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

RPG Superstar 2015

Magus, Spell Combat and Spellstrike


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 56 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Scarab Sages

Hopefully I can get a designer to see this and make an "official" comment.

When using Spell Combat and Spellstrike as a full-round action, you can potentially deal:

Weapon damage from main hand.

PLUS

Touch range spell damage + weapon damage (spell can be delivered through the "off-hand attack"

I had a magus in my game last night using the Arcane Mark spell to try and get this to get 2 attacks with his weapon and spell damage (I know that spell doesn't do dmg, but it counts for the cheese of making the wording of Spell Combat and Spellstrike work for this situation).

Is that right?


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I'm 99% cetain that it has been clarified by the devs before, that Arcane Mark is a legel spell to use with spell combat.

Here's a faq that says that cantrips can be used with spell combat: link.


Yes, this is fully legal.

Here is what I put in the last thread about this (There are many of them)

I wrote:

As long as the archers are doing rapid shot (+1 attack/-2 hit)

And the TWFs are well... fighting with two weapons (+1 attack/-2 hit)

then yep, I will also be useing my class feature to get..... (+1 attack/-2 hit). Only difference is I have to make a concentration check to do it, and they dont.


Although it is clear that cantrips can be used in spell combat/spellstrike, I would not allow a character to use arcane mark in this manner at my table.

Spellstrike (Su): 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.

(emphasis mine)

The other spells normally used with spellstrike, chill touch, shocking grasp, etc., all specify a touch attack. Arcane mark is range touch true, and can have a creature as a target, but does not in the spell allow a touch attack as the other spells do.

EDIT: although you could indeed deliver the mark as part of an attack, it would not grant a second attack in the same round it was cast to do so.

Marathon Voter 2013

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Someone please linkify

http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz65ot&page=2?Am-I-reading-this-right-Seems-l ike-a-lot-of#62

Still cheesy. Touch of Fatigue is better anyhow.

Liberty's Edge

Cheapy wrote:

Someone please linkify

http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz65ot&page=2?Am-I-reading-this-right-Seems-l ike-a-lot-of#62

Still cheesy. Touch of Fatigue is better anyhow.

Linkified

@TGMaxMaxer: For a home game, as long as you tell the Magus player up front, you would be fine. For PFS, you would be incorrect.

Arcane Mark explicitly states that it can be placed on an unwilling target via a melee touch attack.

Spells that can be delivered against unwilling targets via melee touch attacks get a free attack to deliver it during the round it is cast.

So, Arcane Mark qualifies for Spell Combat/Spellstrike.

Besides, to be honest, when the Magus receives his first Arcana or whatever it is called, he can take Close Attack, which allows him to use an ray attack as part of Spellstrike, so he could then use a cantrip like Ray of Frost to do Spellstrike attacks.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32 , Marathon Voter 2013, Dedicated Voter 2014, Star Voter 2015

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TGMaxMaxer wrote:
The other spells normally used with spellstrike, chill touch, shocking grasp, etc., all specify a touch attack. Arcane mark is range touch true, and can have a creature as a target, but does not in the spell allow a touch attack as the other spells do.

Granting a touch attack is part of the rules for how spells with a range of touch work:

Core Rules wrote:
Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action. You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll.

It doesn't matter whether the spell's text mentions an attack. If it has a range of "touch" and you attempt to use it against an unwilling target, you get a free touch attack on the round you cast it.

Additionally, as per Cheapy's link, the lead designer of Pathfinder has OK'd the use of arcane mark in this fashion.

It doesn't get any more legit than that.

Note: As per new rules in the Guide, GMs are not allowed to disregard messageboard clarifications that they're aware of. So if you're a magus player reading this, print out Jason Bulmahn's post and carry it with you.


Ok, answered by authority, noted, and clarified.

Cheezy as hell, but nothin compared to people arguing they can load a black powder weapon while bound to a weapon cord.

Grand Lodge

I think it is ok. Using arcane mark is worse than using touch of fatigue. Haha I think I will recommend this trick for my friend's new pathfinder society character.

Marathon Voter 2013

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Well, it's not truly official since he prefaced it with "no rulings here"... But yeah. My main gripe is the lame-ity of using arcane mark. Who knew zorro used a scimitar!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Villain makes Spellcraft check:
"Oh, Arcane Mark. I'm willing to accept that."
Magus:
"Willing? Ah, crap, there goes my extra attack."

