| 16 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Debattet here:
I would like an official ruling on the following:
1) Does natural weapons count as "light weapons" so they can be used for spellcombat, without having to have a actual weapon in your hand?
2) Spellcombat says: "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)"
Does natural weapon count as melee weapon?
Can a lvl 2 magus with a bite attack take a full round action to cast a spell, make to attacks with his sword at -2 AND make a bite attack with -7?
3)Spells like frostbite have charges. If a tengus magus with 2 claws and a bite attack cast Frostbite in round 1, can he make 3 natural attacks and deliver a charge with each attack in round 2?
Please mark for faq.
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
4) Frostbite (and similar spells with can be used with spellstrike to get an extra attack in the round in which it is cast?
5) If frostbite, chill touch and so on can be used with spellstrike, they stay with the weapon the following turns or they "revert" to your hand?
I.e., can I make my weapon deliver all the charges of frostbite or it will deliver only the one from the initial casting?
1)
Special: Natural weapons are considered light weapons.2)
Attacks made with natural weapons, such as claws and bites, are melee attacks3)
If you don't discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell, you can hold the charge indefinitely. You can continue to make touch attacks round after round. If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates. You can touch one friend as a standard action or up to six friends as a full-round action. Alternatively, you may make a normal unarmed attack (or an attack with a natural weapon) while holding a charge. In this case, you aren't considered armed and you provoke attacks of opportunity as normal for the attack. If your unarmed attack or natural weapon attack normally doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity, neither does this attack. If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and the spell discharges. If the attack misses, you are still holding the charge.
So you can use a natural attack to deliver a charge you hold. It nowhere states that you can only deliver one charge per turn, so I'd say its clear that you can deliver as many as you have natural attacks (unless you don't have that much charges)
See the debate thread - isn't that special just for weapon finesse.
After taking a look at the other thread I noticed Mathwei ap Niall already gave you the answers to some of your questions with quotes from the rules. Like 3).
| 8 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. |
Noted -It is a long thread, and a bit heated - thanks.
6) Is Spellcombat intented to be "as part of a full attack action", instead of the special "Full round action" it is to day? - so you could benefit from haste and make secondary natural attacks.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
1) Does natural weapons count as "light weapons" so they can be used for spellcombat, without having to have a actual weapon in your hand?
Spell Combat (Ex): "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."
It must be in the other hand.
2) Spellcombat says: "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)"
Does natural weapon count as melee weapon?
Natural weapons are almost always called out separately from melee weapons and unarmed strikes. Regardless, since it's not in your hand, it can't be used with Spell Combat.
Can a lvl 2 magus with a bite attack take a full round action to cast a spell, make to attacks with his sword at -2 AND make a bite attack with -7?
No. You only get your attacks with the melee weapon in your other hand.
3)Spells like frostbite have charges. If a tengus magus with 2 claws and a bite attack cast Frostbite in round 1, can he make 3 natural attacks and deliver a charge with each attack in round 2?
If he is caster level 3, yes. Note: A witch or druid can do the same thing. You don't need Spellstrike to deliver a held touch spell with natural weapons or unarmed strikes.
4) Frostbite (and similar spells with can be used with spellstrike to get an extra attack in the round in which it is cast?
I don't really understand the question. Frostbite is a touch spell (Range touch). This means it follows the rules for touch spell. When you cast a touch spell, you can make a touch attack as a free action any time during that turn. If you have Spellstrike, you can deliver that touch with a weapon (assuming you cast the spell).
5) If frostbite, chill touch and so on can be used with spellstrike, they stay with the weapon the following turns or they "revert" to your hand?
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."
Bold mine. "can" means it's optional. The magus can choose if he wants to use Spellstrike, or deliver the spell normally.
I.e., can I make my weapon deliver all the charges of frostbite or it will deliver only the one from the initial casting?
Any time you would be able to deliver a magus touch spell that you have cast, you can use Spellstrike to deliver it with your weapon. This includes (but is not limited to) the free attack granted by casting a touch spell.
Look at it this way:
A) Did you actually cast the spell? (not wand/magic item/etc)
B) Was it on the magus spell list?
C) Did it have a range of "touch"?
