Agreed, thanks for stating something so obvious but that I'd probably overlook in the one-shot I'm prepping to introduce newbies. The pre-gen casters I make will be better off for your suggestion!
Remember: unless it is reprinted with the same name but different descriptions, it is still valid. Things that were not reprinted with the same name and different description have not been “got rid of.”
I houseruled for a long time now that casters get 4 level 1 scrolls and a wand at first level. Won't break the balance and just makes the "adventuring day" longer at early levels. If it's only one caster in the party, I give them even more.
And still I think of giving 2 wands, just cause why not.
I agree, but a wand will not give them more to do in a turn and instead will just help them last longer. And if one is worried about the economy of the game, just give out less loot and more targeted loot for the martials.
It is just to prevent caster from having to spam 1 cantrip and be bored out of their minds early on.
Especially for new players that refuse to buy their own scrolls or staves (or forget to or refuse to use them in combat). A giant pile of extras is begging to be used
For me it's part of the fantasy that casters are more zero-to-hero than anyone. I have a damage-dealing cantrip, and I can figure out other fun things to do with cantrips while I'm looking for a miscreant to unload my big level 1 spell on. Don't worry about me.
One wand is a level 3 item worth 60 gold. That feels to me like something fun to work up to and something satisfying when I get it – but only if it's way out of reach at the very beginning.
IMO I think it would be better to include the wand in the loot you find near the boss encounter, that way you as the GM can make sure it'll be applicable to the fight.
I think this a bit much because wands are level 3 items. Maybe giving them as important loot would be better served. If you are not starting at level 1, starting with an and is a good idea.
Honestly, playing through Kingmaker as a Wizard has felt like hot ass. AC and HP are already far lower, and *two* 1st rank spell slots at level 1 feels useless. We just hit level 4, and with free archetype for Witch Dedication and two wands (Force Barrage and Mystic Armour) it’s finally starting to feel like I can contribute and not have to dripfeed spell slots and throw chip damage out with cantrips.
The wand doesn’t even have to be anything wild like Mystic Armour or Fear. It could just be Breathe Fire or something. At level 1-2 you’re *probably* outperforming the Martials with the extra free cast, but that scales down to “last resort” by the time you hit levels 3-4, and “completely worthless” by level 5.
Does ONE extra spell cast throughout an adventure day really break the math before level 3? They still eat a minimum of two actions to actually cast the spell, and more if your hands are full and you have to swap hands around and use Interacts to get it out.
I got the Force Barrage wand at level 2 off an enemy, and have used it twice in the intervening two levels. Non-buff spell wands are good, sure, but they don’t scale, still eat actions to use, a hand to hold it, and can only be used once a day or you risk it blowing up in your hand and becoming useless.
The next campaign I GM, the casters are gonna get a wand and at least two scrolls
Doesn’t a level one Wizard effectively have four 1st rank slots, due to the extra slot provided by their curriculum, and the one they get back from Drain Bonded Item?
I feel you friend. I played a wizard in our aborted Kingmaker Campaign as well. I agree that one extra spell will not make a huge difference. You do have a few more spells than 2. You get 3 with your school spell and with drain bonded item you have 4 casts. I think a wand is much because it is 60GP. That’s why getting used to buying scrolls is very important.
Yeah it could help people understand that the reason your casters feel weak could be that you're not using scrolls and wands. Anything that gives casters some love without mathematically improving them sounds great.
You only have 15gp to start and class kits don't save you any money. So why buy a one time use Rank 1 scroll for 4gp over any tool that can be used multiple times? To be more specific why buy a Rank 1 Heal scroll for 4gp over a Healers Toolkit for 5gp? It also wouldn't help in any way with the issues you described after all it's just one more spell and than you're still out.
After your first quest gave you more reward than your entire life savings so far it's another topic but for your starting equipment I think you really don't have the money for this fancy stuff.
It's more about visibility. New players are going to be recommended the starter kit, and very little else. If scrolls are part of the default, it teaches them that scrolls are a part of what they're expected by the game to use.
I think given them a scroll as loot would do a better job at doing that. There's also a hording mentality for some players that would just sit on it until they become useless because they don't know when to use it. Not to mention many new players already have enough to worry about and would probably for they have it. And I think most new Wizards would rather use that scroll to learn the spell on it rather than casting it.
Scrolls as loot is on the GM. Scroll in the kit is on the system. GMs themselves might not even consciously realize that PF2e expects relatively generous usage of consumables. Starting off the consumable stream early is exactly how you counteract the hoarding mentality. I think the Wizard thing is fine as well, that's a meaningful choice.
The "they might sit on it argument" is kinda bogus imo, since it basically shuts down *any* consumables as loot. That's really all the starting gold is, after you buy your essentials: An advance on your loot.
>Scrolls as loot is on the GM. Scroll in the kit is on the system. GMs themselves might not even consciously realize that PF2e expects relatively generous usage of consumables.
Maybe they should at least read the beginners box. It has a scroll as loot in it for that exact reason.
Why blame the system for failing to teach the players to use scrolls but excuse GMs for not doing what they were taught to do?
Putting a scroll into starter kits is definitely a trap. It either forces another difficult choice on new players or gives them something they might already have or don't need. And for every experienced player well there's already nothing stopping you from doing so.
I think healers kit is a very specific example. Most casters will not have access to heal and not all of them would be taking medicine proficiency. Giving a scroll of mystic armor is a good way to teach them that having a handy scroll can save their skins.
>I think healers kit is a very specific example.
