One of the subtle advantages of wizards is their access to arcane spells; it's the most versatile tradition in the game, with plenty of offensive, defensive, buffs and utility options, and a wide breadth in each category (for example, it's the only tradition that includes all damage types in its offensive spells). They're also arguably the best prepared spellcaster in the game, with many ways to manipulate their selection and effects for the spells they choose.
One thing I did was turning my wizard into the party's utility master. We lost our druid early on which was our only source of healing. So I took the alchemist dedication to get some free daily elixirs. It was also a nice supplement for some spell slots I didn't have to spend on darkvision and extreme environmental temperatures. The GM is good at bringing in social encounters and narrative roadbumps, so my skills and spell usage have reflected on that.
Yes this is what makes wizards great! They have the broadest toolbox. While they may not always have big power in a fight, they can be tricky in social and exploration situations! Thanks for sharing!
I play a dwarven abjurer with the free archetype sentinel. He also believes in the Godclaw and the idea of Torag being the Hellknight of protection, and he dreams of becoming a Hellknight of the Order of the Godclaw eventually.
As always, thanks for your content. It's solid as ever. Perhaps for a future series, you could do unusual or interesting builds for character concepts. One of the things I've found about Pathfinder 2 is how easy it can be to say... I want to play as a ranger flavored character without necessarily being the Ranger class. Or how many different, quirky offbeat versions of Ranger (or any class) are possible to build with the many choices available. A deep dive, if you would, into - not optimal builds - but interesting and unique builds.
This is a suggestion we've had a lot actually, and is the direction we're leaning. Sort of a duct-tape build, achieve the goal without the proper tools, or build a character from a high concept Role Play point of view instead of mechanics first to see how quirky it can be and still function! Thanks for the suggestion!
Cool video. Sorry that wizards suck SO MUCH at dealing damage in this system. I already lost two players out of frustration (players that have been playing my campaigns for 20 years).
As a traditional blaster wizard, I feel their pain. Its a hard adjustment. But knowledge checks to identify a low save or an energy weakness, and honestly wizards do just fine. It just requires more forethought than just tossing out the same old reliable spell... which hey, is a lot more wizard-like. But everyone's mileage will vary.
@@CollectiveArcana Haven't had a chance to actually play one yet, but from what I've seen so far, I'm REALLY worried (we're converting to 2E and I was playing an Arcanist). So many of their spells rely on critical failures to get an even halfway decent results from. Add in how slowly their spellcasting progression goes and the fact that there are no magic items to add to DC or spell attack rolls and it's easy to see why they're hurting so much in this edition.
As someone who considers Wizards (and their analogues in various systems) my favorite class, I find the PF2e Wizard... unfortunately disappointing. Some of it is they are hit harder, I think, than any other class by the totality of spellcasting nerfs in PF2e (compared to 1e and D&D3.5 and 5e) in that they feel more of those nerfs than some classes (due to being Prepared Arcane) and are penalized harder than others (due to being a primary caster lacking some of the tools the other primary casters have). Some of it is just that I feel the Arcane list is in a bad place right now and manages to feel like a fifth wheel even though there are only 4 options (there only exist extremely narrow circumstances under which I would pick the Arcane list over another list not already present in a party). But most of it seems to be that they fail to fulfil the thematic fantasy of a "master of magic", and they lack any kind of niche or flavor. You get at the latter a bit when you note that all the other casters have some features alongside spellcasting that help define the class and give it its theme. Even Sorcerers, who are the closest to Wizards in reliance on spellcasting, feel quite unique based on their choice of bloodline and get a lot of class feat options that develop the feature further. Wizards get school focus spells, but everyone else gets focus spells too (and most of them are somewhere between "meh" and "actually bad"). Beyond that, they have nothing that really stands out; some of the class feats are decent, but none of them leave an impression. Back to the fantasy of a "master of magic", the idea I commonly see of a Wizard is not someone who necessarily has the most powerful magic at their disposal but one who can interact with the rules of magic in ways that elude less studied spellcasters. In reality terms, they are the player who knows the language and quirks of every spell and can use that knowledge creatively, not the player who just stacked the most plusses. In prior editions, this was commonly represented by them gaining extra access to metamagics and magic crafting feats. There is just nothing representing that in this iteration, unfortunately. I would have loved to see a Wizard that has a pool of points used to apply certain modifications to spells as they are prepared each day, and have the class theme and feats revolve around increasing the pool and learning new modifications. Maybe even have some "forbidden knowledge" style tradeoff options where you sacrifice slots per day for unique options. It would have been cool for the Wizard "thing" to be exerting their mastery of magic to alter spells in ways nobody else can.