If A B and C are all "yes" then you can use Spellstrike. So six rounds later you have a held charge, and you've been trying to touch, punch, bite, and swing your sword, but you keep missing. A B and C are still true, so you still have the option to use Spellstrike.
6) Is Spellcombat intented to be "as part of a full attack action", instead of the special "Full round action" it is to day? - so you could benefit from haste and make secondary natural attacks.
"As a full-round action, he can make all of his attacks with his melee weapon..."
Assuming "his melee weapon" refers to the a light or one-handed melee weapon he is wielding in the other hand, you cannot also make attacks with natural weapons.
Sadly, even though you can make all of your attacks, you're not using a full-attack action, so the extra attack from Haste does not apply. Feel free to FAQ that one, though, since Haste was changed recently to apply to more cases, and it might not have been the intent of Spell Combat to not work that way.
@ Grick - have a look at the debate thread.
1) and 2) seems to be a source for some confusion...
3) - seems to have made consensus
4) and 5) I agree
6) flagged for faq - seems a class that have not 1, not 2, but 3 ways of getting haste should be intented to be able to use it, WITH his signature ability.
|
1) Does natural weapons count as "light weapons" so they can be used for spellcombat, without having to have a actual weapon in your hand?Spell Combat (Ex): "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."
It must be in the other hand.
Natural weapons are almost always called out separately from melee weapons and unarmed strikes. Regardless, since it's not in your hand, it can't be used with Spell Combat.2) Spellcombat says: "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)"
Does natural weapon count as melee weapon?
Now I usually agree with you on most matters regarding the Magus class but in this case I have a differing opinion on this. Not saying you are wrong on how Spell Combat works but that you can use it with natural weapons because of how SpellStrike works.
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."
When the Magus uses spellcombat to cast a touch spell and declares he's also using spellstrike then SpellStrike explicitly states you can deliver it through ANY weapon you are wielding, not just the weapon in the other hand. Since Spellstrike is the more specific ability being used here (spell combat is any Magus spell while Spellstrike is just touch spells) it should take precedence in this case.
The only way I could see that you couldn't use SpellCombat/Spellstrike with natural weapons is if:
A. Natural weapons aren't wielded weapons, (an option I don't believe) OR they aren't melee attacks (also an option I don't believe).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When the Magus uses spellcombat to cast a touch spell and declares he's also using spellstrike then SpellStrike explicitly states you can deliver it through ANY weapon you are wielding, not just the weapon in the other hand.
As long as your free hand stays free, and your other hand keeps wielding the light or one-handed weapon, it's fine.
The attack granted as part of casting a touch spell is separate.
What I assume Bigtuna was asking about was using Spell Combat, casting a spell, then making all of his attacks with a natural weapon instead of with the light or one-handed weapon in his other hand.
To give some examples, assuming a level 2 magus:
Spell Combat, cast shield, attack with dagger.
Spell Combat, cast shocking grasp, deliver with touch, attack with dagger.
Spell Combat, cast shocking grasp, deliver with dagger, attack with dagger.
Spell Combat, cast shocking grasp, deliver with bite, attack with dagger.
All totally work. This one doesn't:
Spell Combat, cast shocking grasp, deliver with bite, attack with bite.
or
Spell Combat, cast shocking grasp, deliver with touch, attack with dagger, attack with bite(secondary).
"All totally work." - so far so good - all agree...
"This one doesn't:
Spell Combat, cast shocking grasp, deliver with bite, attack with bite.
or
Spell Combat, cast shocking grasp, deliver with touch, attack with dagger, attack with bite(secondary).
-yes this is what is unclear
|
|
"All totally work." - so far so good - all agree...
"This one doesn't:
Spell Combat, cast shocking grasp, deliver with bite, attack with bite.
or
Spell Combat, cast shocking grasp, deliver with touch, attack with dagger, attack with bite(secondary).
-yes this is what is unclear
This is the part that is unclear to me as well. Why do you understand that the natural attack is invalid?
The requirement to have a weapon in one hand is understood but nowhere in the description does it state that you have to attack with that weapon, you just have to be wielding it.
With Spellstrike he can deliver the spell through any weapon he's wielding (natural attacks are always wielded) and get the free attack from that without using the normal 1/round attack the natural attack usually gets. I don't see why he couldn't Spell Combat, cast shocking grasp, Spell Strike, deliver with bite, attack with bite.
