I thought I would start a thread where people can post things the would and would not like to see in the new Magus class. It seems there is a new fighter-mage (Magus) thread every other week, but this time it is more of a wish list of abilities that we would like the Magus to have. Since the developers want Magus to supplant "Gish" as the word that means fighter-mage, and since many never liked the word gish to begin with, AND since we all want to earn extra credit from the developers so they'll listen to our ideas, lets make this a 'gish-free thread :)
Things I'd like to see in the new Magus class:
1- An ability to deliver spells through a weapon.
2- Flexible armor penalty reduction to support multiple build concepts. Meaning not just "can cast spells in X armor . . ." but "reduces the spell failure of armor by X% . . ." This supports those that want to wear all types of armor.
3- Bonus to casting spells in melee.
4- D10 hit die.
5- A broad or multiple spell list(s) to facilitate different builds or concepts.
6- Cool flavor. I would love to see something along the lines of the cavalier orders that would give the magus different abilities, and control which spells they had access to.
7- Magus (or even better, order) specific spells.
Things I DON'T want to see:
1- Paladin/ranger spell progression.
2- Full spell progression.
3- Full BAB
4- Prohibited magic schools.
5- Unrestricted access to all schools like a sorcerer or universalist wizard.
I know some of the things I put on the list seem contradictory (d10 hit dice with 3/4 BAB), and others seem like I was obfuscating (not wizard/sorcerer spell progression and not ranger/paladin which leaves . . .), but I think that this class may be an opportunity to break the mold. I don't think the magus must have a bard equivalent spell progression, but that a brand new magus spell progression might be the way to go.
Likewise I wouldn't mind seeing a different casting mechanic then we have seen before. Depending on flavor text I could support either charisma-spontaneous or intelligence-prepared, but I would love to see something different then either of these. Constitution comes to mind. It would be interesting if the magus had to balance how many spells they used or start taking damage/penalties because they are sapping their strength every time they cast.
I'd like to see them have ability lists like the oracle does, where you pick a path (mystery, in the oracle's case, but obviously some other name for magi) and it has various special abilities you can pick from.
So you could have an armored path, where you get casting in heavy armor, increased defensive buffs from your spells, etc., or you could have a bladesingerish path, where it's light armor only and mixes melee buff and short-range attack spells more fluidly with your melee attacks, and maybe a spellsniper type path, where you get no special armored casting things but have enhancements to rays and ranged spells (and many more paths, of course).
|
Hmmm, it shouldn't negate the usefulness of the Eldrich Knight and shouldn't be as ridiculous as the Duskblade. Probably go bard progression, light armor casting, junk like that. The bard would make a good base for it actually, take away the inspiration and music stuff and maybe add in a few bonus feats and done.
You misspelled Stabracadabra (or Stabracadabrist!) ;D
It’s highly unlikely for „D10 HD + 3/4 BAB” to happen. Paizo is quite adamant about the BAB/HD marriage, with the only exceptions being Barbarians and Dragons.
I am fine with d10 and full BAB, for a caster. I really liked the duskblade and did not think it was broken. However, I know others do not agree with this hence the split. I would really like the class to have d10 hit dice since I prefer to have a toe-to-toe magus using magic to shield himself, and increase the damage of his sword swings. Since this is a wish list I figured I'd put d10, but I have the feeling that it will end up as d8.
What makes or breaks the class for me is the ability to "channel" spells through meleeattacks!
Else you have the ages old drawback of all gishs so far:
- if you attack in melee you are just a worse fighter
- if you cast a spell you are just a worse Wiz/Sorc
- you can't do both at the same time
A cast+strike ability would justify a d8 + appropiate bab and still function well. It would not make the Fighter obsolete (who would still do more damage and have greater staying power) but rather make an utility fighter with tricks to offset the lower damage (which, I agree, is something the monk should have been). It would also not intrude too heavy on the turf of full casters because most of the spells would have a very focused and unique application.
