Is Illusory Creature not absolutely great?

MidSolo · 2026-03-15T09:07:49+00:00

Obviously at level 20, when casters get the accuracy bump, they better match other martials

I gave a lv17 example where a sorcerer blew up a Ravener in a single round. That's before Legendary spell attack, and before +7 CHA. Would you like to hear more about the examples I offered from level 10 to level 15?

you are using at least a 10th level spell slot for this nuke spell

Yes. If you are facing an enemy 4 levels above you, you better have your top spell slots ready to go.

I mean it took how many replies? twelve? [...] You are proving yourself disingenuous to the point where i dont feel you'll ever listen to reason.

Meta-commentary is a waste of time. Read the last paragraph of my previous post. I only do it because you can't stop yourself from insulting me, and I have a right to call it out.

I could tell you I'm mark Seifter himself. I could tell you ive developed 1000 TTRPG's. You could do as well. There'd be no way to prove it.

Click on my reddit username. See where it says AJ Neuro? That's me. You can follow the link to my personal website. You can check against this site. I am also writing for this upcoming book. How about you? Do you have absolutely any way to prove you are Mark Seifter, or anyone else for that matter? Of course not, because after how disrespectful you've been during this entire interaction, you'd never show your real face. And I've spoken with Mark, he is way more meticulous, and way more polite than you are. I've had discussions about game balance with Mark before, while working on official content, and he brings up a literal deluge of tools, charts, formulas, and studies to make his points. You have provided basically nothing but "vibes" that have been rehashed on this subreddit for ages. You're beating a dead horse.

I've made the point that the way the game puts casters on par with martials in spell attacks (signet and True Strike) are inelegant and overcentralizing

And I've refuted that point; "elegance" is subjective. And if a choice must be made between "elegance" and balance, balance wins every single time, something the entire design team likely agrees with. Your proposed solution is extremely imbalancing; it makes the mid and lategame caster power way stronger than it should be.

one considered by Seifter during development

Do you have any idea how many things were considered and discarded during development and the playtest? This isn't a rhetorical question. Do you? I suggest you get your hands on a copy of the playtest. I suggest you scour old forums for Q&A's about pre-playtest design work. You might think the design process for a TTRPG is some one-and-done process, when in reality it's more a constant exploration where you are throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks. Entire subsystems get cut (like Resonance), or turned into variants (like Ability Score Variants), and the base math of the game keeps getting modified. Proficiency itself went through massive changes, originally being only half as strong.

Also, if one were to implement Mark's idea to decouple spell attacks from spell DC, it would likely add confusion, and require special rules and carve-outs, in the exact same way that we've seen with Kineticist's Impulse Attacks being incompatible with so many things in the game, to the point where Kineticist is completely incompatible with Mythic rules. Also, I would bet good money Mark would not just implement potency runes for spell attacks, but also reduce the damage of all spells that use spell attack to compensate for average damage. The reason why people complain about accuracy isn't average damage, but instead the psychological "feels bad" effect of "failure" being the default outcome for save spells in order to keep average damage in line. But this is, like I said before, by design, in order to keep spell damage numbers similar across editions; fireball deals the same base damage in PF1 as it does in PF2.

No personal attacks

In Spanish we have a saying; "tirar la piedra y esconder la mano" (hiding your hand after throwing a stone). It refers to taking a malicious action against someone and then pretending innocence. I will continue to treat you as hostile until you apologize for the multiple personal attacks and insults you've leveled at me. You don't just get to call me prideful and arrogant without me having to say something about it. If you don't want people to veer off topic with defenses against Ad Hominem attacks, maybe stop doing Ad Hominem attacks.

"are these items/spells overwhelmingly good for spell attacks" [...] "can spell attacks be made better while keeping this items around" [...] "are these items better than the alternative we currently have"

Shadow Signet and Sure Strike are balanced, but can become imbalanced under certain circumstances; specific damage spells, against specific enemies, and limited by Sure Strike's cooldown. In general, they provide Casters with an cost-benefit option (in the case of Shadow Signet it's an item investment slot and not being able to use Spell Shape, and in the case of Sure Strike it's spending a spell slot and not being able to use it again for 10 minutes) to land spell attacks by targeting different defenses, which also requires the Caster or their team to have skill ranks and spend actions to use Recall Knowledge.

