Paizo's Lack of Love for Casters

I know this conversation is highly repetitive, but the topic usually gets closed quickly, and Paizo's lack of a solution makes me come here to repeat it. What I feel playing and analyzing Pathfinder 2e is that we, casters, are in need of much more support from Paizo. My main debate is that magical classes lack mechanical depth and their own identity. And this creates a huge imbalance when you compare them to martials. For me, it's no use for Paizo to just release new spells; what we really need is a structural revision in how classes are built.

1. The lack of identity through feats My first criticism is that, after the Remaster, caster feats became standardized to the point where the classes lost what makes them unique. The feats are almost all the same, just the name changes. The Witch is the only exception, but even she ends up sharing many feats with the others. Today, what defines my character is their magical tradition (Arcane, Primal, etc.) and not the class, precisely because the feats don't provide that unique identity.

What I propose is simple: we need real support with unique feats for each class, allowing us to truly specialize. A wizard or a druid, for example, should have feats that alter the behavior of their spells. That way, the same spell would have a different effect depending on who is casting it and what the player chose to focus on.

2. Mathematical inefficiency and the enemy's default success The system's math punishes casters. Martials get Expert proficiency at level 5 and Master at 13. We have to wait until level 7 and 15, and only reach Legendary at 19. This already pushes you down right from the start.

Because of this gap, a "success" on a saving throw (when the enemy takes only half damage and avoids the main effect) has become the normal outcome. To make matters worse, the most powerful spell you have up your sleeve often comes with the Incapacitation trait. This means that if the enemy is a boss or has a slightly higher level, their degree of success automatically increases. Spending a finite and valuable resource like a high-level spell slot for the enemy to barely suffer anything is not worth it. The enemy's failure or critical failure, which is when the spell should really shine, has become a statistical rarity.

3. The prison of action economy The standard two-action cost for most spells kills our versatility. Martials also use two actions for some feats, yes, but for them, it's a tactical choice. The martial has the freedom to build their character and decide on the spot how to resolve the situation. The caster doesn't have that choice; I am forced to spend the two actions.

Our third action is usually empty. Spellshape feats almost always serve only as an inefficient stopgap so we don't have to keep raising a shield every turn. I think more spells should be modular, like Heal, which you can use with 1, 2, or 3 actions. Imagine the level 1 Fear spell: it could cost 1 action if it's a touch spell, 2 actions at a distance, or 3 actions to be an area emanation. This would give real strategic weight to my turns.

4. The illusion of choice and the eternal support syndrome When we analyze combat spells, we realize they fall into four niches, and this exposes the problem. Buffs and healing are the only things with a 100% guarantee of working because your ally won't resist. Battlefield control is situational.

Then we get to debuffs. They run into that frustrating math I already mentioned, reaching a point where veteran players say they "just accepted" that it won't work properly. When a player simply needs to accept their own character's inefficiency, the design has failed badly.

And Blaster magic (AoE damage) goes without saying. The niche that should be the terror of the battlefield was the most nerfed by Paizo. It depends on multiple variables, such as positioning, resistances, and number of targets, only to ultimately be truly useful against weaker enemies. The game pushes you into a passive role. Put a whole group of martials in a dungeon with no room for a long rest: they clear everything. A group of only casters is screwed.

5. Conclusion: Solutions and Paizo's fear I perfectly understand the reason for all this. In older editions of D&D, magic was broken and unbalanced the game. Paizo was so afraid of repeating this that they overcompensated heavily in the other direction, leveling casters completely at the bottom. And if you go to any PF2e forum, you'll literally see hundreds of complaints just like mine. Many people stop playing casters because of this frustration of never being able to resolve a situation on their own.

How do we fix this? The first thing, and the most direct, is the creation of items to increase effectiveness. We need magic runes, or something equivalent, to increase our Spell DC and spell attack bonus. If debuffs and damage spells hit with the same consistency as martial strikes, that would already balance casters.

The second necessary solution is specialization progression with feats that actually matter. I know that overhauling the entire action economy system would be a lot of work for the company (although it would be ideal in my opinion). But if Paizo simply added mathematical progression items and feats that gave real identity, the game would already change completely. The system cries out for a revision that brings back the fun and independence for those who choose magic.