|
Let's try some numbers.A notable point: The Rapier build's access to Precise Strike means their static damage would be much higher. You also noted the lack of Arcane Pool enhancement. Assume your same data points, toss the Rapier Magus Flamboyant Arcana and Arcane Deed: Precise Strike. Pretty bog-standard for a Weapon Magus. Mathwei's build has Arcane Accuracy and Flight Hex in those spots. Reduces the benefit of an extra spell, but Arcane Accuracy is half-wasted at this point due to both builds likely carrying Accurate Strike; more on both of those in a moment. Precise Strike first!
At 10th level, with the Magus dealing 10 points of precision damage on every hit, the Natural Magus falls noticeably behind in DPR-- the points you made about DR are actually true as a general case, with DR added in on top of that. Notably, a 10th-level Magus with what's normally a +3 weapon can ignore every DR save DR/-.
Conclusion: without Amulet of Mighty Fists, even using the Calikang the natural attack build is falling noticeably behind in damage due to the prevalence of DR at this level. With Amulet of Mighty Fists, Natural Magus falls behind less severely but is significantly behind in available wealth.
Second notable point. We'll make the assumption that both builds have the same Int stat, and are able to dedicate the same level of resources each round. Thus, assuming no pre-buffing beyond Haste:
First round, Weapon Magus' priorities are to get the Arcane Pool weapon enhancement online. Natural Magus' priority is to shift into their combat form. This means that the Weapon Magus' priority demands a Swift Action and one Pool point, the Natural Magus' priority demands a spell.
Thus, if we work off the assumption of equal resources and equal dedication, the Weapon Magus uses their Swift for an enhancement and casts a 4th-level spell, to match the Natural Magus. They're now at another +3 . Realistically, probably a +2 and Keen and they wouldn't take Improved Critical; we're...
I will have to disagree a bit on your assumption of natural attacker priorities but that's strictly due to your lack of experience with the natural attack routine. Now taking on your assumption that this all begins inside of full attack range and each magus is built on the same point buy and wealth chassis it would be diffrent.
(Also a Rapier wielding Magus is going to be dex based since rapiers are more of a dex based weapon and need the Weapon finesse feat bringing available feats to the same. AND Haste is not something that can be assumed is running before a battle begins. It's a significant investment to have that active and as short as it lasts there is no way to justify it being on as a pre-buff.)Combat begins with:
A Swift action Hasted Assault
A Full round action Spellcombat Monstrous Physique (Calikang)
A fullattack with Calikang forms 6 attacks (-1 for casting) +1 from haste.
(IF the Nat build magi bought a AoMF also throw on a spell effect, usually blindness, bestow curse or shocking grasp)
Ending the round with a 5' step back putting them 15' from their opponent (20' if lunge was taken)
This puts both of the 2 magi in roughly the same position save the nat wielder is outside of full attack range and has more attacks and a better average attack bonus and base damage with probably better defense against any opponent who can deal with invisible foes.
Now three important details that your example forgot to address:
1). Natural Attacking Magi are strength based combatants. This means whatever Dex you estimate for the rapier wielder they have too, BUT MPII grants a +4 to that strength for an additional 2 pts to hit and damage. AND they qualify and usually take Power attack which at this level means the same to-hit bonus but 6 more points of damage. That 6 + the 2 from MPII + the 1 from strength 13 means they will always equal or exceed most base DR. With the addition of Eldritch Claws that means the only DR that slows them down Adamantine, Alignment based or Cold Iron. All of which have easy methods of getting past.
2). For the 18,000 GP that the rapier wielder spent on their weapon the Nat wielder could have bought a +2 AoMF (Spell storing, Merciful for Debuff builds, Spell Storing Cruel for hexcrafter builds, or just a fury-born and rock a +5 enhancement bonus against every opponent shortly after the fight starts). AND they'd still have 2,000 GP to spend on anything else they want. They come out ahead on the WBL even if they do buy the AoMF which is Great and recommended but not NEEDED.
3). Natural Builds do not require a 4th level spell, that is simply the level where the best form is available. These builds have viable spells to keep them going for every level. (Stone Fist, Alter Self, Monstrous Physique 1,2,3,4). Anything past 1st level spells gives them 3+ attacks a round while past 2nd level they have 4+ attacks a round.
Now if you really want to examine the difference between these two builds, do not look at the first round of combat since both use that round activating their powers, instead look at the second round.
At this point both builds are ready to start handling the challenges on the same footing . Honestly it's a pointless comparison though. The Rapier wielding, shocking grasp builds are designed for rocket tag and run out of juice quickly while the Natural Weapon Builds are designed for longevity and survivability. They are also designed to avoid drawing the ire of GM's by one hitting every opponent they meet.
kestral287:
AoMF: It isn't something that a Magus can do for half the price. The AoMF works for every single natural attack, not just one single weapon. Like I said, it only gets better the more natural attacks you get. Yes, weapon enchantments are cheaper, but they only affect that weapon.