Star Voter 2014, Star Voter 2015

How can a Magus use Touch of Fatigue? It's a sorcerer/wizard/witch spell.

Grand Lodge

Castilliano wrote:

Villain makes Spellcraft check:

"Oh, Arcane Mark. I'm willing to accept that."
Magus:
"Willing? Ah, crap, there goes my extra attack."

Hahaha. Smart.


Bristor wrote:
How can a Magus use Touch of Fatigue? It's a sorcerer/wizard/witch spell.

There is an arcana that lets you add sorc/wiz spells to your list.

Liberty's Edge

Bristor wrote:
How can a Magus use Touch of Fatigue? It's a sorcerer/wizard/witch spell.

I believe there is an Arcana for Magus that lets them use spells from another class's spell list, as long as they have levels in that class.

Quote:
Broad Study (Ex): The magus selects another one of his spellcasting classes. The magus can use his spellstrike and spell combat abilities while casting or using spells from the spell list of that class. This does not allow him to cast arcane spells from that class’s spell list without suffering the normal chances of arcane spell failure, unless the spell lacks somatic components. The magus must be at least 6th level and must possess levels in at least one other spellcasting class before selecting this arcana.

Oh, and the one for using a ranged touch attack spell for spellstrike:

Quote:
Close Range (Ex): The magus can deliver ray spells that feature a ranged touch attack as melee touch spells. He can use a ranged touch attack spell that targets more than one creature (such as scorching ray), but he makes only one melee touch attack to deliver one of these ranged touch effects; additional ranged touch attacks from that spell are wasted and have no effect. These spells can be used with the spellstrike class feature.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game Subscriber

Ok...since I may have been playing Magus wrong for the last year + ...

At level 2, with spellstrike and spell combat, a Magus can as a full-round action:

- Cast a Magus spell with a range of Touch
- Deliver said spell through a free melee weapon attack at a -2 to that attack roll
- Make a normal melee weapon attack at a -2 to that attack roll

If the above is correct, I've been seriously underpowering how I've played a Magus...

Thanks and sorry if this is slightly off from the OP's question.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32 , Marathon Voter 2013, Dedicated Voter 2014, Star Voter 2015

CanisDirus wrote:

Ok...since I may have been playing Magus wrong for the last year + ...

At level 2, with spellstrike and spell combat, a Magus can as a full-round action:

- Cast a Magus spell with a range of Touch
- Deliver said spell through a free melee weapon attack at a -2 to that attack roll
- Make a normal melee weapon attack at a -2 to that attack roll

If the above is correct, I've been seriously underpowering how I've played a Magus...

Thanks and sorry if this is slightly off from the OP's question.

This is correct. Just keep in mind that unless there's a well-timed 5ft step in there, you'll be making a concentration check to cast defensively, and failing means no extra attack (due to failing to cast the spell) while still taking the -2 on your normal attack(s).

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game Subscriber
Jiggy wrote:
This is correct. Just keep in mind that unless there's a well-timed 5ft step in there, you'll be making a concentration check to cast defensively, and failing means no extra attack (due to failing to cast the spell) while still taking the -2 on your normal attack(s).

Thanks very much, and yea, I see that about the step-or-concentration bit now.

Now I'm wondering if it's a free action to "shift your grip" on a weapon... say if playing a Staff Magus, cast a touch spell (with one hand free as per spell combat), take a 5ft step while using a free action to grip both hands on the quarterstaff, then use the quarterstaff one-two to do the two attacks - thematically it would be neat, just not sure if it's legal heh.

Dark Archive Dedicated Voter 2013

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Castilliano wrote:

Villain makes Spellcraft check:

"Oh, Arcane Mark. I'm willing to accept that."
Magus:
"Willing? Ah, crap, there goes my extra attack."

WAIT! Would that actually work???

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32 , Marathon Voter 2013, Dedicated Voter 2014, Star Voter 2015

CanisDirus wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
This is correct. Just keep in mind that unless there's a well-timed 5ft step in there, you'll be making a concentration check to cast defensively, and failing means no extra attack (due to failing to cast the spell) while still taking the -2 on your normal attack(s).

