Slamy Mcbiteo wrote:
Then why not be honest and talk with that witch?Tell him/her that you don't have the time/knowledge/... to change all the encounter of that AP to make the encounters challenging for them and you'd like him/her to trade that slumber hex for something that does not ruin single-monster encounters all the time.
If that player is remotely concerned about his and the group's fun, he/she'll agree to drop slumber for something else.
By the way: how the blazes did the witch get to DC20 at level 4? how high is the witches int? point buy? already decked out with headband of intellect +4?
I guess this is why I strongly dislike gunslingers... they don't bring anything to a table except damage.
So If I were you, I'd consider the gunslinger like a blasting wizard and be a support-oriented spellcaster...:
personally I'd take the witch, but that's a matter of taste
Touch attacks are a trivial barrier at higher levels. At lower levels they do provide some control, but the standard stagger effect would still have no save. I've tried to provide some evidence that this is a decent power. Some have proposed that it is flat out overpowered. Obviously opinions vary. The fact that they vary from "useless" to "overpowered" is odd but perhaps not unusual for the message boards. Regarding the Witch's Slumber hex, I think that's a pretty high powered option itself, but at least the enemy gets a saving throw, and if that save succeeds the enemy is immune for 24 hours. The fact that the Gentle Rest combo can act as a no-save "clean up" to failed Slumber attempts doesn't make it any better.
I ask again: if the touching is trivial for you (it is not for me)... would you agree to make the entire ability a ranged ability that has a saving throw, but WITHOUT the touch attack part?yes? no? why?
I just want the monsters. and PCs for that matter, to have a fair chance against a sleep effect which will likely result in their death.
Why is the touch attack part not chance enough? why do you need to double the chances of failure? if you double it nobody will bother with it any more.It seems like their cleric's chance to hit with his touch attack is unusually high in your games?
Regarding our "lonely BBEG" comment, many encounters published by Paizo and other companies only feature one monster. Most DMs I know run mostly published adventures and want them to be as "ready to run" as possible right out of the box.
Unfortunately this is often close to impossible... whether it's Gentle Rest or another combo, some players will come up with something that works really well and make part of the published encounters a push-over when they shouldn't be. That is not a problem with Gentle Rest, it's a problem about the general balance that does not and will probably never exist... it's up to the DM to balance encounters. And yes that takes quite a bit of work and time.
What happens to single foes is important. I’d also like to point out that they’re not always BBEGs. Not every monster should need a supporting cast of mooks. Anyhow, even if a fight has 2-4 foes it would often be pretty efficient to take out 1 per round with a coup de grace combo.
The last one... because while an enemy is standing nearby, coup de grace provokes AoO from all of them... taking 3 solid hits from 3 enemies while performing the coup de grace, could seriously hurt the fighter, especially at lower levels. Or one of the enemies could, instead of hitting for damage do a maneuver to trip the fighter: no coup de grace until the fighter gets back up.
the witch uses her slumber hex on the first round: sleeping foe, the fighter coup de grace's, while the cleric, magus and sorcerer are watching
but then I'm not sure why the sleep + coup de grace would be any better then everybody just whacking the lone monster good? between the magus and sorcerer and fighter they should have enough damage to kill your monster on the first round anyways?
@Kyoni: So you are basically saying that a 2nd level spell is better than a first lvl domain power? Shouldn't it be? And I'd even argue that Hold Person works on far fewer targets than the 1st lvl domain power.
A domain power should be usable throughout an entire PCs career... if it becomes worthless (ie: never used) at level 3 then I'd rather pick a different domain that stays useful even at levels 7, 12, 18...
It would be the same thing as just houseruling the entire sleeping part away.To sleep a target you need to:
- touch it to make it staggered
- touch it AGAIN to make it sleep
and you want to put a save on top of that?
some people already pointed out that this touching has roughly a 50%-70% to land... let's make it simply a 60%, ok?
now if we assume the save has a 70% chance (most probably less due to MAD cleric) to still affect the target we are down to 25% chance (most probably less then 20%) of actually having everything go as smoothly as you'd like...
