|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
After having read a lot of these discussions, I figure I'll jump in here and mention that many of these discussions about different ways to add content/rebalance existing content have been thought about and 3rd party products have been developed in (partial) response to these sorts of frustrations. I'm over on Infinite, so that's where I know the products best, but if anyone wants to look at already-published additions to the Wizard class, here are 3!
- Wizards+; there's a good chance people here already know this one, it's recently released by Team+ and adds a wide variety of new content to the class. As typical for Team+, it's mostly not focused on rebalancing existing content, but instead about adding new ways to play the class. This includes new feats, theses, and schools - but also a class archetype to introduce some almost animist-like casting to Wizards, and Deliberations, which replace your arcane bond. There are also some rebalancing changes at the end of the book. It's a really fun introduction of new content!
- Arcane Accoutrements; the debut book from Three Rooks Books, this one also focuses on adding a variety of new content for the wizard class - I really like the sword binder arcane thesis, personally. It's got more of all the normal wizard options, as well as some magic items, plus an extra Deliberation using the rules from Wizards+!
- Wizards Refocused; this is the one I wrote, which has a slightly different focus than the other two. There's still new content - a bunch of new class feats, especially focused on trying to introduce some of that academic flavour into wizard, a new thesis, and a Deliberation, but then there's also an archetype to let other classes get some of the nerdy stuff if they want to, and then pretty substantial rebalancing of existing content - I introduced a new ability all Wizards get (Expand your Education) to try and add some academic flavour, as well as to make up for the less flexible schools in the Remaster. I also rebalanced all of the existing theses to try and ensure they each have a fun niche and are more comparable in power to the strongest option available at the moment.
If 3PP isn't the stuff for you, feel no pressure to look at them - but if you're invested enough in wizards to be 3 pages deep into a forum discussion, you might also be interested enough to give a read of how some 3rd party publishers have given the wizard class a bit of a revamp.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's both good and desirable. Now, is it the best possible solution? Certainly not. But perfect can be the enemy of good. It's certainly good enough to stop most of these discussions.I would bet you money it wouldn't. The "wizard" name is too powerful; it's a mirror for many roleplayers and they won't be happy unless that specific word matches the image of what they want in their mind. The player who envisions their character as a spontaneous casting "wizard" wants the name associated with spontaneous caster. The player who envisions their character as a loremaster "wizards" wants the name associated with loremaster class abilities and feats. We hear exactly this, most recently with the kineticist. 'I want an all day blasting wizard.' 'Okay, look at kineticist.' 'No, it has to say wizard on the tin otherwise it's not my all day blasting wizard.'
On top of that, there's the powergaming aspect. I expect some players would not be happy unless the wizard class gave them the game dominance early edition D&D wizards had.
Wizard disappointment is a much a matter of player high expectations as it is mechanics. Mechanically, I'd bet a blaster wizard results in about the same rounds-to-kill as a blaster anything else.
This is not true.
The main drive behind problems with the wizard is playing other PF2 caster classes.
Why is the bard so good? Why does the druid have amazing focus spells they can use all day? Why does the cleric have massive extra healing? Why are the sorcerer feats so much better?
This is the problem with the wizard. Most don't have a problem with the casting. Legendary casting is legendary casting, Exactly the same for all the classes.
But the main argument for the wizard is they have all these spell slots. They can cast more than anyone else. How good are all these spell slots when they are locked into the same spells you can't change very quickly except with one thesis? How good are all these spell slots when you have a limited number of actions per turn and every caster works under this same limitation?
So in a fight if you can only get off 3 spells, so can any caster. You only have enough extra spell slots for maybe one extra fight, while the other caster classes have useful cantrips and focus spells to go all day, fight after fight.
Even if as someone like Superbidi argues that most focus spells aren't are good as spell slots, they are good enough for the weaker battles so you can shine in the harder battles using your spell slots. This allows a good focus spell caster like a bard or druid to get by in easier fights with focus spells and then nova in the big fights.
Wizard is just straight slots. Then on top of that casters like the druid or bard have better armor options and more hit points on top of more desirable main caster stats.
That's the big problem with the wizard. Not this desire for omnipotent power, but this feeling that the wizard isn't as fun and doesn't have as many fun builds as other caster classes with equivalent casting power.
I'm not even sure what criteria they are using to balance when they give the bard Legendary casting, 3 slots per level, absolutely amazing feats, better armor choices, better weapon choices, on top of at level 20 being able to cast from every tradition at least one spell.