Thanks very much, and yea, I see that about the step-or-concentration bit now.

Now I'm wondering if it's a free action to "shift your grip" on a weapon... say if playing a Staff Magus, cast a touch spell (with one hand free as per spell combat), take a 5ft step while using a free action to grip both hands on the quarterstaff, then use the quarterstaff one-two to do the two attacks - thematically it would be neat, just not sure if it's legal heh.

Spell Combat: "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."

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game Subscriber
Jiggy wrote:
"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.

Staff Magus gets to use the quarterstaff one handed, but yea, you're right in that they probably need to keep that second hand free for the whole duration of casting *and* touching with the spell. Ah well :)

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32 , Marathon Voter 2013, Dedicated Voter 2014, Star Voter 2015

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Justin Riddler wrote:
Castilliano wrote:

Villain makes Spellcraft check:

"Oh, Arcane Mark. I'm willing to accept that."
Magus:
"Willing? Ah, crap, there goes my extra attack."

WAIT! Would that actually work???

Only if the GM is the type of person who is more interested in finding questionably-legal loopholes with which to enforce his preferences in spite of what the Lead Designer of the whole game says is legit, than he is in playing fair and ensuring players have fun.

Scarab Sages

CanisDirus wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
This is correct. Just keep in mind that unless there's a well-timed 5ft step in there, you'll be making a concentration check to cast defensively, and failing means no extra attack (due to failing to cast the spell) while still taking the -2 on your normal attack(s).

Thanks very much, and yea, I see that about the step-or-concentration bit now.

Now I'm wondering if it's a free action to "shift your grip" on a weapon... say if playing a Staff Magus, cast a touch spell (with one hand free as per spell combat), take a 5ft step while using a free action to grip both hands on the quarterstaff, then use the quarterstaff one-two to do the two attacks - thematically it would be neat, just not sure if it's legal heh.

That's kind of what I was trying to get the player to tell me how he doing it. He only was wielding one weapon and nothing in the other hand (to be able to satisfy the requirements of Spell Combat) so how did he 'shift' weapons from one hand to the other?

I am playing a Monk(Master of Many Styles Archtype) level 2/Magus (Kensai Archtype with "unarmed" as his chosen weapon) level 3. If the above is the case, I have been seriously underestimating his damage-dealing capabilties!

With a monk (no off-hand when using unarmed) and having an empty hand available, this gets just viscious. Not to mention the Dragon Style, Stunning Fist, and Elemental Fist feats thrown in there, too.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32 , Marathon Voter 2013, Dedicated Voter 2014, Star Voter 2015

CanisDirus wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
"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.
Staff Magus gets to use the quarterstaff one handed, but yea, you're right in that they probably need to keep that second hand free for the whole duration of casting *and* touching with the spell. Ah well :)

Ah, didn't realize that was an archetype; thought you just meant "magus who uses a staff". Well, in any case, the ability to use a staff one-handed is from the Quarterstaff Master feat, which says you have to choose which way to wield it at the start of your turn. Seems likely that the special ability to wield the staff as a one-handed weapon would override the normal ability to use a one-handed weapon in two hands; otherwise the ability isn't doing much, you know?

Scarab Sages

CanisDirus wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
"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.
Staff Magus gets to use the quarterstaff one handed, but yea, you're right in that they probably need to keep that second hand free for the whole duration of casting *and* touching with the spell. Ah well :)

see, that's the thing... my player was trying to use his sword once for his regular attack (Primary Hand) and then AGAIN for his "off-hand" attack with the sword to deliver his touch spell.

It does say in Spellstrike that you get the melee attack for "free" but that doesn't mean contradicting the wording for Spell Combat that says that you need to have a hand free.

Dark Archive Star Voter 2013

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

Darth, that's the correct usage with spellstrike - the touch attack is replaced by a weapon attack.

Scarab Sages

Quarterstaff Master wrote:
Benefit: By employing a number of different stances and techniques, you can wield a quarterstaff as a one-handed weapon. At the start of your turn, you decide whether or not you are going to wield the quarterstaff as a one-handed or two-handed weapon. When you wield it as a one-handed weapon, your other hand is free, and you cannot use the staff as a double weapon.

