Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder: Universalist Wizard Is Completely Unnecessary

[Roman]

Pathfinder has changed specialist wizards in such a way that they no longer have to forego schools completely. They can still prepare spells from their prohibited schools and all they lose by doing so are their specialist benefits for that particular day. In effect, these wizards can function both as specialists and as universalists. As such, I think the universalist wizard becomes redundant and likely unbalanced, as he gets 'universal' benefits whatever spells from whatever schools he has prepared for the day. There is an easy solution to this. Remove the universalist wizard. Sometimes less is more and this is exactly such a situation. Specialist wizards are more flavorful and if they can act as generalists by foregoing their specialization benefits for the day than there is nothing to lose from the removal of the universalist.

*Note: This comes from a regular player of wizards. In fact, non-specialized/universalist wizards are the most common character that I play, though I should mention that I am most frequently the DM.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Hmm. I think there should be some room for the Universalist. There should be something that really grants him his flexibility, without making Specialists feel weak.
Maybe, instead of extra spells, he could "rememorize" spells or something like that.

 

[HalWhitewyrm]

I'm playing an Universalist wizard and I like it. I don't want to be a specialist; beyond the game mechanics, there are flavor and story issues associated with being an Evoker, or an Illusionist, etc. that I don't want for my PC.

I do agree there should be a little (not a lot, but just a little) more oomph associated with being an Universalist in lieu of a specialist, especially now that specialist do not have prohibited schools.

 

[dystmesis]

But generalist gets wish as a spell-like ability. Honestly, nothing else the other guys have compares.

 

[SSquirrel]

Specialists have never been popular in any group I have played with. The idea of a necromancer was, but not actually being one

 

[EricNoah]

Maybe the Universalist should be the one who casts an extra spell per level (their choice, like the 3.5 specialist gets). Maybe that "freebie" slot should be a spontaneous slot. Or maybe it's an empty slot for use with "on-the-fly" metamagic. Would show off the universalist's versatilty.

I dunno. First-thing-in-the-morning idea...

 

[BradfordFerguson]

Hmmm, I hadn't thought of the Universalist in the same terms. They don't get the specialist bonus that the other specialist casters get, AND I don't think that specialists will tend to memorize "banned" schools and forego their specialist bonuses and special abilities.

The Alpha 1.1 rules for the Pathfinder RPG tweaked the Universalist and I think lowered the power of the Universalist. I think the consensus of posters on the Paizo messageboards thinks the Universalist is still a little too powerful.

I think the difference is smaller than you think though.

Tangentally, I hope that 4E RADICALLY overhauls the spell lists. I think wizards should have less choices as far as spells. Just looking at the sorcerer/wizard spell list boggles my mind, especially at lower levels. 31 spells to choose from?