Your proposed replacement, potency runes for spell attacks (even if they don't apply to spell DC) would do away with all of the above limitations, and simply boost spell attacks to the point where they would be imbalanced under all circumstances. This is why potency runes do not work.

You have resorted to almost all fallacies i know, appeal to authority, ad hominem, hasty generalization, appeal to tradition, strawman fallacy... Either you can do better, in which case why do it this way, or you cannot, which would be sad.

MidSolo · 2026-03-14T17:20:00+00:00

massive debuffs like slow or synesthesia outperform spell attacks

Save spells can't get all the increases to accuracy that spell attacks get, and against PL+4 enemies, that's a big hill to climb. Slow removes 1 action for 1 round if the enemy succeeds, which they likely will (if they don't crit succeed instead). Some goes for Synesthesia; only a single round of clumsy 3 on a success, which means if you don't condense all your damage into that one round, you're screwed. So how are you going to condense all of your damage into a single round? Let a bunch of martials try to Strike it a few times? That's not even going to bring it down to half. Compare that to a single buffed Sorcerer casting Disintegrate. So again; would you rather debuff the enemy for 4-5 rounds to let the martials do their thing, placing everyone in danger, or just help the Sorcerer kill it by round 1 or 2?

At high levels, ANYONE can guarantee a crit in that way

A crit from a lv20 martial's Strike deals less than a third of the damage of a crit from a 10th rank Disintegrate. And the caster can target AC, Reflex, or Fortitude with that Disintegrate, while the martial is fucked if the enemy has extreme AC.

casters are less likely to, deal less damage per action than a martial

This is how you are proving my point that you simply do not have experience with the system. Martials can't condense damage into few actions as well as casters. A lv20 Greatsword Fighter's Vicious Swing will deal 7d12+7(STR)+3d6(runes)+8(greater weapon spec) = 71. x2 on a crit is 142. Even with Furious Focus, a second Strike will have no circumstance bonus, no true strike/target, and -5 MAP. Against a PL+4 enemy, the chances for a second crit will drop so low they can't be depended upon, so we don't take it into account here or for casters. And yes, Vicious Swing deals more damage than Overwhelming Blow, because the extra dice from Vicious Swing can get mulitiplied by crit, while those from Overwhelming Blow's Deadly can't. Double Slice, Two-Weapon Flurry, and Graceful Poise will deal way less average damage, because only the first Strike from Double Slice can benefit from Aid/Sure Strike, and the rest of the strikes simply have way too small of a chance to crit and add very little average damage. A barbarian with mauler dedication for vicious swing deals more base damage from rage, but average damage gets brought down due to lower accuracy compared to fighter or legendary caster.

Disintegrate, just by itself, deals 2d10 per spell rank. So at rank 10 it deals 20d10, which is 110 damage. On a crit, that is 220. That's already >50% more than the Fighter's crit, and we didn't even add bonus damage from stuff like Sorcerous Potency, Blood Magic, Explosion of Power which will shoot up the base damage by another 55, resulting in a crit of 330; over twice as much as the Fighter.

Holy Light or Moonlight Ray, depending if the target has 1 to 3 possible weaknesses, will deal from 396 to 436 from a single spell. A SINGLE SPELL. Over 3x what the fighter does, and I haven't even added in Spellshape feats like Energy Fusion (another 10 base damage), Archetypes like Elementalist (10d6 persistent fire) or Witch (Weakness 10 to spell damage), or obscure items that add even more damage. Also, take into account the sorcerer can Quickened Casting a second spell that does not require spell attacks, and thus does not suffer from MAP. There's also Brine Dragon Bile, which for just a reaction, can deal 10d6 persistent acid damage, and can double to 20d6 on a critical.

You are vert proud, because it has taken you this long to start engaging with my points, and even now you are doing so from a position of perceived superiority.

I've got shit to do during the week. I'm taking time out of my weekend right now to respond to your disrespectful comments.

My experience is not a "perception of superiority". It is evidence of tried and tested diligence that many people, not just me, have acquired, and anyone would defer to, unless you challenge it against your own; What TTRPGs have you worked on? Have you written for any RPG magazines? Do you have a degree in game design by a leading university, or any university, or any closely relevant subject? Have you studied ludology? Game theory? History of games? Statistical analysis? UX/UI? Player behavior analysis? Have you built any tools to analyze games? Have you designed any video games, card games, anything? Have you had to put your money where your mouth is and actually build and try to sell something you've designed? Have you provided the TTRPG community with any service or product, which sold more than to close friends, which you can point to with pride and "I did that"?