As I said: a lot of other classes can do this with a single standard action (spells, hexes, whatever)... so it's already unlikely the cleric will do this because others will be quicker, as they don't need two melee-rounds to set it up. Spellcasters can do this before the monster even reaches melee.
I'd really like to see some numbers from the "needs a save" crowd, because some numbers are off if you feel that the chance of success is more like 70%+ and not 40%- for the sleeping going as smoothly.
Hey Kyoni, that's uncalled for and a fair bit off-topic. Let's leave the assumptions of foul play and the off-topic fudging rants at the door and discuss the actual ability, shall we?
I did discuss the actual ability... and I keep asking again and again why the "touch attack" part is dismissed so easily by Devilkiller and others and they keep insisting how important that saving throw is.
I put the "rant" in a spoiler... better?
No magic means there are no arcane spellcasters at all? and no divine casters too?
If this is your first time DMing, I heavily advise against any houserules, especially such drastic ones, that change the entire game balance.
If this is not your first time:
Make a list of available classes, don't go "you could, I advise against it".
What's wrong with paladins and monks when magical classes are not available? because otherwise there's fighter/barbarian/rogue/ranger?
Also, how do you intend to handle the healing? Be aware that spellcasting draining HP means somebody patching people back together. Without magic?
What's stopping some PC to hand his gems to another PC because he doesn't want spells? What will be the consequences?
Honestly all of this sounds like too big a change... I seriously advise against it. I fear this will end with a martial-centric group who'll just ignore spells altogether as in a no-magic world enemies shouldn't have access to magic either.
coup de grace provokes an attack of opportunity: lonely BBEG problem again
also if you really want to put a saving throw on gentle rest, I'd be fine with that under the condition that you make it ranged and remove the touch attack. That way you get your precious save and I have a decent chance to have this ability actually work.
Because as long as killing the monster outright is more efficient then trying to sleep it with little chance of success, I'll just go ahead and rage-pounce it.
anecdote about fudging saves:
But the more I read what you are writing the more I fear you are the kind of DM that adjusts saves and HP on the fly if dice don't go your way? (I might be wrong though).
I've seen one DM once, who fudged dice of saving throws because he didn't like how his monsters were debuffed/cc'ed...
This little anecdote is to underline how players will always try to find the strategy that's most likely to work. Put too many chances to fail on gentle rest and nobody will take it any more...
so back to my question...
Diego Rossi wrote:
However the text clearly says move AND ATTACK... if you drop that "and attack" from the spell's first sentence, you'd be right, but why specify the "and attack" then? breaking out of combat maneuvers is not an attack but an opposed check...Also if all this spell does is negating the reduced movement or being entangled, this spell should not be a 4th level spell... would be more in line with slow and haste (3rd level) in that case.
Hold Person is level 2
Hold Monster is level 4
Do you think it should suppress Flesh to Stone? why yes, why not?
Diego Rossi wrote:
You are still under the effect of the spell, it simply don't suffer its drawbacks.
Ok, my bad, I missed that suppressed instead of canceled part. Since FoM lasts 10min./lvl we never had this issue.
Diego Rossi wrote:
If stagger is not canceled by Freedom of Movement... why does Freedom of Movement cancel Slow?
Slow Spell wrote:
An affected creature moves and attacks at a drastically slowed rate. Creatures affected by this spell are staggered and can take only a single move action or standard action each turn, but not both (nor may it take full-round actions).
It says staggered right there in the description.
Freedom of Movement specifically calls out Slow as one example of spell it counters, so I'd say anything that applies "staggered" and is a spell or spell-like is countered. However Freedom of Movement does not cancel sleep and I see no reason why it should... but you have to stagger a creature before the second touch will sleep it, anyways.
This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement, such as paralysis, solid fog, slow, and web. All combat maneuver checks made to grapple the target automatically fail.
Imho this means any magic taking away your standard and/or movement action is canceled by Freedom of Movement. The word "even" makes the difference for me, though I'm not a lawyer and not that good at grammatical finesse.
Being dead is not a magical effect that prevents you from acting, it's you not being alive any more.
Sleep is a good question... at my tables we handle it like this:
That actually makes me think that if you really want to put a save on Gentle Rest it should probably be fortitude... how is that a mental ability (aside from the sleep spell being will save?). Most fatigue/exhaustion magic use fortitude? so do most effect that stagger and allow a save or have anything to do with death: fortitude.
If you absolutely want to have it be a save I request that it doesn't require a touch attack any more... usable at 30ft range... sounds fair?
Having it require TWO touches for the sleep and a save and stoppable by spellresistance, puts into worthless category. Because that's way too many chances to fail, and I'm not waisting my standard action to maybe-with-lots-of-luck take away his move action.
And for *** sake give those BBEG some sidekicks... this game is about action economy, so of course a 4vs1 fight is not even remotely fair... just giving that big dragon a bunch of measly kobold slaves will change the entire fight!
Other cool cleric domain powers have been pointed out by others already (I love travel and liberation), but why only compare to other clerics? it's not about what a cleric can do, but what characters can do, would you accept this power if it were a witch or a sorcerer doing this?
Karui Kage wrote:
A Will save is better than nothing at all, and the Witch hex also has the 'once per creature per 24 hours' limitation. If you make your save, they can't try again. Heck, even if you need a natural 20, that's still a 5% better chance you'll negate the effect then what this ability has (IE: no way to prevent it).
Ok, I did not intend to continue in this thread because people seem to camp on their POV no matter what... but here I go again.
Gentle Rest: is a touch and is (sp)=spell-like, so it needs a touch attack (two for the sleeping) AND it needs a spell resistance check.
Witch Hexes: The save to resist a hex is equal to 10 + 1/2 the witch’s level + the witch’s Intelligence modifier.
Misfortune (Su): Will negates; creature cannot be the target of this hex again for 1 day. (Extend duration with Cackle)
Don't forget that survival is mostly about following tracks, finding north, and finding food/drink.
For catching rabbits/food, I'm fairly sure that setting up simple traps would be know by both. Rabbits/birds also exist in parks in modern cities... why shouldn't a street urchin have learned how to catch these? when you are hungry/starving you'll be happy to eat anything you can get your hands on.
But looking at tracks to ID the creature who left it would be covered by knowledge skills anyways... survival is for following those tracks.
The only thing that would be weird, is if a street urchin knew how to assess dangers in wilderness (ravines, quicksands, ...). But usually I prefer to roll knowledge geography for these (but that's our table's houserule). It also gives knowledge geography more uses, because right now it's a rather pointless skill.
Natural hazards are already covered by Knowledge Nature: DC 15 + hazard's CR
Is your group already out-performing you?
Also, what would happen if your character talks to that fellow character needing an armor upgrade and just hand him your breastplate and agree that in exchange you get the big cut on gold so you can buy/order something useful soon?
Also, be aware that talking "I got less wealth", is usually not the best way to tackle the problem... better say: hey, that breastplate is seriously hampering my mobility, I can't move in that darn thing! Explain to your DM how that breastplate will penalize your dex, which is your most important attribute: you have a +4 but breastplate limits you to +3 and slows you down, which is not a good idea for an archer who might want to get out of a danger zone.
Two more things that might be helpful to sort this out:
you and your fellow players should make a google-doc list of all items and who has them, that way your DM can always check who has what and adjust more easily.
Also, if that DM is an old AD&D / 3.5 DM he might be under the false impression that you, being an archer, need the equipment for becoming a switch-hitter. While some builds can do that in PF, it was way easier before. Make sure your DM understands that you want to purely focus on archery and mobility.
A DM handing out weird items is not necessarily because he wants to penalize you but often because he might think "oh, if that was me, I'd love this to be able to do that" but your way of playing your character and your expectations might be very different. Talk to him about what you expect out of this character and how you intend to fit into the group, because he might have the wrong idea.
Why don't you GM? Then you can act on all of your "suggestions," and maybe not be so angry about it all.
I already do... and it's not a gripe with the fellow DMs at my two tables, we all enjoy the games we have and learn from each other on occasion.
It's a gripe about DMs coming to this forum and complaining how their players beat the lonely BBEG because power X from class X is "broken/OP/whathaveyou"... these powers are not overpowered or broken.
Have a look at the last few pages of this forum concerning overpowered class features and what people suggest to correct this: 9/10 it's, why is that BBEG alone? where are his minions?
As far as your character being overly concerned with his death, perhaps he's not meant to be an adventure if he is this afraid of death.
There is a healthy middleground between biting dirt every second fight and a 50-33% chance of biting dirt on one particular challenging encounter after 3 "normal encounters", as you say ;-) and only with the wrong tactics, as you admitted yourself...
I'm asking all the DMs out there posting about how their players ruin their BBEG because class ability X is sooo unfair and their poor BBEG does not stand a chance.
Fights should not come down to "which side has the largest healing&HP-to-damage ratio".
Karui Kage wrote:
One cleric, with quicken spell-like ability, could put down** spoiler omitted ** on the first round with a single touch. By that point, PCs are likely 17th-18th level, so beating an ** spoiler omitted ** isn't all that difficult. Granted, still need to get to him to touch... but if you can, game over man, game over! lol.
Why on earth is that CR ~17 BBEG standing all by himself, with no contingency plans nor access to "Freedom of Movement", a lowly level 4 spell?
Freedom of Movement wrote:
This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell
Daze, stagger, stun, paralyze, ...? not doing anything!
As for sleep: witches can do this from level 1 (Slumber Hex) too and good luck with the saving throw, you'll fail. And since that Hex is SU (read supernatural) Spell Resistance does NOT apply...
I've already driven our DM insane by targeting his high-levelmonsters with some cute witch (su) hexes... and with enough knowledge I know which one is the monster's low save: fort or will.
Actually there are only 3 (SP) witch hexes... neither of these will ever require me to roll vs SR (a summon, a dream thingy and woodland stride; still puzzled why woodland stride is SP for the witch???)
To go more into detail, you could use the kicking character's strength modifier plus some bonus to determine how far away the weapon will slide...
the bonus could be something along the lines of +1 for every 5 increments you beat the CMD to succeed on the maneuver?
Character death is absolutely meaningless after about level 9 because you can just hop over to a temple or teleport to home base and get a rezz (or, heck, have the party's cleric/druid/whatever raise the person on scene).
This might be true from a metagame perspective, however RP-wise my character would seriously question his skills, if he's biting dirt on a regular basis... can he change something to fix this (items/magic)? if not, should he stop chomping off more than he can chew (less powerful foes)?or maybe he cannot fix it and should just retire before the gods refuse to give him yet another chance at "life"?
Every so often we see people complaining how ability x or y is waaaay too powerful because some PC broke the DMs precious toy (read BBEG) with little/no effort.
Almost every time it's because the BBEG was too stupid to get some henchmen working for him and thus help the BBEG if the PCs pull something unexpected...
Also often these DMs give me the impression that they don't think they challenged their players unless at least one PC goes below 0 HP at least every 2-3 combats. Honestly... if that were me RL: I'd seriously reconsider taking on different jobs/missions because obviously the current ones are suicidal and one day/crit I'm going to _die_.
So why do DMs feel this urge to challenge their player by having them bite dirt again, and again, and again?
Wouldn't it feel more rewarding to have the PCs take care of that huge dangerous whatever by outsmarting it, luring it into a deadly trap without risking their lives, fully knowing that if they would have faced that threat head-on, the dangerous whatever would have wiped the floor with their mangled bodies?
To me it certainly would... so why the single-BBEG-damage-slugfest? why can't that big dangerous brute have a shaman-sidekick and minions? and if the big brute dies too fast, why not have that shaman-sideknick be the EvilGeniusMasterMind behind the entire thing in the first place?
Also it would be interesting to see how much the fighterish people's perceived usefulness changes, if they can actually heroically protect their squishy spellcasters without having to be scraped off the floor by these spellcasters every other fight?
tldr; what do you consider challenging as a PC?
Taking away enemy actions is one way for PCs to stay alive...
it's part of the entire "live to see another day" strategy.
Preventing damage is just as valid as healing for a strategy... and actually more efficient/safer. I fail to see why PCs need to have a high-HP sponge and a make-sponge-whole-again in their party just so the DM feels like he is challenging the players...
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:
If you want to heavily rely on chaning forms you'd better get the means to eschew materials and/or still spell anyways... this highly depends on your build.
While Charda is definately a very nice form, you don't get flight "for free". Other creatures can be nice too, depending on the situation...
It also depends on whether the OP is a shocking-grasp 1-trick-pony or whether he also uses other techniques to get damage, for example "pool strike" (amagus arcana and "su" ability) can still be used with spell strike and thus with natural weapons and as it's (su) can be activated in any polymorphed form.
But anyways, I'd suggest the OP read this very nice guide (not made by me). Though keep in mind it's a general guide and magi might not find as much use for some of these.
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:
For MP 1!, yes...
Monstrous Physique IV wrote:
You get all of the above I posted... just not right off the bat.Maybe I misunderstood the OP, but I thought he meant throughout his magus' career... not just MP I...
Buffed with Elemental Touch and Frostbite or Chill Touch before casting MP, you can do decent full attacks while in that form... And that form basically replaces any other flight-enabling magic you might have needed.
PS: to argue about the combination of Elemental Touch with Forstbite/Chill Touch please go here
another decent creature:
medium size, so you don't loose dex, even though the +2 str is unlikely to do much for you:
Popobala (Bestiary 3)
too bad you don't get it's DR, too.
Otherwise: Jorogumo has poison, web, ...
Transmutation/Polymorph Rules (Magic section) wrote:
And don't tell me "it's not not in the list of abilities of the spell", because that's a different section of the polymorph school rules... they would not have a separate paragraph about natural attacks if it was meant to be covered by this paragraph:
Transmutation/Polymorph Rules (Magic section) wrote:
If the form you choose grants these benefits, or a greater ability of the same type, you gain the listed benefit. If the form grants a lesser ability of the same type, you gain the lesser ability instead. Your base speed changes to match that of the form you assume. If the form grants a swim or burrow speed, you maintain the ability to breathe if you are swimming or burrowing.
Now this part is interesting:
Transmutation/Polymorph Rules (Magic section) wrote:
The DC for any of these abilities equals your DC for the polymorph spell used to change you into that form.
Does that mean that a creature/form that grant me a poison attack uses the DC of my spell? and not the (usually crappy) DC of the original creature's ability?
[disclaimer]I didn't read all pages of this thread, repeats are highly likely.[/disclaimer]
- the MMO/computer game mentality of tank/healer/dps has a wide fan-base because it's a easy and obvious way to cover combat roles needed in a party. However there are other ways of spreading roles (even in MMOs: Guild Wars 2). Also in D&D/Pathfinder it's not necessarily obvious which classes would fill what roles, as many can be build to perform very differently based on feats/archetypes/... choices.
- bringing me to my next point: combat is not the only thing you should be doing in a pen&paper game. It almost sounds like these tank/healer/dps groups have next to no "social challenges"? Why is that? (group's choice, DM not willing, only 1 skill-monkey player, ...?)
(I did make a document about pathfinder and roles a while ago, maybe people might be willing to have a look? 4 roles?, I'm still looking to improve it, any/all advice is very welcome.)
RP-wise (not optimization) Cayden Cailean is nice with a dwarf (put ranks in craft alchemy to brew your own ale?). My dwarf just took weapon prof. falcata as 1st feat... falcatas rock with inquisitors (and gods with falcata as their favored weapon are... obscure).
Desna is also quite nice... I think the starknife (like other 20ft throwing weapons: spears...) is often overlooked because of it's low damage, however it has a crit of x3 and it allows you to throw it too, making it a decent pick for switchhitting. Unlike a spear (2-handed) it is one-handed, allowing a buckler/klar in your other hand. (The shortspear only has x2 crit).
(Again, the starknife for desnan inquisitors is more of a rp-choice, not hardcore optimization with god/weapon choices. If you want optimization, read those very well written guides out there: link)
Easy fix for attributes under 10... have the player in question tell you what makes his attribute that low:
8 intelligence? 8 wisdom?
And, no, you cannot say charisma=6 and be bad at talking to people and then put ranks in diplomacy... charisma is more then just diplomacy... so you have to explain why a sorcerer with diplomacy=10 is different from charisma-dumper with diplomacy=10...
Standard NPC Nobles would first approach the guy with the highest charisma... and switch talking to the highest diplomacy person after being asked to. That's not punishing the players... they still get to do their diplomacy just the same, it just takes a wee longer if your are not the natural magnet of the group (charismatic) to grab the attention.
8 int doesn't necessarily mean bad tactician if he's a fighter (such a fighter would not live long)...
I don't like people dumping stats and then ignoring them because they put points into the necessary skill to make up for it... in that case you would not need those stats to begin with.
If you are not willing or capable of roleplaying those lower stats, I won't allow you to dump stats at my table.
wonder what recurring hiccups would be for a low stats... hmm? :-)
A true neutral character who actively tries to promote balance is somebody who tries to make sure neither side becomes too strong or too weak... just like predator and prey cycle in dominance (which is normal and balanced), the predator should never be allowed to drive the prey into extinction because after that the predator will become extinct from lack of food.
And just like the cycle of day and night, neither can exist without the other but if one becomes dominant for too much time, balance is broken: the consequences would be dire (major changes in the ecosystem).
Tyrannies are broken by revolutions and eventually people in charge after such revolutions become corrupted by power/money, becoming the very tyranny they were fighting before (usually about an opposite extremist thing).
(the assassination vs revolutions, ensures no hero-worship will happen: powergrabbing)
Quantum Steve wrote:
Drawing components is a non-action and the free action to deliver the spell is granted as part of the spell. So, unless you count actions granted by spells against the normal number of actions allowed, that's two free actions.
Why is this then listed under free actions in the combat section of the CRBFree Action - Attack of Opportunity^1
Cease concentration on a spell - No
Drop an item - No
Drop to the floor - No
Prepare spell components to cast a spell^5 - No
Speak - No
Also, the touch granted by touch spells is a free action otherwise you'd have to do it in the same standard action you cast the spell... not after moving around.
If you can math out for me how a bite attack will do similar amounts of damage when compared to a Greatsword or Falchion/Nodachi/Elven curve blade... I might be convinced otherwise.
(and the elven curve blade reminds me that it is finessable and thus cancels the entire we want str to mean something, we need 2-handers to work for magus, argument)
As Redneckdevil kindly pointed out... I forgot 1 free action... so that's 4 free actions plus full usage of standard+move+swift actions.
Yes, for me that is too much.
And maybe a rimed frostbite (entangle + fatigue, no save) spellstriked full attack ain't that powerful by itself, but if you combine that with major hurt from a maxed-str-full-dmg-power-attack with a 2-handed-weapon...?
If you're worried about a Magus infringing on the EK, I can see your concern, but that's not the topic at hand. Because both RAW and RAI are against you.
RAW maybe, but I'm worried how to explain to a player that
is ok... but this is not:
as to RAI, you are wrong:
James Jacobs wrote:
[..]overall, magi do not use two-handed weapons. They need to keep a hand free for spellcasting—they're not "fighter/wizards" as much as they are two weapon fighters who just happen to use spells as their off-hand weapon. So two-handed weapons are nonsensical in most cases—the staff magus is the only one I know of that breaks that rule.
So the devs clearly intended the magus to be a sword+magic dual-wielder... or duelist with magic in his off-hand.
Jiggy, Xenrac, Quantum Steve
The problem is the amount of free actions that becomes ridiculous... I guess I would not mind (or mind less) if one of those actions were a swift action or move action.
But since Pathfinder balances around action economy, anything that needs to do so many free actions to work, smells like cheese. Especially when that class has clearly been stated by the devs to be a sword+magic dual-wielding class (see quote/link above).
and Quantum Steve: that's why I already replied further up, somebody who wants to wield a greatsword and do magic should be making an EK.
Because if you'd want to push it... my example further up could then become:
free action: let go 1 hand
Does this still sound fair to you?
Because this, in theory, is totally RAW... just like the EK quick-casting and full-attacking right after that. The question is: how much is too much... especially for a class that was never intended to wield 2-handers and channel spells through it (even though RAW seems to allow it).
still fair to you?
I know these FAQs and don't question them by themselves... I do however question how a magus could do 3 free actions in the same round with the same one hand...
They don't debate spell combat... the debate is about SpellSTRIKE
Spellstrike (Su) wrote:
At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack. Instead of the free melee touch attack normally allowed to deliver the spell, a magus can make one free melee attack with his weapon (at his highest base attack bonus) as part of casting this spell. If successful, this melee attack deals its normal damage as well as the effects of the spell. If the magus makes this attack in concert with spell combat, this melee attack takes all the penalties accrued by spell combat melee attacks. This attack uses the weapon's critical range (20, 19–20, or 18–20 and modified by the keen weapon property or similar effects), but the spell effect only deals ×2 damage on a successful critical hit, while the weapon damage uses its own critical modifier.
And whether you can do this with a 2-hander as a magus:
free action: let go 1 hand
all in 1 round...
I meant using polearms as a houseruled staff magus replacement in PFS. :-)
Chill touch, Frostbite, Elemental Touch (depending on the DM's reading of "touch", see this thread), ...
there are spells that allow for multiple touches and "rimed frostbite" is actually a well known magus combo, that can be very nice alternative to shocking grasp...
Why allow it for unarmed/claws/gauntlets/... but not for two daggers or kukris or other dual-wielding weapons?
I believe the magus is strong enough as it is and the extra points of damage through a 2-hand weapon are not necessary outside theoretical min-maxing.
Allowing so many free actions in one round with the same hand will not sit well with many DM, including those from my 2 groups, and I believe that is a good thing.
If you want the option to go back an forth between 1-hand striking and 2-hand striking depending on whether you use spell strike/spell combat, you can use a quarterstaff or a bastard sword or a katana... I don't see the need to allow all 2-handed weapons for magi to work with spell strike, because then you enter "why-not-X-too" realms (dual wielding comes to mind).
If you have a cool build in mind to use polearms, I'm sure your DM will find a way to house-rule the Staff Magus archetype somehow.
thanks for reminding LazarX :-) totally agree.
so Magus ~ Duelist with spell in off-hand
No I am talking about doing 3 free actions with a single hand... and nothing stops that same magus to move with his move action and activate arcane strike or something else with that swift action: breaking action economy.
Now if you tell me that you want to do the letting go + regrabbing instead of your movement and still get the attack... we might find a houserule for that, but then you loose what people want out of that 2-hand-weapon-spell-strike: a mobile str magus build.
For a single limb (off hand)? yesIf it were 2 free actions with one hand and 2 free actions with your other hand and talking (with your mouth): fine by me :-)
Letting go of the broom, dust into a pan and regrab the broom, with the option to walk around and do a swift action on top of that, all of it in 6 seconds? not even as a black-belt "floor-specialist". ;-)
Magus is more... "brutal" somehow. Is a warrior with some spells, but it can throw itself in melee with a big weapon after a couple of spells to buff himself.
A brutal warrior with spellcasting (buffing) abilities is an Eldritch Knight...
A magus is somebody who blends fighting and magic... that does not sound very brutish to me, the fact that magus relies on int, means he'd be more reliant on smart tactics, too... just like a duelist.
A Magus casting a Quickened Frostbite and then doing a full attack with a double-blade is perfectly legal... I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here?
Because if you allow double weapons, you'll have a hard time explaining why two kukris should not be allowed.If a magus is allowed to use spell-strike with a two-handed weapon, why not allow him dual-wielding too...? two-weapon-fighting has always been considered weaker then two-hand-fighting (except for rogues, because of multi-sneak-attacking).
