Meet Pathfinder 2's Cleric; Plus Spellcasting Basics!

On the Paizo comments a lot of people are annoyed that classes get less than PF1, less class features and have to pay feats to get them back. The counter argument is that you get those feats instead of class features, just meaning you can chose how you want your class - rather than stuck with what is written. The same applies to races/ancestries. Either argument aside it does seem that all classes and races are nerfed, you don't have enough feats at level 1 in PF2 to get all the features to equal level 1 PF1. We haven't seen what backgrounds and Archetypes exactly do yet tho. I think this is a good thing, spread the power - but people don't like having things taken away I guess.

Secondly a lot of comments about only getting, max, 3 spells memorised per spell level. Another good thing IMO, to lower the power of casters vs mundanes; and also casters won;t have the spell to do automatically what other classes roll skills etc for all the time. There is the concern about 15 min adventure day tho, but that is partially offset by scaling cantrips.

These things mostly look good to me, as a DM normally I don't care about PC's having less than PF1. As long as they are better balanced against each other and opponents, it's irrelevant - but there is a lot of the Endowment Effect going on

Very interested to see the entire Playtest tho, very hard to get a feel with these tiny titbits - not that it hasn't released the rage on Paizo!

 

[Parmandur]

If I understand what you are saying.

• Every spell caster chooses which spells are known, only while leveling.
• These known spells are permanent.
• [ The caster can change the known spells while leveling. ]
• The caster can use slots to cast any known spell spontaneously.
• This is the normal way for casting spells for all caster classes.

• As an exception, a separate feature can swap in different known spells, per long rest.



So if I understand correctly, I basically agree.

Yet at this point:

• I would get rid of slots entirely, and use spell points as the new normal.
• Instead of swapping known spells per rest, simply let a wizard cast directly from a spellbook.

The wizard gets extra known spells if and only if casting from the spellbook.

Heterodox opinion RE: Spell points: neo-Vancian Slots already are large grained spell points.

 

[Tony Vargas]

So if I understand correctly, I basically agree.

Yet at this point:

• I would get rid of slots entirely, and use spell points as the new normal.
• Instead of swapping known spells per rest, simply let a wizard cast directly from a spellbook.

The wizard gets extra known spells if and only if casting from the spellbook.

Spell points are more intuitive than slots, which were not very intuitive in traditional Vancian (if I just memorize 1st level spells, shouldn't I be able to memorize /more/ of them, in total? - what I came up with at the time was they were the most 'efficient' arrangement and you could swap around spell-levels at half efficiency), and are just completely arbitrary in neo-Vancian.

I agree, which is why I prefer traditional Vancian casting... Have you considered the possibility that whoever you’re arguing against is made of straw?

I'm afraid I may have been agreeing with you a little too contentiously.

I’m saying that would be preferable to the system used in 5e, yes. It would be functionally identical, but would remove the complexity of having a “spell preparation” concept baked into the system.

I guess the question there is, base spells known on spells known or on spells prepared. The former makes the Wizard stronger, the latter weaker.

Alternatively, going back to traditional Vancian where you have to prepare each spell individually would also be preferable, because then the spell preparation would serve a purpose- namely, making the resource management game deeper, by forcing the caster to think about “how many fireballs do I have left?” AND “how many counterspells do I have left?” instead of “how many third level spells do I have left?”

That's what I was doing such a bad job of agreeing with!

 

[Charlaquin]

OK, I agree, all it accomplishes is to allow the player to change their list of known spells each day. And it is a Class feature already. That would be the point, to provide the narrative feel of "Wizard" or "Cleric" as opposed to "Bard" or "Sorcerer."

It’s a class feature in the sense that some classes have to prepare spells and others don’t. But preparation is included as part of the spellcasting rules for the classes that do it. I’m saying, instead of having four slightly different versions of the spellcasting rules, each spelled out in full in each class entry, just have one unified spellcasting system - the one that sorcerers and bards use -and have classes that break that mold spell out the exceptions. Druids and Clerics would have a feature that lets them change out any of their known spells for any other spells on their class spell list when they finish a long rest. Wizards would have a feature that lets them swap out their known spells for any other spell in their spellbook when they finish a long rest. Functionally identical, but without the need to introduce a concept of spell preparation for no payoff.

Or just use old school Vancian. I’m fine with either option, I just think it’s silly to make spell preparation a thing if it doesn’t actually do anything but allow what amounts to a spontaneous caster to swap out their known spells.

 

[Parmandur]

It’s a class feature in the sense that some classes have to prepare spells and others don’t. But preparation is included as part of the spellcasting rules for the classes that do it. I’m saying, instead of having four slightly different versions of the spellcasting rules, each spelled out in full in each class entry, just have one unified spellcasting system - the one that sorcerers and bards use -and have classes that break that mold spell out the exceptions. Druids and Clerics would have a feature that lets them change out any of their known spells for any other spells on their class spell list when they finish a long rest. Wizards would have a feature that lets them swap out their known spells for any other spell in their spellbook when they finish a long rest. Functionally identical, but without the need to introduce a concept of spell preparation for no payoff.