I actually wanted this exact concept as I read through the book the first time, for wizards to have focus spells that act as metamagic. Unique, interesting use of focus spells. And we actually do see some of that. The example off the top of my head (and possibly the only one) is for conjuration school, a buff to your next summon spell. I'd have loved to have seen that implemented across every school. Its worth noting Wizard is the only class that can't gain 3 focus spells (or 3 points) without multiclassing. I hope we'll see 3rd focus spells in Secrets of Magic, especially if they follow this idea. I definitely think something like a school heavy thesis could be introduced, maybe adding a unique metamagic focus spell based on your choice of school. Thats really all I feel the wizard needs - a way to feel like your school is more impactful, like your the best at illusion magic, rather than just having the extra slot. A unique free or single action metamagic style focus spell specifically to boost those types of spells would go a long way to fulfilling that class fantasy.
@@CollectiveArcana Ooh, unique metamagics as focus spells? That's a really cool idea! There's already a precedent for it, too (Bard's Lingering Composition and Inspire Heroics are essentially metamagics for its composition cantrips).
I agree completely, and I'll add in that it's not just thematically weak, it's mathematically weak as well. Spellcasters as a whole get slower progression of their core mastery than even basic martial classes, often leaving them 2 behind their party members in all their combat actions. Then add in that no magic items improve spell attack or spell DC and it won't be long before they're 3, 4, or even 5 points behind the rest of the party. As you said, other spellcasters have other things they can do beside spell attacks, but wizards really don't. Then add in that MANY of the wizard spells don't really do much worth the spell slot unless it's a critical (and with those numbers criticals are going to be rare) and most spells don't even seem to be worth the actions to cast, much less the spell slot as well. Their feat selection doesn't even seem particularly interesting. If they got more meta-magic options than other spellcasters, it'd at least be interesting, and provide some actual use to the new 3-action economy as most meta-magics cost one action. Sadly, they don't.
@@colinsmith1495 Yeah, spells targeting AC are at parity with martials for exactly 1 level before being 1-4 points behind (averaging 2 behind) forever after. After factoring in proficiency upgrades and runes, the progression of optimal casters and martials against average on-level enemy AC looks like this (docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VwFrTkq5qmzxL_qiR5NpAbZjGwH-JNPVQ9QqKqInvQo/edit?usp=sharing). But even targeting saves doesn't help. People assume casters get an advantage over martials by targeting the weak save instead of AC. In truth, the average weak save is only one to two points lower than average AC (with rarely more than 1 or 2 points variance from that) at almost every level. So assuming the more generous 2 point boost puts casters on par with a martial's first attack... except not. Because 1) targeting a save means the defender wins ties (versus the attacker winning ties when attacking AC), which is effectively a -1 to the casters, and 2) that assumes you always know the weak save and always have a worthwhile spell targeting it. The middle and strong saves average 2-3 and 5-6 over the weak save, even just targeting the middle save gives the target an average chance to beat your spell DC of around 60-65%. The bigger problem, to me, is that Paizo has drastically nerfed the ability to be a utility caster in 2e, which was a defining strength for Wizards before. Now you have far fewer slots (so the opportunity cost of slotting circumstantial utility spells is far higher), cannot prepare new spells during the day (you can change spells but only if you happened to pick the right thesis), and many of their utilities have been nerfed hard as well. And lets not forget Wizards having to pay to actually benefit from their supposedly-superior (it's really not, outside of 2 specific use-cases) spell list.
I think that 2nd Edition did a great job evening them out, and its honestly hard to say which is better now. Many folks think spontaneous has edged out prepared in this edition, but I think its just because they see how improves spontaneous is, and overestimate the comparison a bit. In any case, if one dies edge out the other, its not really busy much. More than ever it comes down to personal playstyle preference in this edition. My personal preference is still prepared though.
