Quote Originally Posted by Ignimortis View Post
Just a thing, I think. I'm still not sure myself whether their complaints are overblown and they're too used to casters utterly dominating the 3e/PF1e (and to a lesser extent, 5e) metagame with save-or-dies and such, or if it's really something like this. From some descriptions, I can glean that caster party members feel like the encounters would be cleared just fine without them, and if they just rolled a Fighter or a Champion, they'd be of more help than they are now. That's a major and persistent complaint for 3e/PF1e/5e, except it usually worked the other way around with Fighters being better off replaced by mages.
It's the spells themselves. Depending on the spell even if the target fails the save you don't get what you wanted the spell to do. You only get a minor inconvenience. The target has to critically fail to get the effect you wanted. Roll a 1 or (10 or more) below the target number. Therefore the spell is highly unreliable. Buff spells don't have this problem, which is why they're more valued.

It is a limitation that nerfs spellcasters. It's not even a "punishment" that I soap box against. I'm not a fan of it either. Complain all you want spellcasters are too powerful. They're still entitled to have the spells they do get to work.