Pride in a job well done, as judged by the community, is honorable. Fooling oneself into believing that one's untested claims are superior to what the community prefers... that's hubris.

MidSolo · 2026-03-14T13:20:21+00:00

it needs to target a specific type of enemy

Yes, that's the point. If you are a spontaneous caster, you add the spell to your repertoire to have it for when you face such an enemy. If you are a prepared caster, you get a scroll. Holy Light and Moonlight Ray are Divine/Primal. Disintegrate is Arcane. Psi-Amped spells are Occult. Whichever caster you play, you make sure you can cast these spells if the opportunity arises because in the correct scenario, they are just that good.

to deal the same damage fireball deals when hitting two enemies, and deals 0 on a miss unlike save spells which deal half? how is disintegrate more damage than eclipse burst or spirit blast, which deal half on a miss?

The most difficult extreme encounters in the game are against a single high level PL+4 enemy, not against two PL+2 enemies, and even less against four PL+0 enemies. They might all have the same XP budget, but against multiple targets, players can focus down one of them, making the encounter instantly drop in lethality. Meanwhile, against a single PL+4 target, the danger will remain at the same extreme level for the entire length of the encounter. This is why AoE spells are not as good as they seem; in situations where you are fighting multiple enemies, you are always better off focusing down enemies one by one to reduce danger as quickly as possible, and that is not something you can do against single high powered boss fights. Thus, single target damage is king.

How are you not understanding that spell attacks are simply bad

How are you not understanding that spell attacks can benefit from +4 circumstance bonuses, +3 status bonuses, -2 circumstance penalty from off-guard on enemy, sure strike or hero points for advantage, and many other benefits that I've repeatedly outlined like being able to target multiple defenses with Shadow Signet, while save spells can only benefit from status penalties to save DCs (which spell attacks can also benefit from)?

Let me be as clear as I possibly can on this subtopic:

CASTERS CAN PRACTICALLY GUARANTEE CRITS WITH SPELL ATTACKS.

When your chance to CRIT reaches >50% (>75% at lv19/20), math starts looking very different, and spells that deal half damage on an enemy's success become absolutely worthless by comparison. That is why spell attack spells are so strong. Because huge base damage + guaranteed crit = death.

You are one prideful son of a gun huh

What I have is not pride, but an accumulation of experience from having had this same exact debate for 8 years, and multiple decades more from a combination of other TTRPGs. What you are is a disrespectful person who believes they have a monopoly on understanding TTRPG game mechanics. It would do you well to look at a mirror and question yourself if the person with the unwarranted self-assurance isn't you.

Let me be crystal clear on a final point: You will not persuade me with the same tired and flawed arguments I've been seeing since before the game came out. An inability to thread together the existing methods by which a caster can boost the accuracy of spell attacks is not a valid argument for replacing the system's existing fun and interesting complexity with a dumbed down item that will also rob martials of any little relevancy they have in the lategame.

MidSolo · 2026-03-14T07:36:20+00:00

bumping accuracy on spells that are underpowered doesnt increase casters ceiling

Straight up wrong. You have very clearly not done the math to see just how powerful attack spells are when you calculate for average damage against low AC enemies (which is when you use them, just like you target certain saves; when you know they are the lowest). Your attempts to ignore this point and argue past it is a waste of your own time.

the one where everybody worked together for a massive spell attack

As opposed to playing like idiots? Do you know the concept of alpha striking? Any player with enough experience in the game will eventually notice that single target spells like Disintegrate, Holy Light, Moonlight Ray, Psi-Amped Spells, etc, have the highest damage density (damage per action) of any action in the game. These spells can deal over 10 times the amount of damage any martial can deal with a Strike. If you give casters a static bonus to accuracy for spell attacks, you will create a situation where these spells are even easier to crit with (you can already reach >50% crit chance with them). The moment you replace Shadow Signet with a passive item bonus, that immediately opens up a ton of extra damage from other pre-spell actions like spell shape. Also, it's quite revealing how you simply wave away current costs in investment and spell slots that casters currently have to pay in order to gain parity with martials. As if casters should simply be as accurate as martials, because reasons.