If I cast a touch spell on myself, is it enough to touch two fingers together or do I have to put my hands together? Can I cast a touch spell on myself by closing my fist? Do i have to create a new touch, or can i cast them with a touch that already exists, like when I am tied up with my Hands together?
I answered this in another comment, but I'll do it here too to make sure you see it! How you touch yourself isn't really important to the spell. You just need to me able to complete the spell component. The touch is part of the Somatic component. The somatic component has the manipulate trait. This means you dont have to have a free hand, but you can't use manipulate actions while you're restrained. If your hands are bound, you can still touch your own fingers, but you can't actually complete the other gestures that are part of the manipulate trait part of the Somatic component. So you can't cast the spell. When restrained, single action spells with only the verbal component are your only options.
i'm a bit confused about the spell economy of the staff nexus thesis. according to the rulebook a normal staff auto-recharges each day a number of charges equal to the highest spell level you can cast. and if those charges arent used in 24 hours they are lost. and preparing the staff again gets rid of all charges and adds the proper amount again. but your nexus staff doesnt regenerate any charges. does that mean the charges you infuse in it have no time limit? if so, is there a cap on the amount of charges you can give your nexus staff? if so that's potentially overpowered as you can simply infuse it each day with more and more spells you didnt use.....if those charges have a time-limit, then there's really no spell economy effect, it's more like spell blending, with an additional cantrip. i can see the use of staves that have spells hgiher than level 1. but a level 1 spell and a cantrip dont seem to be THAT useful as to spend your only arcane thesis. perhaps i'm misunderstanding how staves work, specifically the nexus staff...
You aren't wrong! The staff doesn't immediately pay off, at least, not as obviously as others. But it gets wild as you gain levels! You're 100% right that it would be crazy strong if there was no time limit to the charges. Since we know it works like any other staff except for not having base charges, we assume just like a regular staff, the charges you impart last until your next preparations. So, lets break down the benefits! Out of the gate: You basically just get the extra cantrip. Charge or no charge, thats a 20% increase in cantrip options. Not too shabby, sweet sweet versatility from level 1. No real point in using the charge effect at this time. Level 3, you can now spend a 2nd level slot to get 2 casts of your first level spell in the staff. Sort of the opposite of spell blending. This isn't great, but is versatility. But, lets say, we upgrade to a Staff of Fire now - its level appropriate, and we're a battle mage. For most people, that staff gives them a cantrip, and a first level spell, produce flame, and burning hands. For us, it provides 2 of each. 2 cantrips, 2 1st level spells. And now we get the free charges each day. 2 of them (we're still level 3). We can also pump a spell slot in for more charges. This staff is allowing us to cast 2 different spells per day without preparing them ahead of time, and the option to charge more. Lose a single 2nd level spell to buy for 1st level spells. Thats not nothing. And from there, it just gets better. At 8th level, we can put 2 spells in when most people can only put 1. You could lose lower level spells to get more high level spells, but unlike the blending thesis, you dont have to decide what to do with those sacrificed lower level spell slots at the start of the day. You can decide in the moment (like a sorcerer) the best way to use those points you've set aside. Bunch of low-level spells? A couple extra highs? See where the day takes you. At 16th level, you can pour 3 spells in. To get 8 extra charges, the druid in the party pays an 8th level spell. You lose two 2nd levels and a 4th for the same benefit, keeping all your high level oomph. Or, if you really like your staff and it has a great mix of spells of all levels (like a staff of power), you can charge all your high level spells in, and have 32 charges available. Yes, you lost a lot of your top level power, but you gained a lot of in-the-moment versatility.
One of the subtle advantages of wizards is their access to arcane spells; it's the most versatile tradition in the game, with plenty of offensive, defensive, buffs and utility options, and a wide breadth in each category (for example, it's the only tradition that includes all damage types in its offensive spells). They're also arguably the best prepared spellcaster in the game, with many ways to manipulate their selection and effects for the spells they choose.
Exactly! What wizards lack in big flashy spectacle, they make up for in lots of tiny advantages.
One thing I did was turning my wizard into the party's utility master. We lost our druid early on which was our only source of healing. So I took the alchemist dedication to get some free daily elixirs. It was also a nice supplement for some spell slots I didn't have to spend on darkvision and extreme environmental temperatures.