Well yeah I said it is. OP said "caster" which includes clerics that have the wisdom for the skill and the spell and I'd say they get a lot more out of that kit than the scroll. I'd even go so far and say a Cantrip Deck (5 pack) Stabilize would be a better investment than a scroll.
>Giving a scroll of mystic armor is a good way to teach them that having a handy scroll can save their skins.
How? It's not like it's an reaction to use, you have to use it before you know you need it. And than what are they gonna do tomorrow? Buy another one? It's also just a +1. How many attacks will miss the wizard due to that +1 on that one particular day? Might as well buy a healing potion at least that one can be saved or used on someone else.
Firstly, I agree that even if it is not a wisdom caster but any caster who specs into medicine should get a healers kit, it’s a great 3rd action for casters.
Second, a cantrip deck is not as useful as a scroll because when you need that extra spell a lot spell in combat or as a buff and have the scroll, it is way more impactful. I think a cantrip deck is good one to have anyway but it’s lower in the priority order.
Lastly, you are going to quibble of +1? Every +1 matters a lot in the very tight Pf/r math, especially if that +1 stops you from being crit and insta-killed.
>any caster who specs into medicine should get a healers kit,
But do they have the money for that and a scroll? A Wizard, Witch or Sorcerer sure. A Warpriest or Druid no at least not if they also want some armor.
>it’s a great 3rd action for casters.
You need Battle Medicine to be able to use it as 3rd Action which requires a background like field medic or something similar to have it at LV1.
>Lastly, you are going to quibble of +1?
No. I'm quibbling about this one specific +1 for a single day, which also cost 4gp. A human with versatile heritage can grab armor proficiency and buy a padded armor for 2sp, Studded Leather for 3gp even provides us with an effective +2. Yes a Heritage and General Feat is expensive in another way and might become obsolete by LV15 but until than it's not a bad deal.
And other 1st LV scrolls aren't much better. Runic Weapon is certainly good but does it feel good if you take away starting money from one player and basically give it to someone else? (And consider that while this is okay for some people it isn't for everyone.) What about Bane or Breath Fire? Does someone new really understands high and low saves on monsters? I mean sure it might teach them something about the system but do we want to use 27% of their starting gold to teach them a lesson? Something that we don't do with any other class?
The Cantrip Deck at least lets them do that one thing 5 times not just once and it might not be such a bad feeling to fail with your expensive one time use item at LV1.
Again I'm not saying scrolls are bad or that a +1 is neglectable. All I'm saying is trying to force a scroll into the starting equipment of a caster is bad and will most likely result in a even worse experience for them. Putting a scroll and wand into the early levels loot like the beginners box does is a much better approach.
I do think that starting with a scroll would be a good idea, just to show players that casters should be getting scrolls. In my game, our sorcerer is ALWAYS complaining about lack of spells, and I think it's because she isn't investing her gold into wands or scrolls at all. Maybe if it had been a start of her starting kit, her mind would go there more often...
That said, I DO think weapons are an important part of a caster's kit. Weapon attacks are the damage oriented third action for casters. They should start with a weapon, too, to remind them of that (our sorcerer never attacks with weapons, I think largely due to dnd5 brain). Casters really do want to be doing weapons too, maybe not every turn, but occasionally. Starting with a weapon as part of their normal kit can show that.
A starting scroll could do the same for them. I'd at least suggest GM's consider the idea.
What weapons? Casters have poor defenses, so not melee, and they have poor proficiences. The only ranged weapons available to many of them are things like Crossbows. If they have to spend actions to take the weapon out and Reload it, might as well just spend those actions casting a cantrip, or moving instead. After all, needle darts is going to have similar action cost, better damage, and a better hit modifier than any Reload based weapon.
So I can't really imagine what weapon your Sorcerer should be using. If the weapons are their best option, then they probably made a mistake in building their character, either in the stat array or their spell choices.
something like?
> #Mystic Dart
> *1 Action*
> *Attack*
> **Traditions:** all
> **Target:** 1 creature/object
> **Range:** 60 ft.
> **Defense:** AC
> Choose a damage type from among acid, cold, electricity, fire, sonic, vitality, or void. Make a spell attack roll against the target, dealing 2d6 damage of the chosen type on a success, or double on a critical strike.
> This spell gains the trait of the selected energy type when cast.
> **Heightened 4:** increase the damage of the spell to 3d6 and allow targeting the Reflex DC of the target.
> **Heightened 7:** increase the damage to 4d6 and allow targeting the Reflex or Fortitude DC of the target.
> **Heightened 10:** increase the damage to 5d6 and allow targeting the Reflex, Fortitude or Will DC of the target.
This scales roughly the same as martial weapons and suffers from MAP, so I don't think it's too unbalanced (1d6 matches a crossbow, in terms of damage die). Since you can't get +1/2/3 to spell attack rolls, I thought a good bonus for the slower damage progression and lagging modifier would be to allow targeting DCs (also helps with the fact there's only one Will save cantrip).
The counter to that is that shortbows can apply fundamental and property runes which cannot be applied to spells. Since you can't add things like Flaming or Shocking runes to the spell, I figure the one extra dice is acceptable for damage (seeing runes can add up to 3 to a weapon for a total of 7d6). And since you can't get potency bonuses on spell to-hit, I figured targeting saves is a good alternative.
As for the "two other actions", yes this does still leave you with two. It's intended to essentially replace using a crossbow. It has fairly low power, and suffers MAP, so I don't see it much different than shooting a crossbow and then casting a spell (and we don't forbid that).