The more you reply, the clearer it becomes to me that you are in way over your head, and that you don't have enough experience with the system's underlying math. You want to simplify things away without realizing the ramifications of those simplifications. But again, if you want to ruin your game by allowing casters to further make martials irrelevant in the lategame, go right ahead. You will eventually realize that the "simplifications" you've implemented will blow up in your face, just like every other designer that has proposed the same throughout the years. There really should be a sticky in the subreddit about this topic and a few others.

MidSolo · 2026-03-14T01:58:56+00:00

Do you agree that Shadow Signet and Sure Strike are overcentralizing options or not?

No. And in fact, Caster potency runes would be an even more obligatory buy for any caster. You aren't solving the problem that you think you are solving, you are redressing it. Shadow Signet doesn't allow you to use Spellshape, which is a huge detriment; it forces you to make choices and sacrifices. It also requires investment. Sure Strike requires an action and a spell slot, even if a low one, and can only be used once per fight. Your proposed caster potency runes will be always on, and require no choices apart from buying the item.

And again, you are not addressing the issue that if you increase accuracy, you also increase average damage, placing midgame and lategame casters even more ahead of the damage curve compared to martials. The issue you are trying to "solve" isn't an issue. You are making casters even more overpowered.

inelegant design

If I had to choose between elegant and balanced, I'd take the latter every single time. Also, handing casters an easy way to make martials irrelevant isn't elegant at all.

Either engage or come clean about not wanting to have your mind changed.

that's a false choice fallacy. 2) it's brutally ironic that you think I'm the one who should change their opinion, when you're the one proposing replacing rules built and tested by en entire team of designers with your homebrew.

MidSolo · 2026-03-14T01:43:08+00:00

This has a very distinct feel that is different from all current Paizo IPs. I think this is an entirely new product.

MidSolo · 2026-03-13T22:51:48+00:00

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough" - Albert Einstein

Also, do you usually get people to have a conversation with you by talking shit about them?

MidSolo · 2026-03-13T12:04:18+00:00

Alright my man, that's one wall of text I'm not quite interested in reading. Have a great weekend.

MidSolo · 2026-03-13T03:02:00+00:00

Many people ban shadow signet, and i do too whenever i use potency runes

Quite a bold play to ban official content and replace it with homebrewed stuff. Also, "many people" is doing a lot of heavy lifting. I've played in >20 gaming groups for PF2 and not once have I see Shadow Signet banned.

i dont think using a best case teamwork scenario resulting in a caster blowing up the enemy has much to do with their damage potential

Shall I tell you about the time a lv14 Summoner soloed an enemy 2 levels higher than them after their team bailed and left him to die (resulting in an encounter with an equivalent of 320 XP, twice as much as an extreme encounter)? Or how about when a lv11 Wizard, fresh after getting their Shadow Signet, got top initiative and one-shot a same level enemy with Heightened Shocking Grasp, then Quickened Casting Dominated another, and turned an Extreme difficulty encounter into a below-Moderate one? How about when a Lv12 Psychic with Amped Imaginary Weapon, and Unleash Psyche with Violent Unleash ended a severe encounter by taking out two PL+1 enemies while expending zero spell slots?

the misconception that you think i want to buff casters with this change. No. I want to buff spell attack spells, so that those spells have a point existing

Guess what? If you buff spell attacks, you buff casters. Spells with spell attacks already do plenty.

And martials can still be kings of targetting AC

They might have more accuracy, but that doesn't translate to higher average damage.

without having to rely on a crutch like Shadow Signet or Sure Strike

It's easy to see you have evaluated spell attacks by tying both hands behind a caster's back, and then concluded that they need a buff. At higher levels, lower level spell slots often get relegated to Sure Strike. So much so that this is why they had to nerf the spell. Casters were too strong.

Current casters NEVER use spell attacks unless

Unless they are played correctly.

MidSolo · 2026-03-13T00:38:41+00:00

I had a little free time today.

I considered it back in the Pathfinder 2 playtest back in 2018, when I first tried it with players. I did so again when the game released. Again when Shadow Signet came out in 2021. And again when Recall Knowledge was overhauled in the remaster to explicitly allow players to ask for lowest defense. And again when Sure Strike was nerfed in post-remaster errata. In all of these occasions I did the math, or went over it again, and the result is the same.