Or just use old school Vancian. I’m fine with either option, I just think it’s silly to make spell preparation a thing if it doesn’t actually do anything but allow what amounts to a spontaneous caster to swap out their known spells.

I'm really not seeing the point here: the preparation is itself the payoff, in narrative terms. Wizard's gotta study, Cleric's gotta pray. The non-unified mechanics are a feature for modularity and versimilitude, not a bug to be fixed.

 

[jmucchiello]

• Athletics
• Perceptiveness
• Empathy
• Toughness



Yeah. Yet notice, in this case.

• Athletics → Fighter (melee, reflex, athlete)
• Perceptiveness → Rogue (sniper, stealth, perception, steady-hand manual dexterity)
• Empathy → Wizard (!) (caster, mental spells, willpower)
• Toughness → Cleric (!) (tough, lots of hit points, heavy armor, one-man army)

These four narrative tropes − jock guy, smart guy, heart guy, big guy − can flesh out in different ways. The Fighter-Rogue-Wizard-Cleric is an effective way to do it.

Are you sure that isn't?

Athletics - rogue (nimbleness, wall climbing, etc)
Perceptiveness - wizard (sees beyond the material layer of the universe to reveal the arcane mysteries)
Empathy - cleric (healing, caring for the sick, stewards of societal ethics)
Toughness - fighter (brute, brawn, muscle)

You can make most sets of adjectives apply to a set of nouns in multiple ways.

 

[Shasarak]

The PF1 fans who played it because they wanted to play D&D but didn’t want to play 4e have already left. The ones who played it because they want to play 3.X forever are never going to be happy with a new edition. The ones who just love everything Paizo does aren’t going anywhere. What Paizo needs to do (and seems to be doing) is to stop trying to be D&D and start trying to be Pathfinder, and to hope the people who want to play whatever they decide Pathfinder looks like outnumber the people who want to play D&D 3.X forever.

Not sure why Pathfinder needs to stop being DnD.

But in any case, it seems that less spells per day may be balanced with uncapped cantrips. More information needed, cautiously pessimistic.

 

[Yaarel]

Are you sure that isn't?

Athletics - rogue (nimbleness, wall climbing, etc)
Perceptiveness - wizard (sees beyond the material layer of the universe to reveal the arcane mysteries)
Empathy - cleric (healing, caring for the sick, stewards of societal ethics)
Toughness - fighter (brute, brawn, muscle)

You can make most sets of adjectives apply to a set of nouns in multiple ways.

The design of this foursome − Athletic, Tough, Perceptive, Empathic − goes beyond vague adjectives to identify the mechanics that see high frequency use, then cluster them thematically.



It is possible to make an Athletic rogue, emphasizing mobility and melee, and deemphasizing lock picking and perception.

A tanky fighter can be Tough, hitting less often but hitting harder when making contact. And so on.

 

[Consona]

Thing is, D&D fans, newly-minted, ongoing, or returning, are happy with 5e, it's as D&D as D&D has ever been, 3.5 D&D in all it's glory, included.

Really? Things like Concentration feel straight anti-DnD to me, rather than "DnD in all it's glory".

The fact that three different people come up with three different interpretations of how the physical and mental abilities map to each other goes to show that it’s a poor analogy.

Exactly.

So paleo-vancian casting is here to stay. I had such high hopes, because Paizo had already given the blueprint for neo-vancian casting with the Arcanist, and then 5E gave it to all the full casters in that game.

Tbh, if I like PF2 enough to play it, I will house rule that every palaeo-vancian caster is actually neo-vancian caster.

I don’t see spell preparation as an interesting thing on its own. But at least in a traditional Vancian system it serves a purpose. It forces you to think not just about how many 3rd level spells you have left, but about how many fireballs you have left.

I remember during our 2e days, all the people had to wait for the spellcasters who were memorizing spells every morning like "Do I need one Fireball or two? Let's think about it for like 10 minutes, then there's this Magic Missile spell, how many of those do I really really need this day..." Honestly I cannot believe old-school Vancian was able to survive for such a long time. The system itself was ok in the sense that it had its purpose, I agree with that, I think limitations can bring some good creativity. But the implementation, the amount of slots, made it crazy.

 

[Szatany]

Unfortunately, D&D Wisdom is a nonsense stat.

It has ‘perception’, which moreso belongs to Intelligence.

My dog disagrees.

 

[CapnZapp]

Spell points are more intuitive than slots

Just a cautionary note: spell points is MUCH more versatile and therefore powerful than slots.

To everyone: Do not use unless you know what you're doing.