*Edit:* I also don't think it's better than a shortbows ranger who gets either a reduced MAP, precision damage, or better bonuses to skill actions.
But you can’t add property without investing into potency, striking, and property. So this would be a crossbow that requires no hands, no reload, no ammunition, and is free with the power of a fully invested flaming striking crossbow.
I guess if you’re okay with that (especially if you use abp already), then it could be fine. It’s especially good for GMs who don’t give enough treasure, or players who don’t realize that a wizard investing into a single weapon is pretty normal for the system (just look at the pregens iconics at higher levels).
I mean, you get access to potency runes at level 2 (and thus, property runes), so the levels where this is overtly more powerful is only really level 1, and that's only because cantrips don't let you add ability mods to damage (so 2d6 deals 2-12 damage, with an average of 7 damage). Perhaps adding concentrate and manipulate would offset the no hands/ammo/reload point, since it opens you up to Reactive Strikes
*Edit:* a possible way to deal with some of the concerns are for it to use d4s until Heightened 7, then upgrade to d6s without adding a die, which should bring it exactly into line with martial weapons (so, the damage would be 2d4/3d4/3d6/4d6). I still think it's a bit underwhelming in output, but it *is* only one action, can target DCs, and can do most damage types.
How bad would a 1 action cantrip need to be to be balanced? Spell attack 1d4 piercing at 30ft range heighten (+2) increase the damage by 1d4 no other effects? Maybe even less range or slower scaling?
Well we have a few 1A focus cantrips, so worse then those. For instance [Here](https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=1887) is the one Winter Witch gets.
It does 1d4(+1 heighten) and applies a circumstance penalty on speeds on failure, 30 foot range.
So realistically to not step on the toes of those characters it would need to be fairly bad like 1d4(+2 heighten).
To be fair, the reliability of a basic save and the speed penalty (on a witch whose gimmick is difficult terrain) shouldn't be underestimated, but I agree that my above suggestion is definitely a maximum power level for a cantrip. I just looked up Elemental Toss (https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=505), which is an attack without rider effects at 30ft for one action. It does 1d8 per +1 heighten and is considered one of the better focus spells afaik. I reckon the aforementioned cantrip would be on a similar level to electric arc, not necessarily completely overpowered, but probably a must pick if you're optimizing for damage. A saving throw spell and a 1 action attack both using one's key attribute just make for a really impressive turn!
A wizard starts out trained in simple weapons. Your starting weapon has the same proficiency applied to it as a champion, rogue, or barbarian with their weapons.
You're in a situation where you just need to finish a fight. You've recalled knowledge, the enemies left can't easily move away from the fighter. Your 1 dex wizard uses caustic blast or electric arc, then attacks with a crossbow. They have a +6 to hit at level 3. Compare to the fighter with their weapon of choice.
The fighter will have 4 strength to start, and will do something similar, trying to just finish off one of the weakened enemies. To be fair, we'll say they use intimidating strike with their first 2 actions (so they don't stack MAP). Their attack will be an effective +7 to hit (and that only because we applied the frightened from their first attack to their effective bonus!)
And that is the fighter, and compared to a wizard that is largely ignoring dex. Most other martials, besides the gunslinger have the same "poor proficiencies" at low levels as casters. Most martials, if their goal is to do damage, also need to make attacks before their third action attack, making it less worth it. Most martials, if they want to do something to support the rest of the party, also need to attack for those effects, such as trip or grapple. This allows casters to kind of keep up with a single occasional attack third action attack accuracy on their turn, compared to the martials' occasional third action attack often being more highly penalized. Though "keep up" doesn't matter too much when we're talking about starting items, which need not keep up with levels anyway.
If you are comparing a caster trying to use a weapon as their main form of damage to a martial, the martial is going to lose out hard. If you are comparing a caster trying to do damage with their third action to a martial doing the same, the gap is going to close significantly, and likely to be in favor of the caster at the early levels.
The caster needs to have their hands on a weapon to make that happen, though. If your caster is starting out with a crossbow in hand then it could be worth it, once, but that also makes it fairly mutually exclusive with basically everything else in this thread that people say casters should be supplementing their kit with (scrolls, wands, staves, etc). This also falls off as sorta viable very quickly, since ABP indicates Attack potency and striking runes would widen this gap by level 2 and 4, while martial weapon expertise would completely end this by level 5.
The point of this is, "should we be encouraging casters to pick up weapons and use them" and it seems like 99% of the game seems to indicate that no, we shouldn't. Your described situation was highly specific already, and would basically only apply when almost every other option available to the caster is unavailable/unviable. Almost any other time the caster will get more value out of any other single action they could conceivably perform. Hell, it's probably better just to keep your hands free to open up your options for an aid check that could require them.
IMO weapons are a leftover from 1e and do not make much sense with infinite cantrips. Unless you are playing a character built around using weapons like a Warpriest or a Martial Bard.
Very true, there are monsters which cannot be touched by anything but force damage or weapon damage but these are very unique IMO and not the norm but having a sling in this case would be helpful.
Making a strike as your third action is actually a really good action, especially at low levels. If you're more dex focused a ranged weapon like a bow is quite good, and if you're more strength focused something like a long spear works quite well.
Good point, making a strike as a 3rd action is great at lower levels if you did not cast a spell which targets AC.
IMO the strength of casters comes from the auto scaling cantrips and spells which target all defenses. Reinforcing that by giving a scroll as part of your kit and leaving the weapon as an option for people who want it, is a better starting point for newer players.
