Pathfinder 2E Low-level Wizards in PF2 - are they still underpowered?

Campbell

Relaxed Intensity
So a 5e Barbarian with 18 Strength and 16 Constitution does 2d6+6 damage with a maul while raging. He also has 15 hit points, takes half damage to all physical damage, and will have a significantly higher AC than a a Wizard.

The Wizard's best cantrips do d8 damage and the only single target damage spell available until 11th level is magic missile which does 3d4+3. It scales horribly only doing 1d4+1. Cantrips do not scale until 5th level when martial all get another attack.

The disparity gets much worse as levels raise.

At 2nd level Reckless Attack comes online dramatically improving accuracy and rate of critical attacks.

At 3rd level he can Frenzy granting the ability to make an attack with a bonus action.

At 5th level he gains a second attack. With frenzy he is making 3 attacks with advantage at his full attack bonus. +8 2d6+7 3 times with advantage while a wizard's Ray of Frost does 2d8. Or the Wizard can use a 3rd level slot for Magic Missile to do 5d4+5.

The Barbarian also has a high movement speed in a game where movement has no effect on your ability to do damage. He can use Strength to hit with his thrown weapons. Rage is a bonus action so it basically costs him nothing in terms of action economy. Without rage he merely does damage like a fighter.

I'll have more analysis on first level spells later, but overall I think the PF2 Wizard is in a much better place than the 5e Wizard.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Aldarc

Legend
But what you've missed is that I'm not attacking it. I am merely trying to establish that it indeed has occurred.
I'm not sure that a radical of a change has occurred though. If you were playing 3e or PF1, then your first level wizard attacks were crossbows, which would have involved a lot of attack and reloading actions. Now in PF2, they are doing magical cantrip attacks with comparable damage. The difference is that it scales with every half level, does elemental damage, uses the mages' favorable attack stat, and often provides useful secondary effects.

I fully sympathize with the desire to change the narrative away from "they ruined my game" to "okay so how do we make the best of this situation".

But I consider it a useful step to first address the OP's concerns head-on. Just skimming over the "you're not missing anything, damage from 1st level spells are relatively useless in comparison" stage of analysis doesn't do him any favors, in my opinion.
I would not say that they are useless, though their range of uses are more contextualized. Sleep, for example, is ineffectual in combat (thank goodness), which provides some sense for what sort of contexts are its ideal purposes: e.g., putting guards to sleep in exploration phase.

They're not.

About the only other edition that compares to the PF2 experience is really old D&D, where a Wizard is mostly asked to fend off the critters using a stick and 4 hit points.
Jein. The PF2 Wizard is fairly standard in many respects, though better off than other editions. The PF2 Wizard is not being asked to fend off things with a stick. They get ranged attack cantrips that allow them to stay in the backline, and they can cast them using their main stat. In that respect, that's a clear upgrade from eds. 1-3 and PF1. 5e is comparable, but the main difference is that most 5e cantrips have a higher upfront initial damage die (d6-d10) for their cantrips, but then upgrade in spikes (e.g., firebolt from 1d10 to 2d10 at level 5, from 2d10 to 3d10 at level 11, etc.). In contrast, the PF2 wizard has their cantrips start lower in damage but then upgrade more evenly at a rate of half-level.
 

pogre

Legend
I'll have more analysis on first level spells later, but overall I think the PF2 Wizard is in a much better place than the 5e Wizard.

I'll admit I only have a passing familiarity with the PF2e playtest rules and have not seen the official rules yet, but this last statement seems contrary to the rest of your post.
 

RSIxidor

Adventurer
the only single target damage spell available until 11th level is magic missile

I'm a little confused by this statement. Scorching Ray, Melf's Acid Arrow, Ray of Sickness, Chromatic Orb, Witch Bolt (admittedly bad), Vampiric Touch, Blight. These are basically all better than Magic Missile and typically scale better if they scale. You might argue that some of them don't get taken because of superior choices (and let's be honest, Fireball works just fine as a single-target spell in a pinch) but to say it's the only single target damage spell until 11th seems strange to me.

I'm not trying to argue that 5E wizards are as capable damage dealers as 5E barbarians, because they aren't, but I do feel like you've misrepresented the gap between them here.

Sorry for the tangent, as this barely feels related to the topic of the thread.
 