This is a reason I favor point buy systems. You can buy exactly the combination of fighter/mage ability you want.
It’s highly unlikely for „D10 HD + 3/4 BAB” to happen. Paizo is quite adamant about the BAB/HD marriage, with the only exceptions being Barbarians and Dragons.I am fine with d10 and full BAB, for a caster. I really liked the duskblade and did not think it was broken. However, I know others do not agree with this hence the split. I would really like the class to have d10 hit dice since I prefer to have a toe-to-toe magus using magic to shield himself, and increase the damage of his sword swings. Since this is a wish list I figured I'd put d10, but I have the feeling that it will end up as d8.
I am pretty sure if ya see a d10 and full BAB your only getting a half caster. If ya get med BAB and a D8 you'll see a 3/4th caster. I do not think they will be mixing full BAB with full or 3/4th casting.
This is a reason I favor point buy systems. You can buy exactly the combination of fighter/mage ability you want.
And it will do you no good because, under the current rules, you still can only use one OR the other, so you always will be a bad fighter or a bad caster, you just can choose in which way you want to be bad at any round.
This is a reason I favor point buy systems. You can buy exactly the combination of fighter/mage ability you want.And it will do you no good because, under the current rules, you still can only use one OR the other, so you always will be a bad fighter or a bad caster, you just can choose in which way you want to be bad at any round.
I'm hoping to see a Full BAB, D10HD, half caster with its own spell list. Pretty much a Paladin or Ranger with an arcane bent instead of a divine. And of course it needs to have some of the cool level-dependent class features that Paizo has been building their classes around as well.
Pretty much all of the other options for a Fighter/Mage can be covered with the EK or Bard (provided the alternate class features for Bard are as cool as I think they'll be.)
I'm hoping to see a Full BAB, D10HD, half caster with its own spell list. Pretty much a Paladin or Ranger with an arcane bent instead of a divine. And of course it needs to have some of the cool level-dependent class features that Paizo has been building their classes around as well.
I am on board for all of that myself
I would like to see Full BAB, either d8 or d10 Hitdie, AND a 0 to 9 spell progression.
I realize that it probably sounds like I want something that's more powerful than the other classes. However, I believe it can be done and still be balanced.
One of my players really wanted to play such a class. I designed one based loosely off the swordsage class, but with sorcerer/wizard spells instead of swordsage maneuvers. He has been playing it. My group is up to level 12, and so far, it seems balanced with the other classes.
Basically, if you limit spell selection appropriately, only let them have a selection of buff and damage spells (Vancian, of course) and carefully regulate their daily casting, they really don't end up any more powerful than a Fighter or Barbarian. They lack the versatility of a real caster. They are just fighters with fewer feats, but more diversity of damage types and the ability to buff themselves.
I would like to see Full BAB, either d8 or d10 Hitdie, AND a 0 to 9 spell progression.
Hell no. Paizo tried this once declared it a mistake. It will not happen.
And guys HD/BAB are tied it can be D10 full BAB or D8 3/4th BAB not mix and match
What I think would work is something like:
D8 HD, 3/4BAB
Bard spell progression (6th level spells/20th caster level)
Custom Arcane spell lists with more focus on damage/combat spells, but some good utility and battle field control spells as well.
Gets the Arcane Strike and Arcane Armor feats as bonus feats. Also maybe improved versions that allow him to use them without a swift action.
Ability to cast then attack once as a move action.
I also DrowVampyre's suggestion of paths for heavy armored, light armored and ranged paths.
Some thought would have to be given to combining the Magus with the Eldritch Knight. If you take the Magus up to 7th level, can you then just switch to Eldritch Knight because you have 3rd levels spells and are proficient with all martial weapons? If he casts a spell, then attacks as a move action and gets a critical hit, does he get to cast another spell using the Spell Critical ability? I would think so.