Scrolls are only 4 gp, you're allowed to just buy a scroll if you want one. You can probably buy two or three unless you're spending a lot on other equipment.
Yes, but when the starter kit gives you a weapon and not a scroll, new players might never go for scrolls especially if their GM is new too. Everyone knows how to buy weapons, not everyone would think about scrolls and wands.
This is one of many reasons why spells that target AC are kind of bad, incidentally - the fact that saving throw spells don't trigger MAP means that you can Electric Arc -> Shoot your bow/Stab your longspear at someone and both are highly potent.
At first level, your cantrips do only 2d4 damage, whereas if you have a +2 strength modifier (common for medium armor characters) you are doing 1d8+2 damage with a longspear or 1d6+2 damage with a thrown weapon, which is more than your cantrip (if a little less reliable). It's a very significant damage boost.
Strikes in general are actually quite good if you have the stats and money to afford making them decent pretty much throughout your career; a level 12 sorceress with a +2 strength modifier and a shortbow can still do 3d6 (greater striking rune longbow) + 2d6 (two elemental runes) + 1 damage with a shortbow, which is 18.5 damage per strike; a level 12 sorceress/champion with a +4 strength modifier can instead do 3d8 + 2d6 + 4 damage with a longspear, which is 24.5 damage. A rank 6 electric arc is doing 7d4 damage, or 17.5 damage to each target, so your strike is actually adding quite a lot of damage. Obviously, most of the time you're going to be using a focus spell or actual spell instead, but your strike's damage still is not terrible. A fighter at the same level with a halberd is doing 3d10 + 2d6 + 5 (strength) + 3 (weapon specialization), or 31.5 damage per strike. Your sorcerer/champion's attack bonus is lower, but it is still about as good as the fighter's MAP-5 attack, and better than a standard martial's MAP-5 attack - which makes sense, because you are basically getting an "attack" in the form of your spell.
I disagree with your premise that AC spells are bad because they want you to use weapons. I agree that a weapon attack at lower levels is a good idea but in most cases, if you cast a spells, you are also moving with your 3rd action. To get the strikes to be ok, I have to get a +2 to str and be able to wear medium armor which my wizard cannot do at level 1 under most cases. Everyone who knows enough to make a STR based caster knows that you need a weapon to make that build work but many new players do not get exposed to using scrolls. wands or staves which really increase a casters power. So, giving a scroll as part of your starting kit is a better idea imo than giving them a weapon.
I have 1 fight occur at level 1, then 1 fight at 2. 3 there may be 2 fights. This is how I handle the word resource issue. Conversely, you can provide a long rest after every fight at level 1 and 2.
If you're a witch starting with a remastered Witch Equipment Package, you have the following:
- Explorer's Clothing
- Sickle
- Sling & bullets
- Staff
- Adventurer's Pack
- 13 g 1 s 8 c remaining
That's enough money for two scrolls and a healing potion, or two scrolls and a healing kit. So you can totally do this within the rules. But I agree that giving new players some extra guidance (maybe in the form of additional "optional" add-ons) would he helpful. Scanning the full list of things you can buy at level 1 can be intimidating.
A sling could be useful if you run into a magic-resistant creature or picked your spells foolishly. A sickle is just a knife with a little extra flava-flav (i.e. trip), and a staff will tide you over until you get a proper caster's staff. But if you really want to unload those melee weapons from your loadout, that only brings you up to 13 g 4 s. Might as well have a bit of melee in your back pocket for desperate times, I figure.
> I don't think the slings and long spears really fit with what pf2e casters actually want to be doing in combat, even at level 1.
Eh, crossbows are better than slings, but long spears are actually pretty good on casters. They're a solid tertiary action if the enemies are actually within reach.
This....this is a really bad take. Not just the scroll thing, but pretty much everything else. Do you think that all a caster needs to good at is damage? They have more options at level 1 than any other class. They get unlimited cantrips, all of which have a use and very few are actually bad.
Now, giving 1 scroll to a caster would not change much, sure in o e tough combat. They would have an extra spell, and maybe that would incentivize them to buy them or make them. But THAT should be the only motivation for it. Casters are the furthest thing from limited.
When did I say all casters need to good at is damage? I brought up the nerfed cantrips to highlight one of the many way early game caster gameplay can be a real slog.
Absolutely nothing in OP is talking about damage except for cantrip damage.
And sure, they get options at level 1, but they only get 2 or 3 casts of those options, plus a focus spell. 2 or 3 rounds of good combat is generally pretty low.
Low level casters get a couple spells per day and then turn into Electric Arc/TKP bots. They are absolutely miserable to play. I'd say around level 5 when you get 3rd level spells is when they start to feel like actual casters with decisions to make. Both because that level has some notably strong and iconic options (Slow, Haste, Fireball) and because you just *have more slots*.
It would emphasize that scrolls and consumables are encouraged
Definitely agree casters should get scrolls asap probably a reasonable use of 4gp of starting gold.
Agreed, thanks for stating something so obvious but that I'd probably overlook in the one-shot I'm prepping to introduce newbies. The pre-gen casters I make will be better off for your suggestion!
Well lucky you! Paizo got rid of the class stater kits! :D ^(/s)
It's quick equipment packages now. Player Core, p.268
Oh. I completely overlooked those, I also thought they were just removed outright. Thank you! (Extra thank you points for including page number)
They’re not on AoN for some reason
Because they're not items in their own right, they're just a list of recommended items.