You can use a staff with spell combat, but must make the choice to weild it as a one-handed weapon at the start of your turn.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jiggy wrote:
Justin Riddler wrote:
Castilliano wrote:

Villain makes Spellcraft check:

"Oh, Arcane Mark. I'm willing to accept that."
Magus:
"Willing? Ah, crap, there goes my extra attack."

WAIT! Would that actually work???
Only if the GM is the type of person who is more interested in finding questionably-legal loopholes with which to enforce his preferences in spite of what the Lead Designer of the whole game says is legit, than he is in playing fair and ensuring players have fun.

Or if it thematically makes sense for the Villain to do something like that. It isn't all a conspiracy of trying to take down legal options Jiggy.

If players get to use spellcraft to constantly figure out what the BBEG is casting, then why wouldn't a Wizard BBEG get the same luxury. In this case, the BBEG is probably extremely intelligent and able to make savvy tactical decisions.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32 , Marathon Voter 2013, Dedicated Voter 2014, Star Voter 2015

DarthGoob wrote:
see, that's the thing... my player was trying to use his sword once for his regular attack (Primary Hand) and then AGAIN for his "off-hand" attack with the sword to deliver his touch spell.

This is correct, but...

Quote:
It does say in Spellstrike that you get the melee attack for "free" but that doesn't mean contradicting the wording for Spell Combat that says that you need to have a hand free.

This makes me think I'm missing something. Are you saying he was trying to do the following?

• Declare Spell Combat as a full-round action.
• Make an attack with his sword two-handed.
• Take one hand off of his sword as a free action.
• Cast the spell granted by Spell Combat.
• Put his hand back on his sword as a free action to wield it two-handed.
• Use Spellstrike to trade the free touch attack granted by normal touch spell rules with a sword attack that also carries the charge of the spell.

The only problem here is that Spell Combat says to use it, you have to have a free hand. Since that's a requirement to use the ability, it seems to be implied that the condition must remain true throughout the use of the ability. So although grip-shifting generally works, I don't believe it works with Spell Combat.

EDIT: If you were just wondering about the number of attacks, then your player has it right. A second-level Magus using Spell Combat and Spellstrike in concert with each other gets two attacks. That's how it's supposed to work.

Dark Archive Star Voter 2013

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber
Andrew Christian wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Justin Riddler wrote:
Castilliano wrote:

Villain makes Spellcraft check:

"Oh, Arcane Mark. I'm willing to accept that."
Magus:
"Willing? Ah, crap, there goes my extra attack."

WAIT! Would that actually work???
Only if the GM is the type of person who is more interested in finding questionably-legal loopholes with which to enforce his preferences in spite of what the Lead Designer of the whole game says is legit, than he is in playing fair and ensuring players have fun.

Or if it thematically makes sense for the Villain to do something like that. It isn't all a conspiracy of trying to take down legal options Jiggy.

If players get to use spellcraft to constantly figure out what the BBEG is casting, then why wouldn't a Wizard BBEG get the same luxury. In this case, the BBEG is probably extremely intelligent and able to make savvy tactical decisions.

Although with Spellstrike you're still delivering the touch with the business end of your weapon, so they'd be giving you a free weapon hit.

Accepting the hit means you accept the touch as its being delivered, neh? I wouldn't try to pull this as a GM even with a magus on magus duel.

Expect table variation.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32 , Marathon Voter 2013, Dedicated Voter 2014, Star Voter 2015

Andrew Christian wrote:

Or if it thematically makes sense for the Villain to do something like that. It isn't all a conspiracy of trying to take down legal options Jiggy.

If players get to use spellcraft to constantly figure out what the BBEG is casting, then why wouldn't a Wizard BBEG get the same luxury. In this case, the BBEG is probably extremely intelligent and able to make savvy tactical decisions.

I didn't mean they couldn't use Spellcraft to identify it; I think that's pretty obvious.

I just meant it seems pretty metagamey to think that, in-character, someone would think of deciding to become "willing" in order to manipulate the mechanics of touch spells.

But apparently if you play

Spoiler:
The Dalsine Affair
at Andy's table, he'll allow you to identify the BBEG magus's shocking grasp, declare yourself willing, and take 5d6 damage instead of risking a crit from his Keen rapier.

Thanks for the heads-up, Andy! Too bad I've already played that one.