The Magus needs some kind of capstone ability that makes it worth taking the class all the way to 20th
what i would like to see is
Bard Chasis (3/4 bab and d8 hd with bard spell progression)
A focus on evocation, necromancy, abjuration and transmutation spells in the spell list.
Spontaneous casting.
A set of abilities that combines magic and fighting. Things like casting through an attack, or sacing spells to get attack/defence bonuses.
Ability to cast in at least medium armor (hopefully with a way to bring it up to heavy armor)
A set of guidelines for adding to the spell list (so 3rd party and 3.5 spell can be used more easily in the list).
I would also like to see a full bab d10 hd version with only 4 levels of casting (paladin/ranger chasis) but i would settle for just the first one.
I think this class will be good because just look at the rest of the Pathfinder classes all quality
I want
d10s
Bard Casting but less known spells more per day
Sac Spells for attack or Defense
Seperate focus on either light or heavy armor
Creative Director
|
We're still several months away from actual revealing the magus class as part of a public playtest, but in order to manage expectations a bit right from the start...
The magus will be VERY LIKELY to have:
Medium BAB progression
d8 Hit Dice
bard spellcasting progression (but obviously with a much different spell list)
It's overpowered!
No wait, underpowered!
OK, now that is taken care of.
Sounds good to me! As a fighting bard, battle cleric, EK fan, I can't wait. All I ask is that things be kept general, so I can use it to make an archer, bruiser, mounted, multi-class, etc.
Oh, and please get rid of the swift action for arcane armor training.
Thank you!
This my be odd but I kind of hope the class has different schools or disciplines or paths. I was thinking of introducing Monte cook's runeblade. I would have a dwarven school that favored buffing runes, elven school that favored certain elemental forces among other things arcane and I was mulling over a giant school
I would like something like that - different powers for different disciplines. That would go nicely with bloodlines, foci, and that stuff
|
This is a reason I favor point buy systems. You can buy exactly the combination of fighter/mage ability you want.And it will do you no good because, under the current rules, you still can only use one OR the other, so you always will be a bad fighter or a bad caster, you just can choose in which way you want to be bad at any round.I'm hoping to see a Full BAB, D10HD, half caster with its own spell list. Pretty much a Paladin or Ranger with an arcane bent instead of a divine. And of course it needs to have some of the cool level-dependent class features that Paizo has been building their classes around as well.
Pretty much all of the other options for a Fighter/Mage can be covered with the EK or Bard (provided the alternate class features for Bard are as cool as I think they'll be.)
+1
Although I also like the idea of certain trees/paths/mysteries/whattheheckevers. A way to differentiate your Stabracadabrist from everyone elses.
We're still several months away from actual revealing the magus class as part of a public playtest, but in order to manage expectations a bit right from the start...
The magus will be VERY LIKELY to have:
Medium BAB progression
d8 Hit Dice
bard spellcasting progression (but obviously with a much different spell list)
Well the niche that is trying to be filled with the magus is *very* similar to the cleric. With his Medium BAB, d8 HD, medium armor prof, and full divine spellcasting he is the proverbial martial divine caster.
So when developing the proverbial martial arcane caster I'd like to see Medium BAB, d8 HD, medium armor prof, and *full* arcane spellcasting.
No one ever complains about there not being a good martial divine caster because there isn't just one, but two of them. Paladin and Cleric. There is no such equivalent class for arcane casters. Heck you could even make the magus into two separate classes, one based off of the cleric and a Full BAB, d10 HD, Full armor prof, and a reduced spellcasting progression class based off the paladin or bard.
I'd just hate to see months of effort and hype go towards the creation of a class that is little more than some sort of a variant of an armored bard sans bardic abilities.
I would like to see Full BAB, either d8 or d10 Hitdie, AND a 0 to 9 spell progression.
Hell no. Paizo tried this once declared it a mistake. It will not happen.