GMF: You just restated what I just said.
Body Wrap: This is NOT mutually exclusive to the AoMF. They can be used in conjunction with one another. And both can be used with GMF.
Deliquescent Gloves: Equally available, yes. But he can only effectively use one. The natural weapon Magus can use two...or more!
Strong Jaw: It is pretty easy to UMD this if you get a wand. Or get a charges/day item. At 1 min/level and a lesser metamagic rod of extend it should rarely cut into prep time in places like dungeons.
Improved Natural Attack: It is not +1 damage. It scales with size. So if you increase your size it does more. As an example if your base damage for your bite is 1d8 (average 4.5 damage) and you take INA it goes up to 2d6 (average 7 damage) - an increase of 2.5 damage. If you then enlarge yourself it would increase to 2d8 (average 9 damage) for another 2 point increase. If you then cast Strong Jaw it increases it to 4d8 (average 18 damage) for another increase of 9 damage. That is an increase in damage of 13.5 damage every time you use that attack. If you apply it to something like a claw attacks that you get multiples of then you can use that attack more than once every turn.
This is something the weapon Magus cannot do. And that isn't even mentioning the possibility of a constant use magic item of Strong Jaw (112K) which is also not an option for the weapon Magus.
Dragon Style: This is a worthwhile investment for most natural attack based characters. If you do not believe me feel free to ask the community. If you don't like it there is always...
Arcane Strike. This works better the more attacks you get which is going to be more for the natural attacking magus.
Arcane Pool: Who suggested eating your pool point and swift action every round for 3-6 rounds? Not me.
There are more ways to enchant natural weapons and they are better than enchanting a single manufactured weapon. More expensive? Yes. But they are better and most affect every attack.
You know... I should also point out the possibility of a one big hit natural attack build for Magus. It lacks in potential damage in a turn but when you add in strategic movement there are times when even a Magus can only get one attack in a turn. A Vital Striking, Improved Natural Attacking, Size Increasing, Strong Jawed, GMF'ed, AoMF'd, Body Wrapped, Dragon Styled, Spell buffed, Spell Storing Magus is a thing.
|
|
Oooh, two big posts. Let's start from the top.
1. Is your priority not to actually be able to use natural attacks? I would assume so. Accurate Strike much less so, but it's the most tactically sound thing to do with your Swift Action at this level. I suppose buffing a single Slam with the Arcane Pool isn't totally useless, since you can use that particular Slam for Spellstrike, Haste, etc., but it's still not a great play, nor does it significantly alter anything.
Not sure what you mean but if you are referring to round 1 as I said it's simply a setup round where getting all your buffs and positioning right is most important. That is exactly what you wrote for the weapon magus did that round. If you're making a different point I'm missing it.
2. Given that I am currently playing a Strength-based Rapier Magus, we're going to have to disagree on this front. Dex-to-damage is common and valuable at low levels, but if I was building for 10th level from the ground up? Strength all the way. And almost certainly a rapier. Rapier's advantage is the high crit range and Precise Strike access, and the only thing that makes it traditionally bad for Strength is that you can't two-hand it... which a Magus doesn't care about.
This one is a matter of individual taste, I personally find the bloat from the ACG and it's poorly designed abilities distasteful and haven't updated any of my builds to include them. I'm sure there is enough in there to double the power of any of my builds but it's too unpalatable to me to use any of it. Someone else can address this point if they care to.
3. The established setup presumed Haste was pre-buffed. Hasted Assault would be a waste. Hence I swapped it with Accurate Strike in your build, which I would call fair since you explicitly defended the Natural Magus in Weirdo's numbers using Accurate Strike at 10th level. With your build you can have one or the other, but not both. I presumed the one you argued with and the one more favorable for your build under the setting.
I fail to see how anyone can presume haste is pre-buffed. The short duration, relatively high spell level and limited number of casters who can do it leaves this firmly in the cast during combat world for the majority of encounters. The only way it could active before the first round of combat is with an extra character casting it or a free surprise round for the magus where I'd rather cast Monstrous Physique with a swift action hasted assault for better acction economy.
6. What happened to your contention that the Natural Magus does not need an AoMF? Shifting the goalposts doesn't help your argument, it weakens it.
I never changed that assumption, I have always stated he doesn't need it merely that it is recommended that he take it if he has the available cash or wants the extra flexibility. The weapon Magus doesn't need a +3 weapon but if he chooses to take it the better for him it is.
7. Taking the Amulet of Mighty Fists means that you're down spell slots since you no longer have the WBL for Pearls of Power to offset your greater spell costs. Look back at Weirdo's post regarding wealth or read down in mine.