The GM is good at bringing in social encounters and narrative roadbumps, so my skills and spell usage have reflected on that.
Yes this is what makes wizards great! They have the broadest toolbox. While they may not always have big power in a fight, they can be tricky in social and exploration situations!
Thanks for sharing!
I play a dwarven abjurer with the free archetype sentinel. He also believes in the Godclaw and the idea of Torag being the Hellknight of protection, and he dreams of becoming a Hellknight of the Order of the Godclaw eventually.
I love how wide the character concepts can get thanks to archetypes! Thanks for sharing!
As always, thanks for your content. It's solid as ever.
Perhaps for a future series, you could do unusual or interesting builds for character concepts. One of the things I've found about Pathfinder 2 is how easy it can be to say... I want to play as a ranger flavored character without necessarily being the Ranger class. Or how many different, quirky offbeat versions of Ranger (or any class) are possible to build with the many choices available. A deep dive, if you would, into - not optimal builds - but interesting and unique builds.
This is a suggestion we've had a lot actually, and is the direction we're leaning. Sort of a duct-tape build, achieve the goal without the proper tools, or build a character from a high concept Role Play point of view instead of mechanics first to see how quirky it can be and still function!
Thanks for the suggestion!
I enjoy all your videos always fun
Thanks so much for the kind words! We're glad to have you!
Cool video. Sorry that wizards suck SO MUCH at dealing damage in this system. I already lost two players out of frustration (players that have been playing my campaigns for 20 years).
As a traditional blaster wizard, I feel their pain. Its a hard adjustment.
But knowledge checks to identify a low save or an energy weakness, and honestly wizards do just fine. It just requires more forethought than just tossing out the same old reliable spell... which hey, is a lot more wizard-like.
But everyone's mileage will vary.
@@CollectiveArcana Haven't had a chance to actually play one yet, but from what I've seen so far, I'm REALLY worried (we're converting to 2E and I was playing an Arcanist). So many of their spells rely on critical failures to get an even halfway decent results from. Add in how slowly their spellcasting progression goes and the fact that there are no magic items to add to DC or spell attack rolls and it's easy to see why they're hurting so much in this edition.
@@colinsmith1495 Compared to prior editions where casters reigned as gods? Yes, things are far more balanced.
As someone who considers Wizards (and their analogues in various systems) my favorite class, I find the PF2e Wizard... unfortunately disappointing. Some of it is they are hit harder, I think, than any other class by the totality of spellcasting nerfs in PF2e (compared to 1e and D&D3.5 and 5e) in that they feel more of those nerfs than some classes (due to being Prepared Arcane) and are penalized harder than others (due to being a primary caster lacking some of the tools the other primary casters have). Some of it is just that I feel the Arcane list is in a bad place right now and manages to feel like a fifth wheel even though there are only 4 options (there only exist extremely narrow circumstances under which I would pick the Arcane list over another list not already present in a party).
But most of it seems to be that they fail to fulfil the thematic fantasy of a "master of magic", and they lack any kind of niche or flavor. You get at the latter a bit when you note that all the other casters have some features alongside spellcasting that help define the class and give it its theme. Even Sorcerers, who are the closest to Wizards in reliance on spellcasting, feel quite unique based on their choice of bloodline and get a lot of class feat options that develop the feature further. Wizards get school focus spells, but everyone else gets focus spells too (and most of them are somewhere between "meh" and "actually bad"). Beyond that, they have nothing that really stands out; some of the class feats are decent, but none of them leave an impression.
Back to the fantasy of a "master of magic", the idea I commonly see of a Wizard is not someone who necessarily has the most powerful magic at their disposal but one who can interact with the rules of magic in ways that elude less studied spellcasters. In reality terms, they are the player who knows the language and quirks of every spell and can use that knowledge creatively, not the player who just stacked the most plusses. In prior editions, this was commonly represented by them gaining extra access to metamagics and magic crafting feats. There is just nothing representing that in this iteration, unfortunately.