Liberty's Edge

Jiggy wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:

Or if it thematically makes sense for the Villain to do something like that. It isn't all a conspiracy of trying to take down legal options Jiggy.

If players get to use spellcraft to constantly figure out what the BBEG is casting, then why wouldn't a Wizard BBEG get the same luxury. In this case, the BBEG is probably extremely intelligent and able to make savvy tactical decisions.

I didn't mean they couldn't use Spellcraft to identify it; I think that's pretty obvious.

I just meant it seems pretty metagamey to think that, in-character, someone would think of deciding to become "willing" in order to manipulate the mechanics of touch spells.

But apparently if you play ** spoiler omitted ** at Andy's table, he'll allow you to identify the BBEG magus's shocking grasp, declare yourself willing, and take 5d6 damage instead of risking a crit from his Keen rapier.

Thanks for the heads-up, Andy! Too bad I've already played that one.

Let’s not parse words and put what was not said into someone’s mouth Jiggy.

You are very good at rules. But you are not very good at letting other people also be good at rules if it goes against something you think is the way it should be.

Arcane Mark only needs to be delivered as a melee touch attack if the recipient is unwilling to take the mark. In 90% of the cases, the recipient probably would resist a spellcaster touching them.

Nowhere in the spell description of shocking grasp or ghoul touch does it give this exception of willing or unwilling.

So no, a player couldn’t do what you described. Doing as you described breaks the mechanics of both the spell and the spell combat/spellstrike abilities.

If a player determines that it’s a magus and they are casting shocking grasp, and they want to purposefully take the shocking grasp, I have two options as GM. Just touch them with the electricity for 5d6 damage, or still roll to hit their flatfooted AC.

With arcane mark, it defines how the spell works differently. No attack roll is necessary if the recipient is willing.

Paizo Employee Paizo Glitterati Robot

Moved thread.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32 , Marathon Voter 2013, Dedicated Voter 2014, Star Voter 2015

Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:

Nowhere in the spell description of shocking grasp or ghoul touch does it give this exception of willing or unwilling.

...

With arcane mark, it defines how the spell works differently. No attack roll is necessary if the recipient is willing.

Incorrect.

The rules for touch spells make the willing/unwilling distinction.

Combat Chapter:
"Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action. You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll."

It's not an issue of one spell making the distinction and the other not (did you even read arcane mark before claiming it had that in its text?) - it's a matter of rules for touch spells, which apply to all touch spells equally.

Please, familiarize yourself with the rules being discussed before making claims about what says what.

Scarab Sages

Thanks for the help clarifying this for me everyone!

Now I get to rethink my Monk/Magus and plan out some serious pain-age for the next time I play him.


Jiggy wrote:
The rules for touch spells make the willing/unwilling distinction.

Those rules don't say anything about being "willing". It says "Friend" or "Opponent." Lord Nefarious doesn't stop being your opponent just because he's decided that he's OK with being marked. It doesn't matter what he decides. Hell, even if the Magus decided that he's a friend, that shouldn't mean that you can touch him for free. Can a cleric decide the skeleton is a friend and in need of healing and use Cure Light Wounds on it without making a touch attack?

"Friend" and "Opponent" should be consensual (or at least default to "opponent" unless all parties agree).

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32 , Marathon Voter 2013, Dedicated Voter 2014, Star Voter 2015

Grick wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
The rules for touch spells make the willing/unwilling distinction.
Those rules don't say anything about being "willing". It says "Friend" or "Opponent."

Ah, I stand corrected. I was mixing it up with Aiming a Spell in the Magic chapter. Good catch.

Liberty's Edge

Jiggy wrote:
CanisDirus wrote:

Ok...since I may have been playing Magus wrong for the last year + ...

At level 2, with spellstrike and spell combat, a Magus can as a full-round action:

- Cast a Magus spell with a range of Touch
- Deliver said spell through a free melee weapon attack at a -2 to that attack roll
- Make a normal melee weapon attack at a -2 to that attack roll

If the above is correct, I've been seriously underpowering how I've played a Magus...

Thanks and sorry if this is slightly off from the OP's question.

This is correct. Just keep in mind that unless there's a well-timed 5ft step in there, you'll be making a concentration check to cast defensively, and failing means no extra attack (due to failing to cast the spell) while still taking the -2 on your normal attack(s).

You can avoid the 5' step or concentration check, by the way.

