The occultist has 2nd level spells and SM 3 as a standard action lasting minutes/level from his arcane reservoir, and 2 exploits. You might prepare the 2nd level spells Create Pit, SM 2, glitterdust and leave one open slot. Assuming you're going to summon anyway, maybe SF (conj.), Augment summoning, expanded preparation, extra exploit (potent magic) & the exploit consume magic items sound useful. He has no way of standard action summoning. The school savant has 2nd level spells, swift action 10' teleport, +2 rounds duration on SM and one exploit. A possible list of 2nd-3rd level spells prepared might be 3) stinking cloud, SM 3, haste, 2) create pit, SM 2, 2*open slot. Academae graduate, SF (conj.), Augment Summoning, GSF, Fast Study sound good feats/discoveries to have. The wizard has 3rd level spells, swift action 10' teleport & +2 rounds on SM duration. The conjuration school doesn't have a lot of conceptual glue holding it together, but OK. Between that and the general buffs to casters, being a SoD-focused caster in Pathfinder is probably overall even stronger than it is in 3.5 even with the nerfs to the Spells that Fvcking Kill People.Īnd then they went and printed the Arcanist, as if to mock people who argued that Pathfinder wasn't the Casteriest Edition ever.Īrchmage Joda wrote:On another note, for what is essentially a "Supreme Conjurer", that is, good at most if not all aspects of the conjuration school, what would my best chassis be, a Conjurer Wizard, a School Savant Arcanist, or an Occultist Arcanist? True Neutral is the king of alignments if you want to bodyjack people in Pathfinder.Īlso, Pathfinder's change to Persistent Spell is crazy-go-nuts with magic jar (and other SoDs, but magic jar gets you the most mileage). It's actually stronger in Pathfinder, because protection from 's suppression of charms, compulsions, and possession effects is now alignment-based rather than universal. Magic jar is word-for-word reprinted from 3.5. No spells have been improved, but new ones have been introduced. "Death" becomes "pile of damage", crippling conditions come with new saves every round. Rule of thumb: Every spell from the 3.5 PHB that was save-or-lose has been nerfed. OgreBattle wrote:Is there a list of spells weakened in PF(glitter dust)compared to spells improved in PF? You win everything in 1 round of real time in any tome game with just that, and your class/build doesn't matter as long as you can use scrolls.Īnd then you take the Mona Lisa from the cold dead hands of the fools who used their wishes for anything but a massive pile of scrolls. You just chain time-stop scrolls and drop other scroll spells that work during time stop. PF only pulls ahead if you add houserules to 3.5 and allow PF 100% free reign.Īs for scrolls, time stop. It was also explained multiple times how 3.5 casters can and will have more wealth by level. So a candle of invocation in PF is not an auto-win against any pre-epic challenge. I think the theoretical optimization takeoff point for pure RAW wankery is like one level earlier in Pathfinder.Īnd as already pointed out multiple times, gate has been severly nerfed in PF, because not only it is limited to HD=CL, there's no more monsters with HD lower than CR. Candles of Invocation exist in both games, and Pathfinder characters have more wealth by level. And even if the comparison point was meaningful, it still wouldn't give you an answer, because breaking the game is the same end point in both cases. So it's basically a meaningless point of comparison. They are both powerful enough to run the game into the ground at about level 9 if not before. As others have already pointed out, Pathfinder also has broken stuff in it, so if you play "all dicks on the table" then Pathfinder and 3.5 Wizards are exactly the same power.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |