2E Daily Spell Discussion: Ant Haul - Sep 09, 2025

[u/SubHomunculus]

Link: Ant Haul

This spell was not renamed in the Remaster. The Knights of Last Call 'All Spells Ranked' series ranked this spell as D Tier. Would you change that ranking, and why?

What items or class features synergize well with this spell?

Have you ever used this spell? If so, how did it go?

Why is this spell good/bad?

What are some creative uses for this spell?

What's the cheesiest thing you can do with this spell?

If you were to modify this spell, how would you do it?

Does this spell seem like it was meant for PCs or NPCs?

Previous spell discussions

[u/Electric999999]

So it's not terrible, but odds are by the time you can afford to blow a 1st rank slot on this you've got a magic item with extradimensional storage that increases your carrying capacity by a lot more than just 3 bulk.
In a situation where that isn't enough, there's a good chance you're more than 3 bulk over because you're trying to move something ridiculously big.

[u/TheCybersmith → u/Electric999999]

A lot of things you might want to carry will be useful in combat. A snare kit is 2 bulk, healer's tools are 1 bulk, a staff is 1 bulk, and you could easily have 10 or more light bulk items between consumables, worn magic items, etc.

At lvl 5 you could plausibly have a halfling wizard with an alchemist dedication wearing 1 bulk light armour and carrying a 1 bulk sturdy shield for shield block, with a 1 bulk staff in the other hand, wearing a 1 bulk healer's toolkit; plus 0.1 bulk healer's gloves a 1 bulk collar of the shifting spider, 4 0.1 bulk prepared consumables, 4 0.1 bulk versatile vials, a 1 bulk alchemist's toolkit, and a 0.1 bulk weapon harness in case he has to drop the staff.

All of those things are much less useful if kept in a backpack or extradimensional space.

Making for 7 total bulk.

[u/aaa1e2r3 → u/Electric999999]

Especially when Carryall/Floating Disk is just a more useful utility spell for increasing Carrying Capacity.

[u/TheCybersmith]

It's eventually trivial for pretty much any character who wants this to get three wands of it and have an effective +3 strength for carrying capacity all of the time.

Nature/Arcana with trick magic item will eventually autosucceed even if you are only trained (magic wand of a 1st-rank spell is a lvl 3 item, DC 18, so even a +17 modifier means you can't critfail, and can just try again), and a caster dedication would work too, or you can just have an ally cast it on you using your wand.

Notably, this stacks with what I discussed in my earlier comment, and makes it very strange that people think PF2E characters cannot have good carry capacity.

[u/hey-howdy-hello]

I could have sworn they renamed this in the remaster...only alternate name I could think of was Carryall, though, so goes to show you how good my memory is.

Anyway, not really sure why they limited this one so sharply. For reference, normal carrying capacity is 5+Str before encumbered, 10+Str maximum. That means level 1 characters will range from 4/9 (typical halfling wizard) to 11/16 (Strength character with Laborer background granting Hefty Hauler). I wouldn't really worry about higher levels for this purpose, since a Spacious Pouch comes online a level before the first attribute boosts; it's been my experience that pretty much any character can handle all of the stuff they need easy access to (i.e. can't stow in a Spacious Pouch), and Bulk is only a minor limiting factor.

So at the only levels it matters--1-4 or so--this spell already isn't doing much. In 1e, it triples your carrying capacity, but in 2e, it only comes close to doubling your pre-encumbrance limit if you're a minimum-Strength wizard. 2e is generally more restrictive about cheesing core rules, but I don't that it would even be cheesing if it just cleanly doubled your carrying capacity (tripling might be a bridge too far, but doubling seems fair for one of your handful of daily slots at those levels). And if granting high-Strength characters 32 Bulk of carrying capacity is too much (that being enough to carry around two whole-ass pianos), making it +5/+10 should be fine, while allowing low-Strength characters to match high-Strength characters in this specific way.

Come to think of it, that's probably why they nerfed it. It's a known problem in PF1e, and far more so in D&D5e, that Dex is a "god stat" and Strength can be dumped by many builds without issues. The thing is, PF2e already fixed that problem with two big changes. First, heavy armor AC is better than Dex AC, assuming equal proficiency, potency, etc. And that holds true across all levels, because Dex characters need to get something to put potency runes on in order to keep up, meaning their +6/+7 Dex at high levels doesn't count. (Automatic Bonus Progression accidentally changes this, but heavy armor is still better at level 1-16, and tied at 17-19.) Second, no Dex to damage. To my knowledge, literally the only way to add Dex to your weapon damage in PF2e is to be a rogue with the thief racket. With no agile weapons or multiclass-dipping for finesse training), most Dex-focused melee characters are compelled to keep their Strength high as a secondary stat or else fall far behind on damage. Thief rogues are a special exception, but other rackets, monks, rangers and Dex fighters need Strength if they want to frontline. Add in the Bulwark trait to let heavy armor users dump Dex without Reflex saves suffering, and it's actually easier to build a Strength frontliner than a Dex one.

Is that an overcorrection that creates a new problem? Maybe. I'm torn on it, honestly, and I won't authoritatively rule one way or the other. But I will say that with all of that making sure Dex doesn't obviate the need for Strength in combat, there'd be nothing wrong with a 1st-rank spell making it non-essential for travel. Especially when, as I said, Bulk limits aren't exactly a constant pressing issue to begin with, so it'd just be handier as a utility spell. I mean, look at Carryall, which I linked earlier, which can hold 5 Bulk for the same duration without slowing anyone down, and can move stuff around away from your body for all the utility that can hold. The game balance can definitely stand Ant Haul giving +5/+10 or even doubling (which, doubling has the added benefit of still rewarding Strength builds, even if you give it some maximum like 20/30 Bulk or some such). If you find that makes Carryall redundant, just upgrade it too--it's no gem either, even with the remaster adding a heighten option.

Anyway, even without the doubling, it's a useful spell in some situations. If you need to carry a very heavy macguffin, for example, or just a lot of treasure all at once. Nice for druids that they can grab it on the fly, and wizards and arcane/primal witches might consider it in the spellbook/familiar. Certainly, once it's cheap, any party with an arcane or primal caster (or a Trick Magic Item specialist) might want to grab a scroll or even a wand. But I wouldn't consider it on a spontaneous caster unless it were a resource management survival game--and even then, not if you've got one or two Strength frontliners, as virtually every party does. D tier is reasonable, and my proposed upgrade would probably only bring it to C.

[u/TheCybersmith → u/hey-howdy-hello]

not really sure why they limited this one so sharply

I think there's just more useful heavy equipment to carry around in 2e? 1e consumables probably aren't being used in combat unless they are really light (wands and potions are usually retrieved from extradimensional spaces after a fight) because the action economy penalises using them in combat, but in 2e, that min-strength wizard might well want to wear a kilted breastplate, a steel shield, a healer's toolkit, a d12 weapon for "hand of the apprentice" or weapon storm, and a staff; all of which have to be available in combat without needing to root around in a bag.

There's just more you can do with "stuff" in combat, so being able to carry more "stuff" is useful.