You use a one-handed weapon that provides reach.

Whip, for example, qualifies as a weapon that can be used as a Magus weapon for Spell Combat/Spellstrike.

Dark Archive

Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:
Arcane Mark only needs to be delivered as a melee touch attack if the recipient is unwilling to take the mark. In 90% of the cases, the recipient probably would resist a spellcaster touching them.

This is why I engrave degrading remarks and/or genitalia with every Arcane Mark upon the enemies of Qadira. I know of none willing to receive a marking resembling a [redacted] on their forehead.

I've branded "Pirate" on the foreheads of those accusing us as such;
"Slaver" to expose our enemies as such -publicly- and various insults and hieroglyphics indicating Qadira's wrath.

One always resists the Bad Touchy mark.


Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:


With arcane mark, it defines how the spell works differently. No attack roll is necessary if the recipient is willing.

Attack roll not necessary, but not forbidden either. If I intend to deliver my spell with the pokey end of my poking stick you can choose to just take it or not. Either way a hit with my poking stick will deliver pointy stick damage and spell effect combined.

It's like saving throws for beneficial spells. You can save against them if you want, but you are allowed to just let it hit you instead. Neither choice effects how the spell actually works.


I really cant believe there is this much insane arguements going on for something that really is only useful for the first few levels of play. Personally if after level 4 or so if my magus is resorting to cantrips then the day has aparently gone on way to long or something is truly fubar. with normal spell slots(which actually deal damage) plus spell recal starting to kick in, you've got 9-10 shocking grasp spells prepared or useable again with spell recall, plus whatever you have prepared in your second level spell slots. If that isn't enough to get you thru a day worth of combats then maybe you should look into playing something more mundane like a fighter.

Asta
PSY


PSY850 wrote:
I really cant believe there is this much insane arguements going on for something that really is only useful for the first few levels of play.

Well you know they have to make sure that the magus doesn't rise to the level of power of the monk.. cause then game balance and all would go out the window...

-James

Shadow Lodge

there is also a trait called

Two Worlds Magic

which allows you to add a 0 lvl spell from another class to your list

PSY850 wrote:

I really cant believe there is this much insane arguements going on for something that really is only useful for the first few levels of play. Personally if after level 4 or so if my magus is resorting to cantrips then the day has aparently gone on way to long or something is truly fubar. with normal spell slots(which actually deal damage) plus spell recal starting to kick in, you've got 9-10 shocking grasp spells prepared or useable again with spell recall, plus whatever you have prepared in your second level spell slots. If that isn't enough to get you thru a day worth of combats then maybe you should look into playing something more mundane like a fighter.

Asta
PSY

Unless your an archtype that looses Spell recall (which is 80% of them)

Scarab Sages

Wraith235 wrote:


Unless your an archtype that looses Spell recall (which is 80% of them)

Yep, my Kensai will be using cantrips for a lonnng time.


PSY850 wrote:

I really cant believe there is this much insane arguements going on for something that really is only useful for the first few levels of play. Personally if after level 4 or so if my magus is resorting to cantrips then the day has aparently gone on way to long or something is truly fubar. with normal spell slots(which actually deal damage) plus spell recal starting to kick in, you've got 9-10 shocking grasp spells prepared or useable again with spell recall, plus whatever you have prepared in your second level spell slots. If that isn't enough to get you thru a day worth of combats then maybe you should look into playing something more mundane like a fighter.

Asta
PSY

An extra attack is nice at low levels.

The thing is " An arcane mark spell enables you to etch the rune upon any substance without harm to the material upon which it is placed." So i assume if material takes 0 damage, so would a person. So it's just a magic symbol and not really cutting into someones skin.


This was an old thread.

Pureshadow wrote:
The thing is " An arcane mark spell enables you to etch the rune upon any substance without harm to the material upon which it is placed." So i assume if material takes 0 damage, so would a person. So it's just a magic symbol and not really cutting into someones skin.

The spell doesn't harm them, the weapon damage you're dealing in addition to the spell effect does.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ok I am a bit confused by something. This whole, spellcraft Arcane Mark, become a willing recipient, become immune to getting smashed with a hammer is a bit ridiculous.