I would have loved to see a Wizard that has a pool of points used to apply certain modifications to spells as they are prepared each day, and have the class theme and feats revolve around increasing the pool and learning new modifications. Maybe even have some "forbidden knowledge" style tradeoff options where you sacrifice slots per day for unique options. It would have been cool for the Wizard "thing" to be exerting their mastery of magic to alter spells in ways nobody else can.
I actually wanted this exact concept as I read through the book the first time, for wizards to have focus spells that act as metamagic. Unique, interesting use of focus spells.
And we actually do see some of that. The example off the top of my head (and possibly the only one) is for conjuration school, a buff to your next summon spell.
I'd have loved to have seen that implemented across every school.
Its worth noting Wizard is the only class that can't gain 3 focus spells (or 3 points) without multiclassing. I hope we'll see 3rd focus spells in Secrets of Magic, especially if they follow this idea.
I definitely think something like a school heavy thesis could be introduced, maybe adding a unique metamagic focus spell based on your choice of school. Thats really all I feel the wizard needs - a way to feel like your school is more impactful, like your the best at illusion magic, rather than just having the extra slot. A unique free or single action metamagic style focus spell specifically to boost those types of spells would go a long way to fulfilling that class fantasy.
@@CollectiveArcana Ooh, unique metamagics as focus spells? That's a really cool idea! There's already a precedent for it, too (Bard's Lingering Composition and Inspire Heroics are essentially metamagics for its composition cantrips).
I agree completely, and I'll add in that it's not just thematically weak, it's mathematically weak as well. Spellcasters as a whole get slower progression of their core mastery than even basic martial classes, often leaving them 2 behind their party members in all their combat actions. Then add in that no magic items improve spell attack or spell DC and it won't be long before they're 3, 4, or even 5 points behind the rest of the party. As you said, other spellcasters have other things they can do beside spell attacks, but wizards really don't. Then add in that MANY of the wizard spells don't really do much worth the spell slot unless it's a critical (and with those numbers criticals are going to be rare) and most spells don't even seem to be worth the actions to cast, much less the spell slot as well.
Their feat selection doesn't even seem particularly interesting. If they got more meta-magic options than other spellcasters, it'd at least be interesting, and provide some actual use to the new 3-action economy as most meta-magics cost one action. Sadly, they don't.
@@colinsmith1495 Yeah, spells targeting AC are at parity with martials for exactly 1 level before being 1-4 points behind (averaging 2 behind) forever after. After factoring in proficiency upgrades and runes, the progression of optimal casters and martials against average on-level enemy AC looks like this (docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VwFrTkq5qmzxL_qiR5NpAbZjGwH-JNPVQ9QqKqInvQo/edit?usp=sharing).
But even targeting saves doesn't help. People assume casters get an advantage over martials by targeting the weak save instead of AC. In truth, the average weak save is only one to two points lower than average AC (with rarely more than 1 or 2 points variance from that) at almost every level. So assuming the more generous 2 point boost puts casters on par with a martial's first attack... except not. Because 1) targeting a save means the defender wins ties (versus the attacker winning ties when attacking AC), which is effectively a -1 to the casters, and 2) that assumes you always know the weak save and always have a worthwhile spell targeting it. The middle and strong saves average 2-3 and 5-6 over the weak save, even just targeting the middle save gives the target an average chance to beat your spell DC of around 60-65%.
The bigger problem, to me, is that Paizo has drastically nerfed the ability to be a utility caster in 2e, which was a defining strength for Wizards before. Now you have far fewer slots (so the opportunity cost of slotting circumstantial utility spells is far higher), cannot prepare new spells during the day (you can change spells but only if you happened to pick the right thesis), and many of their utilities have been nerfed hard as well.
And lets not forget Wizards having to pay to actually benefit from their supposedly-superior (it's really not, outside of 2 specific use-cases) spell list.
Please do a rules , mechanics , Ancestries & heritages series of videos .
Noted!
My dwarven wizard with the martial artist trait throws fireballs and punches people. Is that subtle enough?
The exception that proves the rule!
Sounds awesome!
What do you think about prepared casters X spontaneous casters?
I think that 2nd Edition did a great job evening them out, and its honestly hard to say which is better now. Many folks think spontaneous has edged out prepared in this edition, but I think its just because they see how improves spontaneous is, and overestimate the comparison a bit. In any case, if one dies edge out the other, its not really busy much.
