I'm not interested in debating the details, and I'm not here to deny you your opinion.
My only goal here is to hotly contest one possible implication a reader might draw from your characterization - that 5E is about the same as PF2, that both games fail the arcane caster to about the same degree.
I'm not saying you're claiming this, but let me make it clear it's absolutely not the case. Only someone with his or her d20/PF1 goggles on could group the games together like that.
The 3E spellcaster was a horribly broken construct that needed to die. Both games realized that. In my opinion, 5E does the better job, by far.
The 5E Wizard can absolutely feel underwhelming. Compared to Sorlocks or Paladins. But the spell structure is fundamentally sound. It allows you to do stuff. PF2 comes across as positively hamstrung in comparison. Limit the caster, not his toys.
The PF2 Wizard, on the other hand, is a failed class. It brings nothing to the table someone else can't do better. (Given the parameters of the thread)
To me, that's a profound difference that I don't want to get lost in a message such as "[The 5E Wizard is] an underwhelming experience much like the PF2 wizard is an underwhelming experience".
Thanks for reading.
Having reviewed the 5E spells, I have to agree to a point. I felt the 5E wizard was an underwhelming class that did not compete with optimized builds using other classes. We never ran with a single class wizard after the very first adventure because they were not necessary. You did not need a wizard in 5E and there were other more effective classes. A 5E wizard was a bottom tier class with limited customization in the 5E Core Rulebook. Not sure about now with other books. But I have to admit the PF2 wizard is worse insofar as the gap between every other classes' effectiveness and wizard effectiveness is wider, especially so at low levels where most people play.
In PF2 summons, shapechanging, and incapacitation spells are terrible compared to 5E. The main place you will shine is higher level AoE damage spells where your damage can reach obscene levels, especially so on a critically failed save. I have seen first hand an arcane caster lich able to blow off his high level damage spells obliterate a party in a way a martial monster cannot. It was painful. But this is with high level DCs and blowing his high level slots without having to worry about them for later fights. But they were spells an arcane caster has access to.
And I have heard action limiting spells are effective, though I haven't tried them. And there are still wall spells which can be effective.
The biggest problem is getting to that high level because the low level wizard is much less fun to play than a 5E wizard. He is very, very ineffective in the most important fights, which is extremely frustrating. It makes you want to give up. I cannot even say at what level this changes some. I would say maybe 9th to 11th as the 5th and 6th level and above damage spells can be quite nasty, especially given the saving throw success/failure levels.
I am hoping some of this is fixed after feedback from the terrible experience of wizard players. Future magic books will hopefully add spell and magic item options that don't make a wizard player feel like such a pathetic weakling. It is sad to see such an iconic class turned into such a pathetic class that isn't particularly fun to play. I would say that is the most egregious failing is that the PF2 wizard isn't fun. Most people could tolerate the power reduction if the wizard had been turned into something fun to play to replace the lost power.
Even the sorcerer has interesting ways to build. My undead bloodline sorcerer managing the forces of life and death is more fun than a wizard. I have 1 action damage dealers that are interesting and effective. I can heal when needed. Last combat I was able to heal up the martials with spell slots while using
spiritual weapon to attack. The wizard doesn't have options of this kind that are of equivalent effectiveness.
The final PF2 wizard seems to suffer for a lack of testing. It seems like Paizo made every effort to ensure the wizard was not the problem it was in PF1 to the point of ruining the class. It is truly the only class in the book I can't see much of a reason to play. The wizard lacks unique and effective abilities that work well within the 3 action PF2 framework. Not sure how the wizard class as is made it past the Paizo testing process in the form it has taken.