So why should a magus, who by flavor and concept is a blade+magic dual-wielder, be allowed to wield a two-handed weapon or double weapon and cast spells through it?
Actually, a double blade is a decent comparison to Spell Combat. If a person who normally fights with a double blade is unable to do a full attack (for instance he is charging) he can use the weapon as a two-handed weapon instead of a double weapon to get the additional strength benefit from THF on, for instance, power attack. I've seen a high-strength ranger concept who alternated between THF and TWF with an orc double axe surprisingly well.
And a magus could swap between 1-hand hitting and 2-hand hitting on _different_ rounds with a bastard sword just fine. I just don't see the need for a Magus to have 2-hand-weapon-spell-striking, too.
- identifying objects is 1 try per day per person with detect magic!
but to be honest, our group has 2-3 people with detect magic and at least one of us always manages to id the object
- stuck doors and containers... be aware that pounding on these makes noise... usually a lot of noise, especially in stony undergrounds, which can echo quite far... when they get that door open they might find a well set ambush right behind it with enemies ready to take that group down as soon as the group breaks the door: surprise round for the enemy! Also that enemy will already be full buffed etc... this can often turn out to be a near TPK. Pounding on a locked container can damage whatever is within... especially things made of glass like potions, if those potions are bottled fireballs the entire container might explode in their face (read the rules about saving throws for unattended magic items: rings, amulets, ... they all can break!)
But the biggest question is: are they having fun doing it this way? And will they still have as much fun if forced to be more roguish/stealthy? This game about fun: if it ain't fun, it ain't right!
Even with the recent (and in my opinion unfortunate) FAQ on free actions, three different free actions (shift grip to 1h, shift grip to 2h, make a touch attack) is still well within the suggested limitations on free actions laid out in the FAQ.
Maybe, but you have to remember that action economy is the way to go to optimize any/all classes in pathfinder: the more you get, the more powerful you are. Hence why things/trick to break action economy are so highly valued... allowing the magus to get so much seems odd, in that case the devs could have just said spellstrike works with any 1 weapon period... but then you'd have people complaining why double weapons and dual-wielding got shafted.
After all, a frostbiting double-blade sounds like a nice twist... why is that one not allowed? (quicken frostbite and then full attack with both weapon sides?)
Str over Dex or not is just a matter of perception... a mobile build will want Dex, while a "wall" will want Str and iterative power-attacks, but you actually take those multiple attacks away if you only use spell-strike and not spell-combat?
I guess it's just that people are so afraid of MAD classes, that any means to cut down on attributes, is ok... like using dex for everything attack/damage/AC/refl related.
Str has more feats to play around with... also Str is the way to go if you intend to go maneuvers (which, with True Strike and Arcane Accuracy, is a very solid combination for Magi) because of the sheer number of feats required for maneuver-specialization.
Ok, I forgot about the cast-move-touch thing... which seems weird to me, but ok...
Although this bringts the amount of free actions to 3 per round...
free : let go 1 hand
seems like a bit too much in a single round... no?
For me a magus is pretty much a duelist... you wield a weapon in one hand and the other hand has got to be free.
One could argue that a polearm duelist would make a lot of sense...? and polearms don't get much love unfortunately.
Gunslingers do it...
Gunslingers do lots of things that others cannot... and if you look up how often people contest/ask about gunslinger mechanics, you'd know that lots of that is responsible why many DM simply ban gunslinger from their games...that class, while nice, is simply to "finished" (imho).
Also have a look at people complaining about crossbows... the only crossbows that can work more-or-less, are repeating ones.
What bothers me with the free action regrabbing is:
Spellstrike allows you to channel a touch spell through your weapon... but casting a spell (standard action) with the touch (part of that same standard action) would mean you'd have to regrab (free action) in the middle of your standard action...
Normally actions are a sequence... and normally you cannot take another action in the middle of a different action? (Like moving past somebody and attack on the way, unless you have spring attack)
The regrabbing would have to be a non-action for that?
I don't deny that you could cast that spell, hold the charge, and then channel it through your standard attack next round.
start standard action touch-spell-casting