Campbell

Relaxed Intensity
I'm a little confused by this statement. Scorching Ray, Melf's Acid Arrow, Ray of Sickness, Chromatic Orb, Witch Bolt (admittedly bad), Vampiric Touch, Blight. These are basically all better than Magic Missile and typically scale better if they scale. You might argue that some of them don't get taken because of superior choices (and let's be honest, Fireball works just fine as a single-target spell in a pinch) but to say it's the only single target damage spell until 11th seems strange to me.

I'm not trying to argue that 5E wizards are as capable damage dealers as 5E barbarians, because they aren't, but I do feel like you've misrepresented the gap between them here.

Sorry for the tangent, as this barely feels related to the topic of the thread.

My bad. Did not mean to do that. I will revisit this when I get home from work.
 

gargoyleking

Adventurer
@Campbell, Also, the Barbarian Instinct stuff is actually more complicated than that. For instance, you don't gain raging resistance until lv 9. By then, wizards are casting spells like Phantasmal Killer, which could potentially kill it's target outright.
 

Campbell

Relaxed Intensity
I will return to my comparative analysis in a bit. For now I want to address the relationship between spell casters, martial classes, and skills in Pathfinder 2.

Historically in most iterations of Dungeons and Dragons casting a spell was a means to ensure something happened and was limited because the skill of play was about knowing which tactical nukes to prepare and when to unleash them. Often spells did the same thing dedicated specialists did better and the job of dedicated specialists was to fill in the gaps between moments of brilliance. Skills and battle field maneuvering were loosely defined so not incredibly reliable while spells were incredibly reliable.

The primary issue with this is it creates an environment where some players could meaningfully exercise skill at playing the game while other players could only rely on fictional positioning. Skill at playing the fiction is absolutely crucial in roleplaying games, but when you have reliable tactical nukes it is often best to rely on them. Basically you could play a spell caster well or poorly, but the same was not really fundamentally true for a fighter or rogue.

Additionally spell casters have historically been generalists with strong tools to cover every arena of play while martial classes had very specific areas where they were meant to excel. You brought a wizard because they could solve the big problems while dedicated specialists filled in the gaps between.

This is not generally how things work in Pathfinder 2. There are no generalists and spells are not tactical nukes. Everyone has defined effects with different costs and attendant risks. While spell casters mostly focus on managing spell slots and focus points, martial classes and skill users interact with the action economy and fictional positioning and time limitations in a much more detailed fashion then most spell casters.

At higher levels a fighter will often 4 or more reactions to manage with only one they can use in a given round and must carefully choose when to use that reaction. They will also have a whole host of different ways they can use their 3 actions to impact the outcome of battle often dependent on fictional positioning and enabling actions like whether they have their shield raised or have a free hand. Also many of the things they do will have a host of negative consequences for failure. While a wizard can just cast Invisibility a rogue will have to find cover so they can Hide and then Sneak to become Undetected.

Do not get me wrong. Spells are still generally have a greater impact than the individual round to round actions of a martial character, but over the course of a given encounter their impact should be similar. What spells a spell caster casts and when they cast them could turn the tide of battle. Generally they won't dictate outcomes and often should rely on the actions of dedicated specialists like the fighter, barbarian or rogue to really make them shine.

Consider Ray of Enfeeblement. On a failed save it inflicts Enfeebled 2 for one minute. This means the target will get -2 to all Strength based checks including Attacks and Athletics based combat maneuvers like Grapple for the rest of combat and also -2 to damage on all Strength based damage rolls. Against a powerful boss monster this dramatically lowers the damage martial characters will receive over the course of a fight.

Consider Sleep. The 1st level version is unlikely to last long, but Unconscious is a powerful condition. It effectively lowers the target's Reflex by 4 and Armor Class by 6. Damage will end it. Combine it with a single strong attack like the Fighter's Power Attack which now against say an Orc Warchief which now has AC 13 instead of 19 so the fighter now gets a critical success on a 13 and hit on a 4. A critical could very well end him. If also catches an Orc Warrior maybe the Rogue or Barbarian get to take advantage of it making the battle much more manageable.

So it's not about creating a balanced game in the sense of everyone getting their moment to shine or equality of outcomes. It's about creating a play environment where everyone brings a character to the table with different strengths and weaknesses where everyone gets a chance to prove their mettle and the party has to combine their efforts to succeed.