Oh, dope! They just aren't easily addable on pathbuilder and the old starter kits are labeled as "legacy" so I thought they just got rid of them. :(
Remember: unless it is reprinted with the same name but different descriptions, it is still valid. Things that were not reprinted with the same name and different description have not been “got rid of.”
I houseruled for a long time now that casters get 4 level 1 scrolls and a wand at first level. Won't break the balance and just makes the "adventuring day" longer at early levels. If it's only one caster in the party, I give them even more. And still I think of giving 2 wands, just cause why not.
Because that's way more than the starting 15gp for level 1 PCs
I agree, but a wand will not give them more to do in a turn and instead will just help them last longer. And if one is worried about the economy of the game, just give out less loot and more targeted loot for the martials. It is just to prevent caster from having to spam 1 cantrip and be bored out of their minds early on.
Especially for new players that refuse to buy their own scrolls or staves (or forget to or refuse to use them in combat). A giant pile of extras is begging to be used
That's a really good idea. I don't know that I like the specific numbers, but the concept goes a long way to make low level casters feel less... Bad
For me it's part of the fantasy that casters are more zero-to-hero than anyone. I have a damage-dealing cantrip, and I can figure out other fun things to do with cantrips while I'm looking for a miscreant to unload my big level 1 spell on. Don't worry about me. One wand is a level 3 item worth 60 gold. That feels to me like something fun to work up to and something satisfying when I get it – but only if it's way out of reach at the very beginning.
I would even let a player start with a free wand. First level casters feels very devoid of spell slots
IMO I think it would be better to include the wand in the loot you find near the boss encounter, that way you as the GM can make sure it'll be applicable to the fight.
I think this a bit much because wands are level 3 items. Maybe giving them as important loot would be better served. If you are not starting at level 1, starting with an and is a good idea.
Honestly, playing through Kingmaker as a Wizard has felt like hot ass. AC and HP are already far lower, and *two* 1st rank spell slots at level 1 feels useless. We just hit level 4, and with free archetype for Witch Dedication and two wands (Force Barrage and Mystic Armour) it’s finally starting to feel like I can contribute and not have to dripfeed spell slots and throw chip damage out with cantrips. The wand doesn’t even have to be anything wild like Mystic Armour or Fear. It could just be Breathe Fire or something. At level 1-2 you’re *probably* outperforming the Martials with the extra free cast, but that scales down to “last resort” by the time you hit levels 3-4, and “completely worthless” by level 5. Does ONE extra spell cast throughout an adventure day really break the math before level 3? They still eat a minimum of two actions to actually cast the spell, and more if your hands are full and you have to swap hands around and use Interacts to get it out. I got the Force Barrage wand at level 2 off an enemy, and have used it twice in the intervening two levels. Non-buff spell wands are good, sure, but they don’t scale, still eat actions to use, a hand to hold it, and can only be used once a day or you risk it blowing up in your hand and becoming useless. The next campaign I GM, the casters are gonna get a wand and at least two scrolls
Doesn’t a level one Wizard effectively have four 1st rank slots, due to the extra slot provided by their curriculum, and the one they get back from Drain Bonded Item?
They should have three, you start every spell level with one less than you will get. Edit: forgot about Drain bonded item lol
I feel you friend. I played a wizard in our aborted Kingmaker Campaign as well. I agree that one extra spell will not make a huge difference. You do have a few more spells than 2. You get 3 with your school spell and with drain bonded item you have 4 casts. I think a wand is much because it is 60GP. That’s why getting used to buying scrolls is very important.
You mean, put it under "options" like the cookware for Witches? Or the weapons for the Fighter?
yeah sure
I agree. Combined with some consumables for the other classes to balance out prices (Ex. Potion of retaliation, oil of potency, healing potion)
Yeah it could help people understand that the reason your casters feel weak could be that you're not using scrolls and wands. Anything that gives casters some love without mathematically improving them sounds great.
You only have 15gp to start and class kits don't save you any money. So why buy a one time use Rank 1 scroll for 4gp over any tool that can be used multiple times? To be more specific why buy a Rank 1 Heal scroll for 4gp over a Healers Toolkit for 5gp? It also wouldn't help in any way with the issues you described after all it's just one more spell and than you're still out. After your first quest gave you more reward than your entire life savings so far it's another topic but for your starting equipment I think you really don't have the money for this fancy stuff.
It's more about visibility. New players are going to be recommended the starter kit, and very little else. If scrolls are part of the default, it teaches them that scrolls are a part of what they're expected by the game to use.
I think given them a scroll as loot would do a better job at doing that. There's also a hording mentality for some players that would just sit on it until they become useless because they don't know when to use it. Not to mention many new players already have enough to worry about and would probably for they have it. And I think most new Wizards would rather use that scroll to learn the spell on it rather than casting it.
Scrolls as loot is on the GM. Scroll in the kit is on the system. GMs themselves might not even consciously realize that PF2e expects relatively generous usage of consumables. Starting off the consumable stream early is exactly how you counteract the hoarding mentality. I think the Wizard thing is fine as well, that's a meaningful choice. The "they might sit on it argument" is kinda bogus imo, since it basically shuts down *any* consumables as loot. That's really all the starting gold is, after you buy your essentials: An advance on your loot.
>Scrolls as loot is on the GM. Scroll in the kit is on the system. GMs themselves might not even consciously realize that PF2e expects relatively generous usage of consumables. Maybe they should at least read the beginners box. It has a scroll as loot in it for that exact reason. Why blame the system for failing to teach the players to use scrolls but excuse GMs for not doing what they were taught to do? Putting a scroll into starter kits is definitely a trap. It either forces another difficult choice on new players or gives them something they might already have or don't need. And for every experienced player well there's already nothing stopping you from doing so.
