Could Class Archetyping Fix Wizard?

[Darksol the Painbringer]

Ed Reppert wrote:

moosher12 wrote:

Let's also not forget that Mystic and Witchwarper are also going to be 4-slot casters unless nerfed. So that's 4, 6, 2, 1

What the heck is a Witchwarper? And when are we supposed to get these classes?

I got the chance to participate in a SF2 Playtest table during one of the conventions, and I believe the pregenerated character I played was indeed a Witchwarper, which, after doing the Playtest, was basically the SF2 equivalent to Wizard; Intelligence-based prepared spellcasting. I suppose "Wizard" was too "outdated" for a term in the Starfinder universe, even though the oldschool computer installation programs were called Wizards. Funny how that works.

That being said, referencing unreleased SF2 classes from a completely different system (even if the rules are compatible) feels like a non-sequitur.

[Squiggit]

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

Ed Reppert wrote:

moosher12 wrote:

Let's also not forget that Mystic and Witchwarper are also going to be 4-slot casters unless nerfed. So that's 4, 6, 2, 1

What the heck is a Witchwarper? And when are we supposed to get these classes?

I got the chance to participate in a SF2 Playtest table during one of the conventions, and I believe the pregenerated character I played was indeed a Witchwarper, which, after doing the Playtest, was basically the SF2 equivalent to Wizard; Intelligence-based prepared spellcasting. I suppose "Wizard" was too "outdated" for a term in the Starfinder universe, even though the oldschool computer installation programs were called Wizards. Funny how that works.

That being said, referencing unreleased SF2 classes from a completely different system (even if the rules are compatible) feels like a non-sequitur.

It's not a completely different system though. Like it's literally the same system and cross-compatibility has been part of the game's marketing pitch.

It's fair to say that it's still in playtesting and might change significantly before then, but it's not some random thing pulled out of thin air, it's one of the most recent casters Paizo has designed for this engine. It absolutely makes sense to talk about when examining how classes are built.

[ottdmk]

Hasn't Paizo been fairly clear that Starfinder 2e is only balanced internally? That while yes, the underlying rules are compatible, bringing content from one game to the other is not for the faint of heart?

[moosher12]

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

I got the chance to participate in a SF2 Playtest table during one of the conventions, and I believe the pregenerated character I played was indeed a Witchwarper, which, after doing the Playtest, was basically the SF2 equivalent to Wizard; Intelligence-based prepared spellcasting. I suppose "Wizard" was too "outdated" for a term in the Starfinder universe, even though the oldschool computer installation programs were called Wizards. Funny how that works.

That being said, referencing unreleased SF2 classes from a completely different system (even if the rules are compatible) feels like a non-sequitur.

Witchwarper was a spontaneous caster. Though it was quite interesting to see the first int based spontaneous caster. The Wizard equivalent would be the Technomancer, which isn't viewable yet (I'm surprised the Player Core isn't gonna even have one prepared caster).

ottdmk wrote:

Hasn't Paizo been fairly clear that Starfinder 2e is only balanced internally? That while yes, the underlying rules are compatible, bringing content from one game to the other is not for the faint of heart?

Having read all of the Starfinder classes, really most of them can be used in Pathfinder and are not showing many red flags with only minor tweaks. Some small nerfs are needed like postponing when a Rhythm Mystic can grant fly speeds, swim speeds, and climb speeds, or potentially reducing the mystic and the Witchwarper from having a HP scale of 8 to 6. But for the large part, simply imposing a "No Starfinder Weapons or equipment" rule will likely do more than enough to balance them down to Pathfinder levels. Only the Soldier and Operative have compatibility issues at the moment, as their main gimmicks rely on Starfinder weapons, but the latest Errata made the Soldier a lot more compatible with Pathfinder.

It also would frankly be a questionable decision for Paizo to make a system that is so incompatible it's not worth doing frequently enough, as Starfinder is a smaller property with less books of which the books are smaller. Starfinder 2E is also extremely different from Starfinder 1E, and after reading the first 6 Starfinder core books, I can see that making Starfinder 2E a system that is largely incompatible with Pathfinder would make both PF2E players and SF1E players unhappy. PF2E players would have less reason to branch to a game they cannot reasonably use as an expansion, and SF1E players are already being forced to move to a new game and will be annoyed by the fact regardless, similar growing pains as PF1E to PF2E, as SF1E is very similar to PF1E. So I think the statement is just to set expectations lower to make sure players are not upset if it's not a perfect system, it's always better to underpromise after all. But I have heavy doubts that making the system's classes as compatible as reasonably possible is not a major design concern dev side.

But all this is leaving the core of the point which is simply to say that, Starfinder is still designed to be compatible enough some GMs are encouraged to test the waters of combining the systems. Playtests have been reported to have been done by Paizo testing how well the systems can mesh together. And Spellcaster crafting habits Starfinder side are valid data in relation to Pathfinder, as they are still 2E classes, and while they are playtest classes,the Animist is being factored, which until a few weeks from now, is also a playtest class.