Then you play the wizard with six hit points, Legendary casting, a limited school slot and 3 slots, no signature spells, no spontaneous casting, only one thesis that allows them to change spells per day, you're paying more money for your spells to build a spellbook, and no good focus spells to speak of.
Why do people keep pretending wizard players want more power? They don't. They want a more fun to build and interesting class. Right now, it's pretty darn lacking compared to other PF2 caster classes.
I don't even compare the PF2 wizard to the PF1 wizard. None of the classes are as powerful as their PF1 counterparts, not even the fighter who did insane weapon damage. I do compare the wizard to other PF2 caster classes. When it comes to building a wizard, boy, they are boring and lacking.
Why would I build a wizard when I can build this really interesting bard or druid or sorcerer with better feats and more options?
With a PF2 Remaster Sorcerer, I can make this sorc with anoint ally and explosion of power then blow up using a focus spell or bloodline spell.
Druid I can shapechange or drop lightning all day.
Bard I'm boosting the entire party all day while casting.
Mr. Wizard gets some more scrolls that he still has to draw and use and others can buy with the same action cost as spells and often a worse action cost than some focus spells and cantrips.
It doesn't make the wizard feel all that great. Everyone casts as good as the wizard and their build options are better.
|
It would be really nice to receive feedback from the developers because, the last time I remember, they seemed to think the wizard was perfect as it was. Unless we can understand their reasoning and convince them otherwise, these posts won't be able to change much. However, that can only happen if the developers themselves join the conversation.
This does not tend to happen too much these days, but not never. Though I think most of communication around this particular topic was pre-master.
There is an ostensibly Wizard-centric Lost Omens out in March, which I'm secretly hoping will have a bunch of "There! Now Shut up!" options for Wizards, but it probably won't.
The general reception of this book will probably be the best chance for us to get direct feedback.
I wonder if adding wizard school traits to spells would be a good idea.
More work on their end but it would allow new spells to be added to school spell lists and when there is a spell outside of the arcane tradition that fits really well in a specific school the tag would make it a school spell for that wizard school even though its from a different tradition.
There is an ostensibly Wizard-centric Lost Omens out in March, which I'm secretly hoping will have a bunch of "There! Now Shut up!" options for Wizards, but it probably won't.
Even if everything in the Rival Acadamies ended up being excellent for wizards that would make the earlier content trap options pretty much. This isn't PF1e when the option of "just release OP stuff for that class" was a valid option because people expected to see trap options, this is PF2e where supposedly every choice is equally valid as other possible choices. Sadly I think its too late at this point to expect an official fix.
That stance paizo took as I remember it, was around the leadup to the remaster while teasing all the new stuff for wizard and their reasoning behind the new Schools. Thats also when they mentioned they wanted wizard to be a simple but no less powerful class and were satisfied with its current place in the game, Which arguably is true with wizard being the prepared caster with the most spellslots and options that are very "set and forget".
It’s true as a prepared spellcaster (though clerics actually have way more spells if more limited).
But oracles , primal and divine sorcerers can have up to 6 top slots, which makes the wizard shtick way less special.
I think I'm starting to come to the idea that more spells available to the arcane school that make having a large volume of spells that can be swapped each day a serious benefit is all the wizard needs to make up what it lacks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even if everything in the Rival Acadamies ended up being excellent for wizards that would make the earlier content trap options pretty much. This isn't PF1e when the option of "just release OP stuff for that class" was a valid option because people expected to see trap options, this is PF2e where supposedly every choice is equally valid as other possible choices. Sadly I think its too late at this point to expect an official fix.
"every choice is equally valid" has never been a thing in PF2.
and like, idk. The idea that you can't release good stuff now because it'd make old bad stuff look worse seems exceptionally silly to me. The logic doesn't hold since it seems to suggest intentionally printing bad options would be somehow more desirable.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Giving all thesis for free (apart from the familiar) would go a long way.
Another good thing would be to change the prepared system to what Dd5 does: choose a set of spells everyday and freely cast them.
|
There is an ostensibly Wizard-centric Lost Omens out in March, which I'm secretly hoping will have a bunch of "There! Now Shut up!" options for Wizards, but it probably won't.Even if everything in the Rival Acadamies ended up being excellent for wizards that would make the earlier content trap options pretty much. This isn't PF1e when the option of "just release OP stuff for that class" was a valid option because people expected to see trap options, this is PF2e where supposedly every choice is equally valid as other possible choices. Sadly I think its too late at this point to expect an official fix.
There are ways to add new content that improves, rather than replaces, existing content. My hope is that there will be some Wizard Class Feats that will expand and revitalize the existing schools that will make them more viable.