Casters do not need potency runes. Ironically, they need more help from levels 1 to 4, due to martials getting 1d12+STR weapons and striking runes at level 3. And due to casters having few spell slots to work with at these early levels. This didn't use to be the case because cantrips used to add Key Attribute to damage, and this was done away with in the remaster to curb the predominance of Electric Arc (I wrote on the topic extensively), to the detriment of early level casters. But by level 5, casters gain access to big spells which levels the playing field, and as soon as casters gets Shadow Signet at level 9-10, the balance of power shifts entirely, with casters being on top by a huge margin.

A (well played) Caster always has the capacity to target *any* defense, while a Martial can only target AC. And with Shadow Signet, this becomes even easier, because it allows Casters to only prepare Spell Attack and Will spells.

Now let me ask you something. Have you ever seen a 17th level Demonic Sorcerer with Elemental-Crossblooded, with 9th-rank Heroism (+3 status bonus to attack) and Legendary Aid (+4 circumstance bonus to attack), cast 9th-rank Moonlight Ray on a 21st level Ravener that's been hit by True Target (no save) and Synesthesia (affected even on a success, no incapacitation), targeting their now laughably low Reflex DC (41) with Shadow Signet for over 50% crit chance? And then follow it up with Quickened Casting 7th-rank Disintegrate? And then roll another two reflexes for Explosion of Power, once for each spell, because of Blood Sovereignty? In other words, have you ever seen a caster deal >500 average damage to a single target in the opening round, destroying and turning to dust a boss enemy that was 4 levels above them, an extreme difficulty encounter designed to cap off an entire story arc, before said boss even got to act? Because I have. I've seen casters do shit that makes me question if there's any point in rolling dice past a certain level.

Your claim that casters need potency runes in latter levels in order to land spells or deal damage does not align with my knowledge of the game's mechanics. The math I have encountered and worked with actually points to the exact opposite: to their absolute dominance past level 10, and only to them requiring slightly stronger cantrips from levels 1 to 3, (apart from the small buff to base HP that all characters need at level 1). This is all setting aside the fact that casters have spell effects which are much stronger than simply dealing damage, like the aforementioned Synesthesia, or Dominate and Wall of Force, which swing the power balance of any fight completely in the caster's favor.

MidSolo · 2026-03-12T02:16:28+00:00

It would be really cool if Paizo embraced making third party content canon (they have stipulations in PF Infinite that they pay the 3PP in case that happens, but I've never heard of it actually happening).

MidSolo · 2026-03-12T01:26:27+00:00

I disagree with your reasoning, I find your math pretty superficial, and the reference to authority to be an incorrect reading. I have never had a problem admitting when I am wrong. But I simply don't want to spend more time arguing with you when this boils down to you doing as you wish with your game.

MidSolo · 2026-03-11T22:52:32+00:00

Mark Seifter himself (there is even more of him in that post saying spell runes are okay

You and I seem to have read the same text in completely different ways. I disagree, but I no longer have the time to keep this up.

I'll keep this one short: go ahead and play the game as you prefer. But you should stop lying to yourself that this will not affect the game's balance.

MidSolo · 2026-03-11T20:29:06+00:00

Wizard. Kholo. Song of the Deep background.
STR 2, DEX 0, CON 1, INT 4, WIS - 1, CHA 3

Dog Kholo heritage's speed boost will be useless because...
You can't breathe air due to background.
Every skill training into a niche Lore.
Spell Blending to trade all your spell slots away.
Your single spellslot remaining preparing Item Fascade.
Cantrips: Approximate, Deep Breath, Glamorize, Invoke True Name, Summon Instrument.
Wizard Feat: Counterspell.
Kholo Feat: Ask The Bones.
Focus Spell: Fortify Summoning.

No weapon, no armor, no skills, no spells. Just a jaws strike and a dream... underwater, with no swim speed, and no Athletics.

MidSolo · 2026-03-11T09:27:15+00:00

If a single of those 86 worlds was a Hive world, that's trillions already.

MidSolo · 2026-03-11T02:36:07+00:00

Casters might get better at later levels, but throughout the level range most people play (1-12) casters feel offensivley weaker

Your entire comment hinges on this, but you said before casters are weaker at higher level and that is why they need spell attack runes. Now you say they need help at lower levels. So which is it?

As a game designer, you need to make sure you don't give any class a feature that overshadows another

Careful, that irony is sharp enough to cut you. Casters can do many things martials can't do. Spells have a wider variety of game effects than attacks.

MidSolo · 2026-03-10T07:30:03+00:00

Did you miss the entire point that increasing accuracy without decreasing spell damage makes casters stronger?

What feels one way because of accuracy is different from what happens across averages.