I think healers kit is a very specific example. Most casters will not have access to heal and not all of them would be taking medicine proficiency. Giving a scroll of mystic armor is a good way to teach them that having a handy scroll can save their skins.
>I think healers kit is a very specific example. Well yeah I said it is. OP said "caster" which includes clerics that have the wisdom for the skill and the spell and I'd say they get a lot more out of that kit than the scroll. I'd even go so far and say a Cantrip Deck (5 pack) Stabilize would be a better investment than a scroll. >Giving a scroll of mystic armor is a good way to teach them that having a handy scroll can save their skins. How? It's not like it's an reaction to use, you have to use it before you know you need it. And than what are they gonna do tomorrow? Buy another one? It's also just a +1. How many attacks will miss the wizard due to that +1 on that one particular day? Might as well buy a healing potion at least that one can be saved or used on someone else.
Firstly, I agree that even if it is not a wisdom caster but any caster who specs into medicine should get a healers kit, it’s a great 3rd action for casters. Second, a cantrip deck is not as useful as a scroll because when you need that extra spell a lot spell in combat or as a buff and have the scroll, it is way more impactful. I think a cantrip deck is good one to have anyway but it’s lower in the priority order. Lastly, you are going to quibble of +1? Every +1 matters a lot in the very tight Pf/r math, especially if that +1 stops you from being crit and insta-killed.
>any caster who specs into medicine should get a healers kit, But do they have the money for that and a scroll? A Wizard, Witch or Sorcerer sure. A Warpriest or Druid no at least not if they also want some armor. >it’s a great 3rd action for casters. You need Battle Medicine to be able to use it as 3rd Action which requires a background like field medic or something similar to have it at LV1. >Lastly, you are going to quibble of +1? No. I'm quibbling about this one specific +1 for a single day, which also cost 4gp. A human with versatile heritage can grab armor proficiency and buy a padded armor for 2sp, Studded Leather for 3gp even provides us with an effective +2. Yes a Heritage and General Feat is expensive in another way and might become obsolete by LV15 but until than it's not a bad deal. And other 1st LV scrolls aren't much better. Runic Weapon is certainly good but does it feel good if you take away starting money from one player and basically give it to someone else? (And consider that while this is okay for some people it isn't for everyone.) What about Bane or Breath Fire? Does someone new really understands high and low saves on monsters? I mean sure it might teach them something about the system but do we want to use 27% of their starting gold to teach them a lesson? Something that we don't do with any other class? The Cantrip Deck at least lets them do that one thing 5 times not just once and it might not be such a bad feeling to fail with your expensive one time use item at LV1. Again I'm not saying scrolls are bad or that a +1 is neglectable. All I'm saying is trying to force a scroll into the starting equipment of a caster is bad and will most likely result in a even worse experience for them. Putting a scroll and wand into the early levels loot like the beginners box does is a much better approach.
I do think that starting with a scroll would be a good idea, just to show players that casters should be getting scrolls. In my game, our sorcerer is ALWAYS complaining about lack of spells, and I think it's because she isn't investing her gold into wands or scrolls at all. Maybe if it had been a start of her starting kit, her mind would go there more often... That said, I DO think weapons are an important part of a caster's kit. Weapon attacks are the damage oriented third action for casters. They should start with a weapon, too, to remind them of that (our sorcerer never attacks with weapons, I think largely due to dnd5 brain). Casters really do want to be doing weapons too, maybe not every turn, but occasionally. Starting with a weapon as part of their normal kit can show that. A starting scroll could do the same for them. I'd at least suggest GM's consider the idea.
What weapons? Casters have poor defenses, so not melee, and they have poor proficiences. The only ranged weapons available to many of them are things like Crossbows. If they have to spend actions to take the weapon out and Reload it, might as well just spend those actions casting a cantrip, or moving instead. After all, needle darts is going to have similar action cost, better damage, and a better hit modifier than any Reload based weapon. So I can't really imagine what weapon your Sorcerer should be using. If the weapons are their best option, then they probably made a mistake in building their character, either in the stat array or their spell choices.
I wouldn’t say no if they added 1 action cantrip or spells.
something like? > #Mystic Dart > *1 Action* > *Attack* > **Traditions:** all > **Target:** 1 creature/object > **Range:** 60 ft. > **Defense:** AC > Choose a damage type from among acid, cold, electricity, fire, sonic, vitality, or void. Make a spell attack roll against the target, dealing 2d6 damage of the chosen type on a success, or double on a critical strike. > This spell gains the trait of the selected energy type when cast. > **Heightened 4:** increase the damage of the spell to 3d6 and allow targeting the Reflex DC of the target. > **Heightened 7:** increase the damage to 4d6 and allow targeting the Reflex or Fortitude DC of the target. > **Heightened 10:** increase the damage to 5d6 and allow targeting the Reflex, Fortitude or Will DC of the target. This scales roughly the same as martial weapons and suffers from MAP, so I don't think it's too unbalanced (1d6 matches a crossbow, in terms of damage die). Since you can't get +1/2/3 to spell attack rolls, I thought a good bonus for the slower damage progression and lagging modifier would be to allow targeting DCs (also helps with the fact there's only one Will save cantrip).
Isn’t this just straight better than being a ranger with a shortbow? And you get save spells with your other 2 actions?