No idea if that is what they *actually* do, but it is what I am hoping for.
Even if everything in the Rival Acadamies ended up being excellent for wizards that would make the earlier content trap options pretty much. This isn't PF1e when the option of "just release OP stuff for that class" was a valid option because people expected to see trap options, this is PF2e where supposedly every choice is equally valid as other possible choices. Sadly I think its too late at this point to expect an official fix."every choice is equally valid" has never been a thing in PF2.
and like, idk. The idea that you can't release good stuff now because it'd make old bad stuff look worse seems exceptionally silly to me. The logic doesn't hold since it seems to suggest intentionally printing bad options would be somehow more desirable.
Ask anyone what their prefered thing about PF2e and they likely are going to say "that all options feel equally balanced" or something similar to that. It obviously isn't true because that's impossible, but it is a selling point of the system nonetheless.
I also didn't say they can't release good content for a bad class. I hope they do because the wizards needs it, but that isn't going to make everything we have about the wizard today better in consequence. In fact, it would make it look even worse.
Maybe even wizard class archetypes.
See, I agree with everything you said but this. A class archetype doesn't make a whole class better, it only makes those who take that archetype better. Not to mention that recent examples of class archetypes have been...well, not as optimal for lack of a better term. Even one the recent ones that got a decent reception like the avenger rogue, that pretty much is a direct upgrade from the ruffian racket, isn't what I would expect future class archetypes to look like.
I think its confirmed we are going to get the runelord archetype in this book, right? Well, if that archetype changes stuff about the class that makes it more to the tastes of people then that doesn't mean the wizard is a better class now, just that the runelord wizard would be.
If it were to happen, there would certainly be a Rise in the amount of Runelords though (heh).
Do people dislike the wizard focus spells because there are no strong damage options among them?
What if one of the new school options gives something as strong as Fire Ray would that school be everyone's new favorite wizard school?
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
People dislike the focus spells for 3 reasons:
1) Between 3/4 of them are actually good or useful. My personal standout is Spiral of Horrors, I would try to get that on every Wizard is I could. The rest, limited as they are, generally, on the poor - bad axis.
2) You are locked into the two for your school and can’t get options from other schools. Which also means you are restricting 25% of your spells slots to that schools curriculum list.
3) You lack direct access to in-class 3rd points and do not have refocus feat, so even if you have good focus spells that you like, you can do them less and require more downtime to get back.
|
|
I also didn't say they can't release good content for a bad class. I hope they do because the wizards needs it, but that isn't going to make everything we have about the wizard today better in consequence. In fact, it would make it look even worse.
That’s only because of lot of it is just subpar content. Paizo had other, more legally minded, matters pressing on them in the remaster.
However they did not also spend time to materially improve the Wizard like they did with other classes, they in fact made it mechanically worse.
Saying “our hands are tied. We did a bad job and that bad job then means we can’t do a good job now.” Would be an exceptional weird stance to take, when, in all honesty, no one will hold it against them to bring a subpar class inline with other remastered classes.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do people dislike the wizard focus spells because there are no strong damage options among them?
What if one of the new school options gives something as strong as Fire Ray would that school be everyone's new favorite wizard school?
What don't I like?
Force missile: Fine. 1 action magic missile for a focus point with 30 foot range. Range is too short IMO for a class that wants to operate at a longer range, but it's ok.
Charming Push: Duration too short and effect too small to feel worthwhile. Too short of a range.
Diviner's Sight: Duration too short and effect too small. Too situational.
Earthworks: Too situational. Not useful in many situations. Too short of range.
Efficient Apport: Why is this a focus spell?
Fortify Summoning: Summons already cost 3 actions to cast action and a sustain. So to use this, you have to have the summon stay within 30 feet, cast it next round to benefit, while spending a sustain action to sustain the summon, so you're looking at round two for the earliest this will come online and two rounds of casting used up to get this one effect for a weak summon. Why is this not a free action when casting the 3 action summon? Why no heightening boost to at least make a higher level summon much better for a summoner school?
Hand of the Apprentice: This one is pretty good.
Physical Boost: Too situational and short duration.
Protective Wards: Requires a sustain action which are hard to come by at low level and an emanation requiring you to stay close to combat. You don't want to do this as a wizard.
Scramble Body: It's ok.
Warped Terrain: Situational at best.
All the focus spells are built like this. The wizard is a ranged player with weak defenses that wants to use distance as its defense. Yet the majority of the focus spells require them to stay in martial distance of an attack. Even in PF1 the wizard operated at a distance. Now this 6 hit point, weak armor, weak saves class needs to be in 30 feet or lower of enemies to use focus spells while other classes are built to operate at a longer range? why? It doesn't fit the wizard's playstyle.