The spell is NOT being cast with your hand. You are not lightly tapping someone on the forehead and going there you go. You are, as a magus, most likely using a scimitar. But for flavor text lets say your Urth world masher and you wield a Hammer with one hand because your a bad ass like that.

So as a full round action Urth smacks BG (Big Bad) with his hammer. BG take damage. Now Urth is going to cast Arcane Mark, through his hammer, and while hitting BG. BG uses spellcraft and willingly accepts the mark Do you think Urth is going to lightly tap BG because hes a willing participant? No! He's going to smash BG's skull in and then use Arcane Mark to draw a sign saying "My head was here" with an arrow pointing to BG's caved in skull because he's, and by he I mean you, is a bad ass like that.

Just because BG willingly accepts the Arcane Mark doesn't make BG immune to damage. You could try to "Rules Lawyer" it but, from what I have seen, Pathfinder is founded on rules that make logical sense. Just because people are willing to get an Arcane Mark, doesn't make them willing to catch a hammer in the face.


The easiest way to work around this in your home game is simply this;

Allow the 1d3 damage cantrips to be taken as touch spells instead of ranged attacks. Arcane mark crisis avoided and frankly 1D3 damage isn't going to make a hill of beans difference in the grand scheme of things, especially past say 5th level.


BiosTheo wrote:

Ok I am a bit confused by something. This whole, spellcraft Arcane Mark, become a willing recipient, become immune to getting smashed with a hammer is a bit ridiculous.

The spell is NOT being cast with your hand. You are not lightly tapping someone on the forehead and going there you go. You are, as a magus, most likely using a scimitar. But for flavor text lets say your Urth world masher and you wield a Hammer with one hand because your a bad ass like that.

So as a full round action Urth smacks BG (Big Bad) with his hammer. BG take damage. Now Urth is going to cast Arcane Mark, through his hammer, and while hitting BG. BG uses spellcraft and willingly accepts the mark Do you think Urth is going to lightly tap BG because hes a willing participant? No! He's going to smash BG's skull in and then use Arcane Mark to draw a sign saying "My head was here" with an arrow pointing to BG's caved in skull because he's, and by he I mean you, is a bad ass like that.

Just because BG willingly accepts the Arcane Mark doesn't make BG immune to damage. You could try to "Rules Lawyer" it but, from what I have seen, Pathfinder is founded on rules that make logical sense. Just because people are willing to get an Arcane Mark, doesn't make them willing to catch a hammer in the face.

There's not really any way to "rules lawyer" out of it (and you're right, it is pretty silly to claim you can spellcraft your way out of it).

Arcane Mark itself does no damage. You can become a willing recipient of the spell through a spellcraft check all day, but that doesn't change the fact that the class feature allows said spell to be delivered via a weapon. The target might say, "Oh, hey, I'll let you mark me, don't worry," but as you point out, that doesn't mean that you then have to say, "Okay, silly me, here let me just give you a love pat with my scimitar instead of slicing off your face..."


When I first read about people using Arcane Mark with Spellstrike, I REALLY hated the incredible cheese of it. I had just assumed you couldn't. That was based on the idea that the spell caster literally writes on the object when casting Arcane Mark. And people were and still are talking about how they are using it "Zorro" style to carve the mark into their opponent.
Cheese source #1 - That means it's just as easy to carve up to six characters onto an opponents skin as simply trying hit them, and you could be doing the carving with a blunt weapon.
Cheese source #2 - Even if you accept the above as feasible, how is carving or bruising six characters into the skin of an opponent going to do the same damage as plunging a rapier into them, a deep slice of a scimitar or smacking them upside the head with a staff?

But RAW it appears you certainly can use Arcane Mark with Spellstrike.

So, that lead me to the other way of interpreting Arcane Mark, which is that spell actually etches the mark onto the object or opponent when you touch it. This makes it work just like any other touch attack, your opponent doesn't need to stand still while you write on them. You are hitting them like normal, but your mark would be left where the blow landed. Much more believable.
I'm sure many of you were already aware of and using the second interpretation, and this isn't specifically about "rules". I'm bringing this up for the benefit of any players and GMs out there who want to play RAW (and give the low level Magus the free attacks), but are still thinking of this as the "Zorro" style, and can't get past the ulracheese that goes with it.

1 to 50 of 56 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Rules Questions / Magus, Spell Combat and Spellstrike 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.