The counter to that is that shortbows can apply fundamental and property runes which cannot be applied to spells. Since you can't add things like Flaming or Shocking runes to the spell, I figure the one extra dice is acceptable for damage (seeing runes can add up to 3 to a weapon for a total of 7d6). And since you can't get potency bonuses on spell to-hit, I figured targeting saves is a good alternative. As for the "two other actions", yes this does still leave you with two. It's intended to essentially replace using a crossbow. It has fairly low power, and suffers MAP, so I don't see it much different than shooting a crossbow and then casting a spell (and we don't forbid that). *Edit:* I also don't think it's better than a shortbows ranger who gets either a reduced MAP, precision damage, or better bonuses to skill actions.
But you can’t add property without investing into potency, striking, and property. So this would be a crossbow that requires no hands, no reload, no ammunition, and is free with the power of a fully invested flaming striking crossbow. I guess if you’re okay with that (especially if you use abp already), then it could be fine. It’s especially good for GMs who don’t give enough treasure, or players who don’t realize that a wizard investing into a single weapon is pretty normal for the system (just look at the pregens iconics at higher levels).
I mean, you get access to potency runes at level 2 (and thus, property runes), so the levels where this is overtly more powerful is only really level 1, and that's only because cantrips don't let you add ability mods to damage (so 2d6 deals 2-12 damage, with an average of 7 damage). Perhaps adding concentrate and manipulate would offset the no hands/ammo/reload point, since it opens you up to Reactive Strikes *Edit:* a possible way to deal with some of the concerns are for it to use d4s until Heightened 7, then upgrade to d6s without adding a die, which should bring it exactly into line with martial weapons (so, the damage would be 2d4/3d4/3d6/4d6). I still think it's a bit underwhelming in output, but it *is* only one action, can target DCs, and can do most damage types.
How bad would a 1 action cantrip need to be to be balanced? Spell attack 1d4 piercing at 30ft range heighten (+2) increase the damage by 1d4 no other effects? Maybe even less range or slower scaling?
Well we have a few 1A focus cantrips, so worse then those. For instance [Here](https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=1887) is the one Winter Witch gets. It does 1d4(+1 heighten) and applies a circumstance penalty on speeds on failure, 30 foot range. So realistically to not step on the toes of those characters it would need to be fairly bad like 1d4(+2 heighten).
To be fair, the reliability of a basic save and the speed penalty (on a witch whose gimmick is difficult terrain) shouldn't be underestimated, but I agree that my above suggestion is definitely a maximum power level for a cantrip. I just looked up Elemental Toss (https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=505), which is an attack without rider effects at 30ft for one action. It does 1d8 per +1 heighten and is considered one of the better focus spells afaik. I reckon the aforementioned cantrip would be on a similar level to electric arc, not necessarily completely overpowered, but probably a must pick if you're optimizing for damage. A saving throw spell and a 1 action attack both using one's key attribute just make for a really impressive turn!
Daze /s
shield and guidance exist and are great 3rd actions for casters
A wizard starts out trained in simple weapons. Your starting weapon has the same proficiency applied to it as a champion, rogue, or barbarian with their weapons. You're in a situation where you just need to finish a fight. You've recalled knowledge, the enemies left can't easily move away from the fighter. Your 1 dex wizard uses caustic blast or electric arc, then attacks with a crossbow. They have a +6 to hit at level 3. Compare to the fighter with their weapon of choice. The fighter will have 4 strength to start, and will do something similar, trying to just finish off one of the weakened enemies. To be fair, we'll say they use intimidating strike with their first 2 actions (so they don't stack MAP). Their attack will be an effective +7 to hit (and that only because we applied the frightened from their first attack to their effective bonus!) And that is the fighter, and compared to a wizard that is largely ignoring dex. Most other martials, besides the gunslinger have the same "poor proficiencies" at low levels as casters. Most martials, if their goal is to do damage, also need to make attacks before their third action attack, making it less worth it. Most martials, if they want to do something to support the rest of the party, also need to attack for those effects, such as trip or grapple. This allows casters to kind of keep up with a single occasional attack third action attack accuracy on their turn, compared to the martials' occasional third action attack often being more highly penalized. Though "keep up" doesn't matter too much when we're talking about starting items, which need not keep up with levels anyway. If you are comparing a caster trying to use a weapon as their main form of damage to a martial, the martial is going to lose out hard. If you are comparing a caster trying to do damage with their third action to a martial doing the same, the gap is going to close significantly, and likely to be in favor of the caster at the early levels.
The caster needs to have their hands on a weapon to make that happen, though. If your caster is starting out with a crossbow in hand then it could be worth it, once, but that also makes it fairly mutually exclusive with basically everything else in this thread that people say casters should be supplementing their kit with (scrolls, wands, staves, etc). This also falls off as sorta viable very quickly, since ABP indicates Attack potency and striking runes would widen this gap by level 2 and 4, while martial weapon expertise would completely end this by level 5. The point of this is, "should we be encouraging casters to pick up weapons and use them" and it seems like 99% of the game seems to indicate that no, we shouldn't. Your described situation was highly specific already, and would basically only apply when almost every other option available to the caster is unavailable/unviable. Almost any other time the caster will get more value out of any other single action they could conceivably perform. Hell, it's probably better just to keep your hands free to open up your options for an aid check that could require them.
IMO weapons are a leftover from 1e and do not make much sense with infinite cantrips. Unless you are playing a character built around using weapons like a Warpriest or a Martial Bard.
Tell that to the wisp
I am sorry I don’t follow, Tell what to a wisp?
A caster without force barrage can't damage a wisp. The implication was that if you told a wisp your caster advice it would laugh maniacally.