More than ever it comes down to personal playstyle preference in this edition.
My personal preference is still prepared though.
If I cast a touch spell on myself, is it enough to touch two fingers together or do I have to put my hands together? Can I cast a touch spell on myself by closing my fist? Do i have to create a new touch, or can i cast them with a touch that already exists, like when I am tied up with my Hands together?
I answered this in another comment, but I'll do it here too to make sure you see it!
How you touch yourself isn't really important to the spell. You just need to me able to complete the spell component. The touch is part of the Somatic component. The somatic component has the manipulate trait. This means you dont have to have a free hand, but you can't use manipulate actions while you're restrained. If your hands are bound, you can still touch your own fingers, but you can't actually complete the other gestures that are part of the manipulate trait part of the Somatic component. So you can't cast the spell.
When restrained, single action spells with only the verbal component are your only options.
Thank you so much, this is very helpful
Hehe, sorry, I just had more questions. Thank you so much.
i'm a bit confused about the spell economy of the staff nexus thesis.
according to the rulebook a normal staff auto-recharges each day a number of charges equal to the highest spell level you can cast. and if those charges arent used in 24 hours they are lost. and preparing the staff again gets rid of all charges and adds the proper amount again.
but your nexus staff doesnt regenerate any charges.
does that mean the charges you infuse in it have no time limit?
if so, is there a cap on the amount of charges you can give your nexus staff?
if so that's potentially overpowered as you can simply infuse it each day with more and more spells you didnt use.....if those charges have a time-limit, then there's really no spell economy effect, it's more like spell blending, with an additional cantrip.
i can see the use of staves that have spells hgiher than level 1. but a level 1 spell and a cantrip dont seem to be THAT useful as to spend your only arcane thesis. perhaps i'm misunderstanding how staves work, specifically the nexus staff...
You aren't wrong! The staff doesn't immediately pay off, at least, not as obviously as others. But it gets wild as you gain levels!
You're 100% right that it would be crazy strong if there was no time limit to the charges. Since we know it works like any other staff except for not having base charges, we assume just like a regular staff, the charges you impart last until your next preparations.
So, lets break down the benefits!
Out of the gate: You basically just get the extra cantrip. Charge or no charge, thats a 20% increase in cantrip options. Not too shabby, sweet sweet versatility from level 1. No real point in using the charge effect at this time.
Level 3, you can now spend a 2nd level slot to get 2 casts of your first level spell in the staff. Sort of the opposite of spell blending. This isn't great, but is versatility.
But, lets say, we upgrade to a Staff of Fire now - its level appropriate, and we're a battle mage.
For most people, that staff gives them a cantrip, and a first level spell, produce flame, and burning hands. For us, it provides 2 of each. 2 cantrips, 2 1st level spells. And now we get the free charges each day. 2 of them (we're still level 3). We can also pump a spell slot in for more charges. This staff is allowing us to cast 2 different spells per day without preparing them ahead of time, and the option to charge more. Lose a single 2nd level spell to buy for 1st level spells. Thats not nothing.
And from there, it just gets better. At 8th level, we can put 2 spells in when most people can only put 1. You could lose lower level spells to get more high level spells, but unlike the blending thesis, you dont have to decide what to do with those sacrificed lower level spell slots at the start of the day. You can decide in the moment (like a sorcerer) the best way to use those points you've set aside. Bunch of low-level spells? A couple extra highs? See where the day takes you.
At 16th level, you can pour 3 spells in. To get 8 extra charges, the druid in the party pays an 8th level spell. You lose two 2nd levels and a 4th for the same benefit, keeping all your high level oomph. Or, if you really like your staff and it has a great mix of spells of all levels (like a staff of power), you can charge all your high level spells in, and have 32 charges available. Yes, you lost a lot of your top level power, but you gained a lot of in-the-moment versatility.
6 is max skill as you can't start with a stat above 18
Good catch! Thank you!
Oh yikes the more I learn about pathfinder 2e the more I'm turned off with it.
I'd say try it before you judge. Its more than the sum of its parts and wizards... well, they're also more than the sum of their parts!
I have now subscribed, un subscribed, and subscribed again at least 42 times. I dont understand why you keep asking me too
Never stop!