What he couldn't do in this case is add a claw or pincer/gore/etc into that action since that is using a different weapon that isn't delivering the spell. This changes if he's using frostbite or chill touch since he'd still have extra spells (charges) left to deliver with any weapon he chooses so he can assign those to the rest of his natural attacks with spellstrike and complete the round.
Why do you understand that the natural attack is invalid?
"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. As a full-round action, he can make all of his attacks with his melee weapon..."
I'm making the assumption that "his melee weapon" refers specifically and exclusively to the light or one-handed melee weapon he is wielding in the other hand.
-edit: I forgot to finish my conclusion and actually answer you!-
If "his melee weapon" in the example is the dagger, then he gets to cast a spell, he gets a free attack if that's a touch spell, using whatever he wants (bite), then he gets his attacks with "his melee weapon" which is the dagger. There's no reason he gets an extra bite attack at the end. Spell + Weapon(singular) attacks.
If Spell Combat is supposed to be a real genuine full-attack, then not only would it benefit from haste, but it would allow you to attack with any and all natural weapons that don't involve using your hands. (bite, tail slap, etc.)
What he couldn't do in this case is add a claw or pincer/gore/etc into that action since that is using a different weapon that isn't delivering the spell.
If any natural weapon counts as "his melee weapon" for spell combat, then why not?
The attack to deliver the spell is completely unrelated to everything else that's happening. (so long as it doesn't invalidate the requirements for spell combat)
If, for argument, a claw attack counted as wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand, a magus could use spell combat, cast a touch spell, deliver the touch spell with a bite, and then make his normal attack(s) with his claw.
This changes if he's using frostbite or chill touch since he'd still have extra spells (charges) left to deliver with any weapon he chooses so he can assign those to the rest of his natural attacks with spellstrike and complete the round.
Again, if the claw counted as the weapon in hand for spell combat, then sure, if he cast chill touch (at CL 2+) then he could deliver it with a bite, then again using his normal claw attack.
|
|
Why do you understand that the natural attack is invalid?"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. As a full-round action, he can make all of his attacks with his melee weapon..."
I'm making the assumption that "his melee weapon" refers specifically and exclusively to the light or one-handed melee weapon he is wielding in the other hand.
-edit: I forgot to finish my conclusion and actually answer you!-
If "his melee weapon" in the example is the dagger, then he gets to cast a spell, he gets a free attack if that's a touch spell, using whatever he wants (bite), then he gets his attacks with "his melee weapon" which is the dagger. There's no reason he gets an extra bite attack at the end. Spell + Weapon(singular) attacks.
I see where we are missing each other here now. My assumption is that the Bite is the melee weapon here (since spellstrike lets him pick a weapon other then the dagger he has in that hand, though he still has to have a weapon in that hand)
If Spell Combat is supposed to be a real genuine full-attack, then not only would it benefit from haste, but it would allow you to attack with any and all natural weapons that don't involve using your hands. (bite, tail slap, etc.)
What he couldn't do in this case is add a claw or pincer/gore/etc into that action since that is using a different weapon that isn't delivering the spell.If any natural weapon counts as "his melee weapon" for spell combat, then why not?
The attack to deliver the spell is completely unrelated to everything else that's happening. (so long as it doesn't invalidate the requirements for spell combat)
If, for argument, a claw attack counted as wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand, a magus could use spell combat, cast a touch spell, deliver the touch spell with a bite, and then make his normal attack(s) with his claw.
Here's where I'm actually agreeing with your original statement on Spell Combat restricting you to a single weapon.
Spellstrike allows you to channel a spell through any weapon you are wielding and allows you to bypass the spell combat rule limiting you to one weapon, but once you have successfully channeled the spell you aren't using spellstrike anymore and default back to the spell combat rules which then restricts you to only the weapon you originally declared. (Unless you miss then you are still holding the spell and can use spellstrike to channel it through another weapon you are wielding)Let's use an example that I've dealt with a few times now of 10th level Hexcrafter Magus in the form of a 4 armored Gargoyle. Naturally this form provides 6 natural attacks (clawx4, gore, bite) with a 7th from the magi prehensile hair hex.
