what is certain that is if next turn you make an attack you actualy can deliver frostbite with your sword using spell strike but there is alot of discusion even among developers there is no clear ruling
if you cast a new spel like arcane mark to spell combat you would keep the charge and some say you even keep the charge from frostbite because it is no longer a spell but a supernatural abilety as the spell is already cast.
there is a post made about this by me already. my sugestion is talk it over with your GM and let him rule it one way or the other.
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pj33?Magus-spelstrike-and-holding-the-charge
Thanks, Grick!
Not sure if you want to get into this or not Grick, but it might be nice to add a section on the Myrmidarch archetype Range Spellstrike ability for completeness.
You can't use spell combat to cast enlarge person.
As a full-round action, he can make all of his attacks with his melee weapon at a –2 penalty and can also cast any spell from the magus spell list with a casting time of 1 standard action (any attack roll made as part of this spell also takes this penalty).
(Emphasis mine)
Can I add this scenario to the discussion?
Party includes a Magus and a Samurai both level 9. The magus is on the bottom of the initiative and they position themselves for flanking.
Top of the round, Samurai full attacks for 100+ damage
then gets attacked in return by monster
then magus full attacks with spell combat, he goes regular attacks first (with the -2 penalty) and still manages to kill the monster
Does the magus still have to cast the spell and waste it? Or can he choose to not cast it at this point?
he could just aswell cast arcane mark on the dead body.... what doese it mather?
Nice write-up.
I am going to playing my first Magus this Sunday.
This helped!
yeah is awsime got a lvl10 bladbount human magus now its just amazing!
what is certain that is if next turn you make an attack you actualy can deliver frostbite with your sword using spell strike but there is alot of discusion even among developers there is no clear ruling
if you cast a new spel like arcane mark to spell combat you would keep the charge and some say you even keep the charge from frostbite because it is no longer a spell but a supernatural abilety as the spell is already cast.
there is a post made about this by me already. my sugestion is talk it over with your GM and let him rule it one way or the other.
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pj33?Magus-spelstrike-and-holding-the-charge
If you have a held charge from the frostbite, it is gone once you cast another spell.
Hello. I am making a Magus for one of my game and I found out that Spell Combat must absolutly be used with a free hand. However, since I want to make the badass orc weilding greataxe, I won't be able to use it.
Unfortunatly, there is no feat to help me with that. So I was wondering if you guys would help me create a balanced feat for that.
Something along the lines of:
Improved Spell Combat
Your intense training with Combat Spell gave you the ability to cast without needing a free hand.
Prerequisite: Magus Class.
Benefit: This feat gives you the opportunity to use Spell Combat without needing a free hand as long as both hands are used to weild the same weapon and if the spell is a touch or a personal spell.
So basically what it does is it gives you access to better weapons in exchange of only being able to use touch or personal spell using Spell Combat in that situation.
Do you think this would be too strong? Too weak? I'm waiting for your opinion.
You know that shifting the grip on a two-handed weapon is a free action?
Both are free actions. For example, a wizard wielding a quarterstaff can let go of the weapon with one hand as a free action, cast a spell as a standard action, and grasp the weapon again with that hand as a free action; this means the wizard is still able to make attacks of opportunity with the weapon (which requires using two hands).
As with any free action, the GM may decide a reasonable limit to how many times per round you can release and re-grasp the weapon (one release and re-grasp per round is fair).
"To use this ability, the magus must have one hand free (even if the spell being cast does not have somatic components), while wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand."
Beside, my DM refused the Free-Standard-FRee or regripping since its just a way to go around the rule, plus, it does ask for a one-handed weapon.
|
The second level of Titan Mauler gives Jotungrip. That's the approach I'd take. See if your GM will allow a Jotungrip feat, or just take the 2-level dip. It's not like Barbarian is that out of character for an orc.
Other than that, I can see allowing a house rule that you can Spell Combat spells without somatic components with a two-hander. You could then Still Spell (Metamagic) and Still Magic (Magus Arcana) to cast.
... So I was wondering if you guys would help me create a balanced feat...
Have you tried posting your issue in the suggestion/homebrew forum? It's a small bit of a threadjack here where being in the wrong forum will mean a lot fewer of the people who like to help with that sort of thing will see it buried in an instructional thread explaining strict RAW.
Also, what Artoo said [or, if you're not PFS, reskin of an acceptable weapon] and keep in mind the x3 crit of your axe will only x2 your spells.
Necro!
If one would attack with a sword charged with shocking grasp (spellstrike) what will happen?
A: You roll for attack with your sword using the usual +'s and -'s but you also add +3 because your sword is charged with shocking grasp at that time and your enemy has metal. After this hits on normal AC you deal damage of your sword AND shocking grasp without having to roll for touch ac
B: You roll for attack with your sword using the usual +'s and -'s but you do not add the +3 of shocking grasp and when it hits normal ac you deal damage of your sword but you still have to roll touch ac for the shocking grasp
C: You roll for attack with your sword using the usual +'s and -'s but you do add the +3 of shocking grasp and when it hits normal ac you deal damage of your sword but you still have to roll touch ac for the shocking grasp
It's A. You do get the +3 bonus against metal-armor-wearing enemies while trying to deliver Shocking Grasp using Spellstrike. The attacks with your weapon are made against normal AC rather than as touch attacks. When you do hit your enemy with your weapon, the spell automatically discharges without any additional attack rolls needed (although the target still gets saves and SR checks if applicable to the spell).
It's A. You do get the +3 bonus against metal-armor-wearing enemies while trying to deliver Shocking Grasp using Spellstrike. The attacks with your weapon are made against normal AC rather than as touch attacks. When you do hit your enemy with your weapon, the spell automatically discharges without any additional attack rolls needed (although the target still gets saves and SR checks if applicable to the spell).
Thanks for the answer! I find it weird it works like that as the spell strike ability mentions the effects are only dealt when the attack hits. This would sound to me as if the +3 does not apply because it did not yet hit.
Though if you think outside the rules and with common knowledge, I'd say the sword is indeed electrified.
Dear Grick;
Though this post is 4 years old, it still serves as a excellent connect the dots post about Spellstrike. I've been GMing/playing PF for 3 years now and never seen a Magus in action. This week one of my players decided to replace his fallen 8th level character with a Magus and to be perfectly candid about it, I was totally way off in my understanding of this and thoroughly borked up our first session with this new Magus (fortunately, none of us had any grasp of the class' mechanic so it was a shared shame). next session is tomorrow and after reading your essay, I GOT IT (yes, caps warranted) and will educate my group accordingly. Heartfelt thanks good sir.
If your attack hits with spellstrike, but your spell gets nullified from a failed defensive casting check, or spell resistance, does your attack still go through?
Can you use hold the charge to use the spell again next round?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If your attack hits with spellstrike, but your spell gets nullified from a failed defensive casting check, or spell resistance, does your attack still go through?
Can you use hold the charge to use the spell again next round?
The defensive casting roll is made before the attack itself. If that roll fails, the spell is lost, no held charge is created, and the caster does not receive a free attack to deliver the touch spell.
If the spell is delivered via a successful attack but fails due to spell resistance, then the weapon damage still gets through. The charge for the spell is already used up, so the caster no longer has a charge to hold.
If the attack missed, then the charge is still on the weapon and will be delivered with the next attack with the weapon. However, the free attack from casting a touch spell was used up, so that next attack has to be with some kind of attack action, usually a standard action, full-round action, or attack of opportunity.