And guys HD/BAB are tied it can be D10 full BAB or D8 3/4th BAB not mix and match
I heard that paizo didn't like their alternate cleric anymore. I thought that was a great variation, and I thought it was pretty balanced. We had someone playing one in my group and he was not ungodly powerful. He made a great combat medic. He was able to stand his own in melee and he was always on hand when the other melee folks needed healing. He had to give up both domains and one spell per level for that option, and lost a lot of utility spells, but I didn't find it unbalanced. Probably helps that he isn't a min/maxer though.
We're still several months away from actual revealing the magus class as part of a public playtest, but in order to manage expectations a bit right from the start...The magus will be VERY LIKELY to have:
Medium BAB progression
d8 Hit Dice
bard spellcasting progression (but obviously with a much different spell list)
I figured this would be the case. I'm still going to lobby for d10's and full BAB though :) I don't think the hit dice and BAB would break the class (EK has d10's, full BAB, AND nearly full spell progression) as long as the spell list is suitably narrow. As someone else pointed out the cleric has d8 and full caster level progression, so I don't see d10's with 3/4 caster progression as being over the top.
This my be odd but I kind of hope the class has different schools or disciplines or paths. I was thinking of introducing Monte cook's runeblade. I would have a dwarven school that favored buffing runes, elven school that favored certain elemental forces among other things arcane and I was mulling over a giant schoolI would like something like that - different powers for different disciplines. That would go nicely with bloodlines, foci, and that stuff.
I really like the idea of different disciplines! More than just picking a school of magic I would like to see something along the lines of different fighting orders that focus on different aspects/ratios of melee and magic.
Lastly I think the idea of being an alternate caster (like the alchemist) is a really good one. I would love to see something with runes/glyphs where the magus could scribe them onto his weapons and armor.
|
I think it would be cool if he was a variant caster, sort of like the Alchemist.
3/4 BAB, D8 HD
Bard Spell ProgressionAnd then have him inscribe runes on his weapons or armor that allow him to cast his spells. Or something similar.
this
i have always wanted a rune caster. I guy who went... hmm that elemental is weak to fire. Now my sword is on fire...stab stab stabbity stab (oh and burn too). ^_^
I believe there was a Prestige Class, the Suel Arcanamach, that basically is what the OP is after. If we were to turn that into a full 20-level Class, as a Melee combatant who specialises in defensive and augmentive magic, such as Transmutation, Abjuration, Illusion and Conjuration, has the ability to dispell magic with a weapon strike, has the ability to cast spells-per-day as a Bard but uses Intelligence as their Casting Ability and be proficient with Light and Medium Armor, but not shields or heavy armor, we'd be onto a fun class to play.
4 skillpoints per level, Acrobatics, Bluff, Climb, Craft, Disguise, Escape Artist, Intimidate, Knowledge (Arcane), Knowledge (History), Perception, Profession, Sense Motive, Spellcraft, Stealth and Swim (Possibly UMD too?).
HD D8, BAB Moderate (As per Bard, Cleric, Druid and Rogue), Spells Per Day as a Bard but again, the lack of outright offensive spells means the 'Arcanamach' derivative Class relies upon cold hard steel for the most part to get the job done, but has access to spells, and can learn new ones, that enable him to do things a strait-up non-magical combatant couldn't.
|
Creative Director
|
I figured this would be the case. I'm still going to lobby for d10's and full BAB though :) I don't think the hit dice and BAB would break the class (EK has d10's, full BAB, AND nearly full spell progression) as long as the spell list is suitably narrow. As someone else pointed out the cleric has d8 and full caster level progression, so I don't see d10's with 3/4 caster progression as being over the top.
For Pathfinder, we've linked d10 HD with full BAB. Breaking that rule isn't something we're interested in doing.
We also don't want the magus to be equal to a fighter in basic fighting power or equal to a wizard in basic spellcasting power... once the magus is done, both the fighter and the wizard HAVE to remain viable options. If we build the magus so that there's no point to ever playing a fighter or a wizard, then we have a net LOSS of class options and that's no good.
|
|
As a Bard fan, i'd be very sad if the Magus got a D10 HD. Liking what i'm hearing so far about the Magus, will be very interested to see what class features wil be implemented... sacrificing spellslots and channeling a spell through a weapon feels overdone to me.