Speaking generally martial classes tend to excel in raw single target damage throughput, forced movement, personal defense, and mobility. Individual classes will excel in different areas and the build choices they make greatly impact the resources available to them in play. However it is given to them freely. They can't just do damage all day. They have to earn the right by managing their actions and reactions, positioning themselves, and dealing with things like Resistances and Conditions.

Speaking generally an arcane caster excels at area damage, applying strong personal level buffs and debuffs, overcoming resistances, powerful incapacitating spells that can remove targets from a fight and exploiting weak defenses.

The single target damage spells available to arcane casters can come close to the throughput martial characters put out in a single round distributed through multiple attacks. This is important because many monsters in this game have powerful resistances that are applied once per attack. Additionally due to the versatility of damage types available to them arcane casters can generally avoid dealing with resistances altogether. This often allows them to exploit weaknesses to do more damage.

Arcane casters have to many strong personal level buffs like Magic Weapon, Blur, Invisibility, Knock, Enlarge, and Fire Shield. Many of these are tuned to allow the Wizard to come close to the capabilities of a dedicated specialists for a short time, but are far better utilized by casting on other characters. For instance Knock allows a Wizard to use their level on a Thievery check to open a Lock and gives everyone who tries to open it a +4 bonus. So lacking a Rogue a Wizard can almost match one, but with a Rogue it becomes much better. Invisibility on a Wizard is nice. Invisibility on a Rogue is phenomenal. Casting Magic Weapon on a Fighter's Sword can turn them into an engine of absolute destruction. A Wizard makes everyone around them much better at the things they are already good at.

Additionally one area where Wizards really strong personal debuffs like Ray of Enfeeblement and Fear. This includes inflictions like Spider Sting and Goblin Pox - debuffs that get worse over the course of a fight or longer in some cases. Basically they can make powerful boss level monsters significantly less dangerous and more vulnerable. These can often be stacked on top of each other to turn a tough encounter into a moderate one.

In many ways playing an arcane caster is not about personal glory. You are at your strongest when you are quietly enabling everyone around you to be significantly more awesome. Giving Blur to a Champion holding back that Owlbear makes the Cleric's job much easier and could be the difference between life and death. That Goblin Pox that made the Owlbear sickened and made it easier to hit had a strong impact, but no one gives the wizard credit. That Slow spell that made that boss monster only have 2 actions for the entire fight. You get the point. You are the enabler of awesomeness.

Then there's the glory moments. Arcane and Primal casters are the undisputed kings of area damage in Pathfinder 2. Other classes do not even come class. The Barbarian can Cleave, but the Wizard and Sorcerer can level the battlefield. Evokers even get a focus power that lets do an extra 1d6 per spell level of the evocation they are casting around them. If a target is hit by both you get to combine the two before applying resistances.

Basically everyone is a specialist in this game and where there is conceptual overlap spell casters do things differently, but not necessarily better. A Medicine specialist can do things that Cleric cannot do and a Cleric can do things a Medicine specialist cannot do. At higher levels Charm allows a Wizard to keep someone friendly indefinitely as long as they devote the spell slot to it while Diplomacy's Make An Impression is more tenuous. However the Diplomacy specialist can Make An Impression on many people at once which magic just can't do. Only Medicine can remove the wounded condition, but only magic can remove a disease in seconds. Only a Divine caster can revive someone who just died as a reaction.
 


CapnZapp

Legend
I will return to my comparative analysis in a bit. For now I want to address the relationship between spell casters, martial classes, and skills in Pathfinder 2.
I'm sorry but this is not only very long, it's also incredibly generic. It mixes costs with opportunities. At times it reads as a wishlist. At other times it pretends PF2 adds brand new ideas to the market, almost as if other D&D iterations don't exist.

I really have nothing to say to its specific points.

The question here is: is the experience of playing a low-level spellcaster (1st level Wizard) the same or different compared to other D&D games.

Very simply, a Burning Hands spell can catch three critters.

This used to mean one spell equals three rounds' worth of Fighter activity. Now the Fighter can accomplish this in a single round.

Ergo: no, the situation is not the same. It is very different.

This was what the OP was wondering about, and no amount of discussion should obscure it.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top