Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Yet another Magus thread, Spell-Combat and TWF...


Rules Questions


Pertinent info:
Fighter 1/Magus 1 with Two Weapon Fighting as a feat choice.

Spell Combat

Two Weapon Fighting

So here's my question: Spell Combat seems to automatically grant Two Weapon Fighting as a temporary feat for the purposes of casting in one hand and attacking with the other. The language says that the attack takes a -2, as would any attack roll made as part of the standard action spell. Under the table in Two Weapon Fighting this equates to a character with TWF as a feat, using a one-handed weapon in the primary hand and light weapon in the off-hand (much like the Iconic Valeros). So for the Magus, as part of using Spell Combat, TWF is inclusive in the action, whether or not they actually have TWF. So, what if they do have TWF? Does it further reduce the penalties so that there are no penalties at all? For me, as I'm reading it, I think that's how it should work. Otherwise you're removing the benefit of taking TWF as a a feat.

Table: Two-Weapon Fighting Penalties
Circumstances | Primary Hand | Off Hand
Normal penalties | –6 | –10
Off-hand weapon is light | –4 | –8
Two-Weapon Fighting feat | –4 | –4
Off-hand weapon is light and Two-Weapon Fighting feat | –2 | –2

As a Fighter 1, if I wield a longsword in the primary hand, and short sword in the off hand, I only take a -2/-2 penalty. If a class feature grants me the same benefit, shouldn't my existing feat choice affect that somehow? I'm not sure if removing the penalties altogether is really balancing or fair, but I feel like there should be some benefit to a Fighter 1/Magus 1 with TWF.

Let me know if I'm just crazy, it's happened before.


Just crazy. Magus and Monk get nothing from TWF*, just like Fighters get nothing from Combat Casting.

*(weeeell....they do get something if they choose not to use their iconic class abilities and just dual-kukri away, but that's hardly relevant).


MendedWall12 wrote:
So, what if they do have TWF? Does it further reduce the penalties so that there are no penalties at all?

No, it doesn't.

The benefit of Spell Combat is being able to full attack with your weapon and also cast a standard action spell.

The benefit of TWF is reduced penalties when Two-Weapon Fighting.

If you're using Spell Combat you're not Two-Weapon Fighting. If you're Two-Weapon Fighting you're not using Spell Combat.

MendedWall12 wrote:
As a Fighter 1, if I wield a longsword in the primary hand, and short sword in the off hand, I only take a -2/-2 penalty. If a class feature grants me the same benefit, shouldn't my existing feat choice affect that somehow?

Spell Combat does not grant you the same benefit.

If you choose to not use Spell Combat but instead use Two-Weapon Fighting, then the TWF feat will reduce those penalties. Without that feat, you will take much higher penalties for fighting that way. That's the benefit.

Andoran

These two have absolutely nothing to do with one another.


ShadowcatX wrote:
These two have absolutely nothing to do with one another.

Yeah, I'm getting that idea.

However, I don't think they aren't at all related. The penalty numbers weren't just arbitrarily picked out of the sky. In fact Spell Combat actually references TWF in its language. So TWF and Spell Combat are similar in that the developers think using what should be two standard actions in the same round has a penalty. I guess my whole take on it was that if a fighter has become adept at fighting with both hands at the same time (read: took TWF as a feat) he might also be a bit more adept at fighting with a weapon and casting a spell "at the same time" (in the same combat round).

I get that TWF and Spell-Combat are two separate distinct entities, but I still see a correlation between the mechanics.

Andoran

There is a correlation between the two, but the magus is already trained in its specialized form of twf. If the twf feat improves that, every magus will have to have it, and it will probably be over powered.


MendedWall12 wrote:

Pertinent info:

Fighter 1/Magus 1 with Two Weapon Fighting as a feat choice.

Okay you would not improve your spell combat ability from the TWF feat.

However, you would be able to do both IF you qualify to do so.

As you need a hand free, and a one-handed (or light) weapon in the other hand.. the 'offhand' weapon for TWFing would need to be armor spikes, an unarmed strike, or the like (Paizo has a few more weapons).

You would suffer all penalties concurrently, so I'm not sure that it is the best option for you to do from an effectiveness standpoint.

-James


ShadowcatX wrote:
There is a correlation between the two, but the magus is already trained in its specialized form of twf. If the twf feat improves that, every magus will have to have it, and it will probably be over powered.

Totally on board with that. I guess, as I continue to look at it, I almost think that Spell Combat should not provide as strong a benefit as it now does. Especially since it is happening at first level. Perhaps Spell Combat should be -4/-4 (which, yes I know does actually provide a sort of TWF inherent in itself still) and then if the character takes TWF it will drop the penalties to -2/-2. At this point its just pointless quasi-intellectual banter though, because they've already FAQ'd it, and I'm sure they decided on the penalties they did for good reason. I mean the Magus does have to suffer being only a 3/4 BAB class.

Andoran

MendedWall12 wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
There is a correlation between the two, but the magus is already trained in its specialized form of twf. If the twf feat improves that, every magus will have to have it, and it will probably be over powered.
Totally on board with that. I guess, as I continue to look at it, I almost think that Spell Combat should not provide as strong a benefit as it now does. Especially since it is happening at first level. Perhaps Spell Combat should be -4/-4 (which, yes I know does actually provide a sort of TWF inherent in itself still) and then if the character takes TWF it will drop the penalties to -2/-2. At this point its just pointless quasi-intellectual banter though, because they've already FAQ'd it, and I'm sure they decided on the penalties they did for good reason. I mean the Magus does have to suffer being only a 3/4 BAB class.

Again you would turn twf into a must have feat. And a -2 penalty to attack, especially at first level, is already plenty harsh, especially when combined with the mad that magus brings to the table. At -4 a magus would be virtually unplayable.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

It it isn't broken don´t try to fix it, my suggestion would be to talk with your GM about some kind of rebuilding option to exchange two weapon fighting.

Shadow Lodge

As a curious question I am guessing I know that answer, but would Spell Combat count as TWF for per-requisites like TWD?


Michael Grancey wrote:
As a curious question I am guessing I know that answer, but would Spell Combat count as TWF for per-requisites like TWD?

No. Why would it?

Shadow Lodge

MyTThor wrote:
Michael Grancey wrote:
As a curious question I am guessing I know that answer, but would Spell Combat count as TWF for per-requisites like TWD?
No. Why would it?

Mostly hope, that I could get TWD off of it. I know it says it only acts like TWF not is or counts as it for feats.

Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Rules Questions / Yet another Magus thread, Spell-Combat and TWF... All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.