Im hoping Paizo will come up with something new and awesome...
For Pathfinder, we've linked d10 HD with full BAB. Breaking that rule isn't something we're interested in doing.
We also don't want the magus to be equal to a fighter in basic fighting power or equal to a wizard in basic spellcasting power... once the magus is done, both the fighter and the wizard HAVE to remain viable options. If we build the magus so that there's no point to ever playing a fighter or a wizard, then we have a net LOSS of class options and that's no good.
I understand not stepping on the toes of existing classes, and I would hate to see either wizards or fighters loose their party role. I enjoy playing both those classes and will continue to play them even when the Magus is an option. I just don't want to see the new class be weaker than the wizard/fighter/EK build that is already available. I'd like d10 hit dice because I think it would facilitate a toe-to-toe melee/mage class. But there are ways around this. The monk augments his ac and is ultra mobile which is one way to get around the low hit dice. There are probably really cool game mechanics that can provide the magus the ability to be viable in a fight.
As a Bard fan, i'd be very sad if the Magus got a D10 HD. Liking what i'm hearing so far about the Magus, will be very interested to see what class features wil be implemented... sacrificing spellslots and channeling a spell through a weapon feels overdone to me.
Im hoping Paizo will come up with something new and awesome...
However, I feel that without a spell channeling ability there is no point to the class. It has already been pointed out that there are melee/magic combinations available right now. What all of these lack is the ability to use magic while in a melee.
|
|
For Pathfinder, we've linked d10 HD with full BAB. Breaking that rule isn't something we're interested in doing.
We also don't want the magus to be equal to a fighter in basic fighting power or equal to a wizard in basic spellcasting power... once the magus is done, both the fighter and the wizard HAVE to remain viable options. If we build the magus so that there's no point to ever playing a fighter or a wizard, then we have a net LOSS of class options and that's no good.
I understand not stepping on the toes of existing classes, and I would hate to see either wizards or fighters loose their party role. I enjoy playing both those classes and will continue to play them even when the Magus is an option. I just don't want to see the new class be weaker than the wizard/fighter/EK build that is already available. I'd like d10 hit dice because I think it would facilitate a toe-to-toe melee/mage class. But there are ways around this. The monk augments his ac and is ultra mobile which is one way to get around the low hit dice. There are probably really cool game mechanics that can provide the magus the ability to be viable in a fight.
However, I feel that without a spell channeling ability there is no point to the class. It has already been pointed out that there are melee/magic combinations available right now. What all of these lack is the ability to use magic while in a melee.As a Bard fan, i'd be very sad if the Magus got a D10 HD. Liking what i'm hearing so far about the Magus, will be very interested to see what class features wil be implemented... sacrificing spellslots and channeling a spell through a weapon feels overdone to me.
Im hoping Paizo will come up with something new and awesome...
See, people may disagree with me here but I feel the EK sufficiently covers that; i've seen EK's played at many different levels of play and have always respected their power. YMMV
It's all well as long as the Magus has something special.
The Bard has his song powers that he can use WHILE doing melee stuff, that is what makes a Bard viable, not d8+3/4BAB and spells.
I too think it to be ultra cool to finally have a class that can channel spells as part of a melee attack, but this could also be down in a more predetermined way with strike to... powers (strike to dispell, strike to silence, strike to slow).
|
|
The real issue with a *wrote the wrong, old word at first* magus is that going part melee and part spellcasting has problems, mainly with the spellcasting.
The further behind a full caster, the less useful and effective the spells are. You end up with a fighter hybrid who burns a few turns casting spells to get his bab up to level with the pure fighters.
You can balance your weapon abilities with damage contribution from spells
or
you can balance your spell abilities with damage contribution from weapons.