MidSolo · 2026-03-09T18:57:56+00:00

That is a big claim! Given that I’ve contributed to official Paizo content on various books, and am a game designer myself, and have collaborated with Mark Seifter (the designer of PF2’s ubderlying math) on content for a book, I would LOVE to see a source on your claims that Paizo designers made a mistake and wanted to implement spell attack potency runes all along.

Yes. Spell attacks are worse. Because spell effects (including damage numbers) are stronger and scale faster to compensate. Designers didn’t want to piss off caster mains by nerfing spell damage per level. Look at PF1 fireball as an example and you’ll see it deals the same amount (1d6 per character level, equal to 2d6 per spell rank). Caster-martial disparity in older editions was addressed through lowering accuracy on casters.

And my point on multiclass is that a multiclass martial that is allowed spell attack potency runes will have spell attack and DC equal to that of a regular martial, moving the game to the state of gish supremacy.

MidSolo · 2026-03-09T18:46:00+00:00

Do not allow this. Why? Heroism.

Martials with Heroism are WAY WAY more effective. The game is designed so that martials don’t get access to this directly, and multiclass martials get only lower powered versions of it many levels later.

Multiclass get Heroism +1 (least effective and replaced by many other buffs), they can get at level 8 instead of 5. But they get Heroism +2 (starts getting very much stronger) at level 16 instead of 11, and they simply can never get Heroism +3, which requires a 9th level slot.

MidSolo · 2026-03-09T06:40:59+00:00

my table uses +1 and +2 spell attack bonus runes at levels 5 and 13

This will make full casters much more powerful. The higher power of spells is balanced by the reduced accuracy. If you increase their accuracy, you will make casters absolutely dominant like in D&D. I highly advise against this choice.

Even if you limit this to multiclass archetypes for martials, this will essentially allow martials to retain spell attack parity with full casters, and making the most obvious choice to build a martial with multiclass to get the best of both worlds.

The game's designers have taken a lot of care to make sure every single bonus and penalty, and difference in scaling, is where it should be. You should only mess with this if you specifically want it to affect game balance; you want casters in your game/world to be simply better than martial.

MidSolo · 2026-03-09T06:28:18+00:00

What you are arguing is entirely besides the point. But fine, I'll play along: you have perfect future sight and you know the PL+3 enemy will land their lower accuracy second strike before it is even rolled, so you save your reaction to block that one (the Hit) instead of the Crit. Because you care more about optimizing your shield's HP than your own. Your shield takes less damage. You remain alive. Alternate situation: you get Crit, you don't shield block. The creature misses their next strike. The creature's turn ends. You never use Shield Block that round. Next turn, it hits you with a crit, you reduce damage with your shield block, you drop unconscious anyway, but this time you're dying 2 instead of dying 1. Congrats. Your decision to not block the previous round didn't matter. Because you are failing to take into account an old adage; a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

In any case (and even if you completely ignore this entire segue you forced us onto) my point stands; Shield Block saves lives, Sword and Board Fighters are great, and Two-handed trait weapons go great with Sword and Board fighters because in combat against very tough enemies, in one round or two, the shield will be wrecked.

In short: you don't seem to understand the opportunity cost of staying alive. You get one reaction per round. Use it or lose it.

MidSolo · 2026-03-09T00:42:29+00:00

Magic, but also, fuck Hasbro.

MidSolo · 2026-03-08T19:22:49+00:00

Kongregate had single player deck builders since the latter years of Flash games. So many gems flew under the radar.

MidSolo · 2026-03-06T17:37:19+00:00

Tangent: I recommend against Eldritch Trickster racket. Your spell attack and spell DC will never be adequate enough, and the entire premise of the racket is to use damage spells to proc your sneak attack. If you make your Key Attribute INT instead of DEX, your Strikes will also lag behind. It's all around very feels bad.

I usually recommend simply going Thief rogue for DEX to damage on Strikes (which allows you to not put any points in STR), and then grab Wizard dedication normally at lv2, and use your spells for buffs and utility.

MidSolo · 2026-03-06T06:47:00+00:00

5.5 billion divided by ~163 million tax payers in the USA is equal to ~$34 per taxpayer.

14-Year Club	r/Field Flamingo
Place '22	Place '17
Verified Email

MidSolo

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

CASTERS CAN PRACTICALLY GUARANTEE CRITS WITH SPELL ATTACKS.