Adding a 3rd tier of focus spells is a possible addition that doesn't require much change.
I would prefer an innate ability with each school and some good focus spells that fit the wizard theme and playstyle. Not focus spells that are clunky in use or require me to stand in short range of fights to make them work when getting hit is not a good option.
There should be real thought put into focus spells that think about how the wizard plays, where they want to stand on the battlefield, and what focus spells are used for since combat is primarily where you use actions.
So if a utility focus spell is designed, it should be done to work with durations and ranges that work with exploration mode.
The wizard focus spells don't seem to have this kind of consideration. They seem like ideas taken over from PF1 and quickly jotted down without considering for how the PF2 wizard wants to play.
Force missile: Fine. 1 action magic missile for a focus point with 30 foot range. Range is too short IMO for a class that wants to operate at a longer range, but it's ok.
30ft is enough for most published adventures. That particular spells aren't useful in some situations is quite OK.
Do you play in groups that never bother to protect the casters?
Iirc school spells are intentionally weak because the Wizard's meant to have enough spell slots to not need strong backups. That justification I think holds less well now when the Sorcerer not only has four spell slots per rank, but also gets some incredibly good focus spells on top (though that may also be down to the remaster's balance being all over the place). If the Wizard felt like their core spellcasting was really good, perhaps it wouldn't be so bad if they had weak school spells (the decent ones are around the level of the Cleric's domain spells), but their fourth spell slot is quite inflexible and in my opinion fails to leverage the class's versatility.
One factor that I think is worth bringing up as well is how prepared spellcasting interacts with one-shots and other very brief scenarios: the key advantage of spell preparation over a spell repertoire is that it gives much better day-to-day flexibility, but when you're running a scenario with a single adventuring day, that advantage vanishes. If you don't have much information to run with when preparing spells for that one day, you're also not necessarily going to be able to prepare very precisely either. Spell Substitution helps a lot here by allowing more wiggle room, and I suspect that's one of the reasons why the thesis is so popular, but it doesn't fix the problem entirely.
Thus, a player experiencing a Wizard through one-shots or PFS is going to have a very different appreciation of the class compared to a player playing a Wizard in a prolonged adventure. This is more a criticism of Vancian casting and its inflexibility in general, but because the Wizard is supposed to be the prepared spellcaster, their performance is especially variable depending on the adventuring format. When choosing between a prepared and a spontaneous spellcaster for a one-shot, I tend to favor spontaneous casters purely on the basis of their greater moment-to-moment adaptability, which will be of especially great help if I don't know what's going to happen, as opposed to the day-to-day flexibility that I wouldn't get to exercise.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Soontaneous casters got a lot of tools to play with, and between that, cheap consumables and feats like arcane evolution, prepared soellcasting is 100% of the Time worse than spontaneous, by a pretty huge margin.
Which is why the wizard should have his power budget reevaluated, because prepared spellcasting is a huge drawback - not only on PFS scenarios but even when they have time to scout and prepare.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Force missile: Fine. 1 action magic missile for a focus point with 30 foot range. Range is too short IMO for a class that wants to operate at a longer range, but it's ok.30ft is enough for most published adventures. That particular spells aren't useful in some situations is quite OK.
Do you play in groups that never bother to protect the casters?
Do you know how easy it is to bypass protecting the casters? Increasingly so at high level, especially for groups of creatures.
That's on top of gazes, auras, and lots of AoE group attacks.
Casters operate better at longer distance.
And way to bring up one spell. What about the protection aura? 5 foot emanation with a sustain to increase the size of the aura. Something they got rid of with bless because it was clunky and reduced effectiveness.
Why is there always someone defending bad design? Always someone trying to make it seem like wizard focus spells are fine.
They aren't good. They need improvement to make the schools better.
It is sad that you want a wizard class that is on par with other casters for something other than Legendary casting which they all have, and someone has to make it seem like the wizard is just fine with fine focus spells.
Wizard is only competitive due to standard Legendary casting. It's build options are boring and focus spells are some of the worst in the game.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
But stating that Wizards just arent competitive to is just not true when we consider that pre-master the wizard was considered to just be a flatout better witch in every possible situation.
The causality here is not that the Wizard was good, it’s that the Witch was even worse than that.
Post remaster, the Witch got some big improvements, the Wizard was made worse, so the Wizard slipped below the Witch in both a practical and comparative level.