They want to cast shocking grasp so they declare spellcombat + spellstrike and declare the bite as the carrier of the SG cast it and attack with the free attack granted by using a touch spell.
They swing and miss the target so they are still holding the spell and attempt to make their normal bite attack and connect this time. Now, since the bite is the melee weapon declared to be holding the spell it discharges and they are no longer using their spellstrike ability the normal rules of spell combat come back into play and they can now only finish the available attacks with that weapon (the Bite) so they are done attacking now.
On the other hand if he had cast Chill Touch or Frostbite instead once he hit the first time they are still holding a spell and can use the spellstrike ability to declare that now the Gore is delivering the spell allowing it to be used to attack (under the Spell Strike rule stating he can use any weapon to deliver a spell), once that's done switch it to each natural attack in order of preference until you are out of "charges" of the spell.
My argument is and has always been it's the spellstrike ability that lets you use multiple different weapons with spellcombat. Once you are no longer using it you are restricted exactly as you stated in the beginning of this thread.
For simplicities sake as a GM I'd just let you do it AND use haste as well but for RAW this is my interpretation.
My assumption is that the Bite is the melee weapon here (since spellstrike lets him pick a weapon other then the dagger he has in that hand, though he still has to have a weapon in that hand)
So you think "he can make all of his attacks with his melee weapon" dosen't refer to the "light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand", yes?
So, a normal human magus could have a free hand, a dagger in his other hand, then make all his attacks with a blade boot?
Is that what you think the intent is, or is it just a loophole where the rules were not quite explicit enough?
Spellstrike allows you to channel a spell through any weapon you are wielding and allows you to bypass the spell combat rule limiting you to one weapon, but once you have successfully channeled the spell you aren't using spellstrike anymore and default back to the spell combat rules which then restricts you to only the weapon you originally declared.
For the free attack granted by casting the touch spell, you can use any weapon you like. Once the single free attack from casting the touch spell is over, the normal attacks granted by Spell Combat must be made with the melee weapon specified. Even if you use Spellstrike to deliver a spell through them, you're still restricted to the attack you could normally make.
If you had vicious stomp, for example, and someone fell prone adjacent to you, you get an AoO, but that AoO must be an unarmed strike. Having a held charge doesn't mean you can take that AoO with your sword.
On the other hand if he had cast Chill Touch or Frostbite instead once he hit the first time they are still holding a spell and can use the spellstrike ability to declare that now the Gore is delivering the spell allowing it to be used to attack (under the Spell Strike rule stating he can use any weapon to deliver a spell), once that's done switch it to each natural attack in order of preference until you are out of "charges" of the spell.
Gargoyle declares Spell Combat. He decides to cast first.
Part 1: Cast Chill Touch. Make free attack using any weapon via Spellstrike. Lets say he uses "Gore".Part 2: Make all of his attacks with his melee weapon. If that melee weapon is "bite" then he can only attack with bite. He still has the option of using Spellstrike, so if his bite hits, he can also deliver the spell. Since bite doesn't get iterative attacks, after one bite he's done attacking.
My argument is and has always been it's the spellstrike ability that lets you use multiple different weapons with spellcombat.
That's absolutely crazy to give you an attack with every natural weapon. What if you had quick draw and a bunch of daggers, would you let him whip out a new dagger and get a free attack for every caster level?
A normal level 10 magus can make two attacks with his melee weapon when using Spell Combat. (BAB+7/+2) If the spell he casts grants him an extra attack, then he can make that extra attack with whatever he likes.
Spellstrike doesn't grant you an attack. All it does it give you the option, when you make a melee attack, of delivering a touch spell through it.
If you had a held charge(*) of chill touch, and you used a normal full-attack action, then yes, you could deliver the chill touch with each weapon and natural weapon that hit until you exhausted the spell. You're still limited to the number of attacks you would have gotten normally.
(*Assuming chill touch can he held, see recent ruling by JJ, it still works pretty much the same for this example)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) Does natural weapons count as "light weapons" so they can be used for spellcombat, without having to have a actual weapon in your hand?Spell Combat (Ex): "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."
It must be in the other hand.
But if i use two talent, Improved Unarmed Strike and Feral Combat
Training i'm always considered armed so considered with a weapon in handright?!?