[exequiel759]

I think the "SF2e is a different system" is mostly something Paizo says so people that like mainly SF don't feel they are playing a modded expansion of PF2e. Yes, both have a different meta, but mechanically everything is the same and there's even tech-y equivalents of stuff like scrolls and runes in SF2e too. They are also telling you to use PF2e classes in SF2e because otherwise you lack the classic fighters or rogues in space, even if there's some equivalents in SF2e they really aren't mean to replace them, much like how an animist isn't meant to replace the druid.

[BotBrain]

ottdmk wrote:

Hasn't Paizo been fairly clear that Starfinder 2e is only balanced internally? That while yes, the underlying rules are compatible, bringing content from one game to the other is not for the faint of heart?

Comparing the stats on the ranged weapons would certainly indicate that. Most weapons are the pathfinder equivalent of repeating without the drawbacks the air weapons or repeating crossbows come with.

[Ryangwy]

ottdmk wrote:

Hasn't Paizo been fairly clear that Starfinder 2e is only balanced internally? That while yes, the underlying rules are compatible, bringing content from one game to the other is not for the faint of heart?

That seems to mostly come in the way of inflated HP pools for backline characters and making multiattacking with ranged weapons easier. If the remaster Oracle and the upcoming Animist weren't 4 slot then maybe, but since they are it seems pretty clear that 4-slot spontaneous is apparently standard which makes the wizard not quite having a full 4 slots and also not having any particular class features other than 'more of a specific kind of feat' or 'if you do the hokey pokey you get one more top rank slot' even more grating. Either the value of the 4th prepared slot is so much bigger than the 4th spontaneous slot that the wizard needs 100 restrictions on them... or the wizard has issues.

[Old_Man_Robot]

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

I suppose "Wizard" was too "outdated" for a term in the Starfinder universe, even though the oldschool computer installation programs were called Wizards. Funny how that works.

We also used to summon daemons all the time!

But yes, the only reason I mentioned the caster archetype totals to begin with is simply to point out that that being a 4 slot caster - originally deemed to be a benefit in and of itself - has transformed into a "type" of caster.

With the Wizard remaining to be charged for it as if it was a unique benefit.

_______

As an aside, I was building an Oracle for a friend the other day and took a good look at the class.

Between it and the Sorcerer, this new breed of 4 slot casters are incredibly strong.

[Mangaholic13]

Old_Man_Robot wrote:

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

I suppose "Wizard" was too "outdated" for a term in the Starfinder universe, even though the oldschool computer installation programs were called Wizards. Funny how that works.

We also used to summon daemons all the time!

"I made a program on my computer that does it in seconds where it took hours. AND I didn't need any virgin sacrifices either!"

Although... a techno-wizard that uses computers to cast spells all over the place could be an interesting Class-Archetype for Starfinder.

[moosher12]

Mangaholic13 wrote:

"I made a program on my computer that does it in seconds where it took hours. AND I didn't need any virgin sacrifices either!"

Although... a techno-wizard that uses computers to cast spells all over the place could be an interesting Class-Archetype for Starfinder.

You're in luck, as that's basically a technomancer, whose playtest for Starfinder 2E was already confirmed for early next year.

The Technomancer also uses a spell cache, which is a computer tablet, or another typical spellcasting implement, to cast spells. In SF1E, the spell cache functioned like a bonded item would in Pathfinder 1E or 2E.

By the looks of it, the 2E technomancer's spell cache will probably function like a spell book, as it's mentioned in the Human's updated Adapted Cantrip feat.

Starfinder 2E Playtest pg. 18: wrote:

Adapted Cantrip

...If you have a spell repertoire, spellbook, or spell cache, replace one of the cantrips you know or have in your spellbook or spell cache with the chosen spell. If you prepare spells without a spellbook or spell cache (if you’re a cleric or druid, for example), one of your cantrips must always be the chosen spell, and you prepare the rest normally...

Though if you mean giving a wizard a spell cache directly? Frankly, given how spellbooks work, it probably would not be unreasonable to just say Starfinder wizards can use a spell cache instead of a spellbook. You can easily make an excuse for it to have similar time and credit costs to load it with new spells. Like having to buy code packs and spending time coding the spell notes into the spell cache yourself. I don't think it'd really necessitate an archetype. A note under a spell cache that simply says it can take the place of a spell book would be plenty.

[Mangaholic13]

moosher12 wrote:

Mangaholic13 wrote:

"I made a program on my computer that does it in seconds where it took hours. AND I didn't need any virgin sacrifices either!"

Although... a techno-wizard that uses computers to cast spells all over the place could be an interesting Class-Archetype for Starfinder.

You're in luck, as that's basically a technomancer, whose playtest for Starfinder 2E was already confirmed for early next year.

I know. Really, I just wanted an excuse to subtly shout out the Shin Megami Tensei franchise.