When building a magus, you need to leave something to sorcerers and wizards. In this case, it looks like you've chosen to leave them the full caster progression.
I would have suggested something more along the lines of restricting the magus to one spell school, and reducing the spells per day cap of 6 sorcerer, 4 wizard, down to 2. Let them pick the one school, and choose either int or cha as their relevant casting stat.
This makes them more flexible, but leaves most of the power in the hands of the pure casters.
Leaving something for the fighter would be the hit dice and the bab, which I agree with.
Considering this is a mixture of classes, you could offer special package abilities to keep the class interesting. Classic stylistic packages might be
"Spells with weapons"
"Armored Magic"
"Spell-like weapons"
Some less classic packages might include
"Stealthy Magus"
"Holy Magus"
"Divided Magus"
So on and so forth. Something like 8 or 10 packages for versatility. I just have a hate on for Bard Casting. Makes me feel like I should be playing a fighter OR a sorcerer. Like *I can either spend my bardic power to be more effective, but still less effective than a fighter, or I can use my spells to buff myself to be more effective *but less effective than a fighter* or to attack or counter some effect of the bad guy *but less effectively than a sorcerer or wizard*.
Really, sacrificing ability for flexibility all too often means that you're significantly less effective on a round-by-round basis. It's great for surprises, but in combat scenarios you often end up contributing less than your allies even if you're buffing them.
Meh, I shouldn't be posting at this time of night :D
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
We're still several months away from actual revealing the magus class as part of a public playtest, but in order to manage expectations a bit right from the start...
The magus will be VERY LIKELY to have:
Medium BAB progression
d8 Hit Dice
bard spellcasting progression (but obviously with a much different spell list)
Minus bells and whistles, the formula is very similar to the bard, psychic warrior, and my own arcane legionary.
It wouldn't surprise me to see a 'sudden quicken' type level ability, or a bonded weapon.
The magus will be VERY LIKELY to have:
Medium BAB progression
d8 Hit Dice
bard spellcasting progression (but obviously with a much different spell list)
And I guess that the class will still be different enough to warrant a separate class instead of just making it a variant of the bard?
To use the word magus as substitute for what people describe as "gish" strikes me as a major abuse of vocabulary. Magus was also the what the magic wielders of Ars Magica were called, for them sword work was something left to grogs, the lowest on the social ladder of Covenants.
If they decide to name the class magus, that's fine by me, even though I also feel that the word is less than optimal for a sword wielding mage class.
A more suitable name could be warlock, but I'm sure that Paizo has already considered that and discarded it for whatever reason. For one, it's associated with the 3.5 class, and also for some the name for male witches.
Anyway, when the class is published I'm sure it won't take long to forget any aversion to the name, whatever it may be, and instead focus on the awesomeness of the class.
|
I'm sorry, but as a strong Ars Magica fan, I'm strongly wedded to the definition of Magus as singular of Magi... men of wisdom and magic. The term is an utter disconnect to the concept of dual sword and spell wielder.
I’m an ArM player as well, and I don’t find the name „Magus” as an assault on my imagination. And if we’re in Wikipedia, take a look at the term “cleric” and juxtapose it with heavy ... scratch that ... medium armor wearing, mace (or your deity’s weapon of choice)-swinging, baddie-bashing, flame strike-casting divine melee class. Look what they have done. IT’S A SACRILIEGE I SAY, BURN GYGAX ON THE PYRE !
We're still several months away from actual revealing the magus class as part of a public playtest, but in order to manage expectations a bit right from the start...
The magus will be VERY LIKELY to have:
Medium BAB progression
d8 Hit Dice
bard spellcasting progression (but obviously with a much different spell list)
More Base Classes?
For some reason, I get the feeling that this is not a great idea.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
My only wish for the Magus is that it uses the new magic system mentioned in the book and not the stanard casting system the other casters have. That would ensure it remains a different class than any of the other casters, or than an eldritch knight multi-class build, or a bard for that matter.