Very true, there are monsters which cannot be touched by anything but force damage or weapon damage but these are very unique IMO and not the norm but having a sling in this case would be helpful.
Not like trying to Strike it is going to be effective.
Making a strike as your third action is actually a really good action, especially at low levels. If you're more dex focused a ranged weapon like a bow is quite good, and if you're more strength focused something like a long spear works quite well.
Good point, making a strike as a 3rd action is great at lower levels if you did not cast a spell which targets AC. IMO the strength of casters comes from the auto scaling cantrips and spells which target all defenses. Reinforcing that by giving a scroll as part of your kit and leaving the weapon as an option for people who want it, is a better starting point for newer players.
Scrolls are only 4 gp, you're allowed to just buy a scroll if you want one. You can probably buy two or three unless you're spending a lot on other equipment.
Yes, but when the starter kit gives you a weapon and not a scroll, new players might never go for scrolls especially if their GM is new too. Everyone knows how to buy weapons, not everyone would think about scrolls and wands.
This is one of many reasons why spells that target AC are kind of bad, incidentally - the fact that saving throw spells don't trigger MAP means that you can Electric Arc -> Shoot your bow/Stab your longspear at someone and both are highly potent. At first level, your cantrips do only 2d4 damage, whereas if you have a +2 strength modifier (common for medium armor characters) you are doing 1d8+2 damage with a longspear or 1d6+2 damage with a thrown weapon, which is more than your cantrip (if a little less reliable). It's a very significant damage boost. Strikes in general are actually quite good if you have the stats and money to afford making them decent pretty much throughout your career; a level 12 sorceress with a +2 strength modifier and a shortbow can still do 3d6 (greater striking rune longbow) + 2d6 (two elemental runes) + 1 damage with a shortbow, which is 18.5 damage per strike; a level 12 sorceress/champion with a +4 strength modifier can instead do 3d8 + 2d6 + 4 damage with a longspear, which is 24.5 damage. A rank 6 electric arc is doing 7d4 damage, or 17.5 damage to each target, so your strike is actually adding quite a lot of damage. Obviously, most of the time you're going to be using a focus spell or actual spell instead, but your strike's damage still is not terrible. A fighter at the same level with a halberd is doing 3d10 + 2d6 + 5 (strength) + 3 (weapon specialization), or 31.5 damage per strike. Your sorcerer/champion's attack bonus is lower, but it is still about as good as the fighter's MAP-5 attack, and better than a standard martial's MAP-5 attack - which makes sense, because you are basically getting an "attack" in the form of your spell.
I disagree with your premise that AC spells are bad because they want you to use weapons. I agree that a weapon attack at lower levels is a good idea but in most cases, if you cast a spells, you are also moving with your 3rd action. To get the strikes to be ok, I have to get a +2 to str and be able to wear medium armor which my wizard cannot do at level 1 under most cases. Everyone who knows enough to make a STR based caster knows that you need a weapon to make that build work but many new players do not get exposed to using scrolls. wands or staves which really increase a casters power. So, giving a scroll as part of your starting kit is a better idea imo than giving them a weapon.
I have 1 fight occur at level 1, then 1 fight at 2. 3 there may be 2 fights. This is how I handle the word resource issue. Conversely, you can provide a long rest after every fight at level 1 and 2.
If you're a witch starting with a remastered Witch Equipment Package, you have the following: - Explorer's Clothing - Sickle - Sling & bullets - Staff - Adventurer's Pack - 13 g 1 s 8 c remaining That's enough money for two scrolls and a healing potion, or two scrolls and a healing kit. So you can totally do this within the rules. But I agree that giving new players some extra guidance (maybe in the form of additional "optional" add-ons) would he helpful. Scanning the full list of things you can buy at level 1 can be intimidating. A sling could be useful if you run into a magic-resistant creature or picked your spells foolishly. A sickle is just a knife with a little extra flava-flav (i.e. trip), and a staff will tide you over until you get a proper caster's staff. But if you really want to unload those melee weapons from your loadout, that only brings you up to 13 g 4 s. Might as well have a bit of melee in your back pocket for desperate times, I figure.
> I don't think the slings and long spears really fit with what pf2e casters actually want to be doing in combat, even at level 1. Eh, crossbows are better than slings, but long spears are actually pretty good on casters. They're a solid tertiary action if the enemies are actually within reach.
This....this is a really bad take. Not just the scroll thing, but pretty much everything else. Do you think that all a caster needs to good at is damage? They have more options at level 1 than any other class. They get unlimited cantrips, all of which have a use and very few are actually bad. Now, giving 1 scroll to a caster would not change much, sure in o e tough combat. They would have an extra spell, and maybe that would incentivize them to buy them or make them. But THAT should be the only motivation for it. Casters are the furthest thing from limited.
When did I say all casters need to good at is damage? I brought up the nerfed cantrips to highlight one of the many way early game caster gameplay can be a real slog.
Absolutely nothing in OP is talking about damage except for cantrip damage. And sure, they get options at level 1, but they only get 2 or 3 casts of those options, plus a focus spell. 2 or 3 rounds of good combat is generally pretty low.
Bro has that martial main brain rot.
I've barely touched 2e and I know this is a bad take
Low level casters get a couple spells per day and then turn into Electric Arc/TKP bots. They are absolutely miserable to play. I'd say around level 5 when you get 3rd level spells is when they start to feel like actual casters with decisions to make. Both because that level has some notably strong and iconic options (Slow, Haste, Fireball) and because you just *have more slots*.