Irrelevant argument and un-true in any case. The natural attack magus casts fewer spells per day then the weapon magus and gets a longer and bigger overall benefit from them. Your example magus uses greater invis (a rounds per level spell) while mine uses MPII which is a minutes per level spell. An order of magnitude longer lasting with fewer counters to it. We use the same attack spell for equal value but the Natural magus spends fewer Arcane Pool points since he doesn't enchant his weapon that way (he can he just doesn't need to).
Since we have fewer expenditures of those pool points we don't need pearls since we can recover the spells that way AND at this level have the extra cash (that 2K extra that was left over from the amulet) is easily enough to purchase a Wyroot backup weapon to keep that arcane pool full. Irrelevant argument.8. Using Monstrous Physique I cuts the natural attack suite down from six slams (-1 for Spell Combat, +1 for Haste, conditional +1 for Spellstrike) to four claws. This is a massive damage loss. Anything less than the Calikang puts the Natural Magus drastically below the Weapon Magus in damage output.
And it doesn't matter. The point of playing an advanced class is knowing when to use the right resource. If fighting a boss fight you use MPII if it's a lieutenant you use MPI if it's a grunt use alter self. Smart players scale their resource expenditure to the challenge since any damage after the target hit's zero is wasted damage.
9. Second round of combat goes by the DPR established by Weirdo, save that Precise Strike (+10 damage on every attack) was not included, which easily pushes the Weapon Magus above the Natural in DPR. The reason I didn't look into it heavily is that Weirdo already did a solid job of it, save for taking it easy on the Natural Magus by not including the best damage booster the Magus has access to.
See my comments for point number 2, but if absolutely necessary there are enough ways to easily add or exceed the extra 10pts per hit (easiest of the top of my head is to use the witchwyrd form and take Final embrace to double both the natural attack and frostbite damage easily beating the boost from precise strike).
10. Weapon Magus in this example is using Frostbite, not Shocking Grasp. Please, understand the numbers Weirdo used and I built on before you comment on them. Now, I personally prefer Shocking Grasp to Frostbite, but that's not what I assumed for this comparison.
Frostbite or shocking grasp makes little difference, the net outcome is still about the same. XD6+(x*10) damage from frostbite nat builds will always do more damage then 4D6+(4*10) where x equals a number between 6 and 9. With shocking grasp builds it's even worse since that's 14D6 (avg 42). The minimum damage from the nat build exceeds the average from the weapon build. The weapon build has to crit just to stay competitive each round so is burning spell slots every round.
General notes: As I touched on a few times in this post, the idea of "it enhances all of your attacks" does not really mean much. A Weapon Magus will be making all of their attacks with, well, their weapon. So the Amulet of Mighty Fists is completely offset by the cheaper Rapier, the Deliquescent Gloves affect both characters equally at best (a mild edge to the Natural Magus if your GM is willing to actually let it apply to all attacks)
The rapier isn't cheaper, it's more expensive as long as the natural attacker has more natural attacks then the weapon wielder has normal attackers. Remember each natural attack is a separate weapon and all that entails.
kestral287: Did you know that itterives incur increasing negatives to hit while Natural attack routines do not? Saying that enchanting a weapon applies to all attacks is not the same as saying that an AoMF applies to all attacks. You are not as likely to hit with your itterives while you are equally likely to hit with all natural attacks.
I am not a big Magus fan, actually. But maybe I will try and see how a one big hit natural weapon Magus fleshes out. Outside of that build, I do not count myself as an expert on Magi. I will bow out to Mathwei on that one, he seems to have far more first hand experience. Even with my limited experience I can already tell his build will outdamage yours, use less limited resources over a longer period of time and come out ahead in defense as well. But, if it is all academic then I encourage both of you to make a build and put your money where your mouth is. In the immortal words of Steven Tyler, "Talk is cheap. Shut up and dance!" ;)
Avoron: You made a Magus that doesn't use a one handed weapon?...
|
|
Kestral, you have made several unwarranted assumptions in this thread that truly cloud the basic discussion that was going on.
Simply put does the natural attack magus equal or exceed the weapon wielding magus. You have thrown in extra party members, weird corner DR cases and incorrect rules assumptions (There is nothing about the swashbuckler deeds you are relying on that prevent natural attackers from using them too).
Basically this is what's going on, I have posted a build (a build that's over a year old and viewed by hundreds) that is designed to be as self-reliant, self contained and as immune to GM fiat as possible. Whatever amount of cash is available doesn't matter to my builds. Whether the game starts at 5 gold or 500,000 gold makes no difference to my builds since everything is non-gear dependent. If the AoMF is available then great it makes us more effective but if not it doesn't stop the character from doing everything it's designed to.
The parts of your build that you've posted so far is dependent on having enough cash for a +3 weapon as well as extra party members to through buffs on it to equal what the natural wielder does for themselves.
My design has been out there forever and works, yours seems to only exist in your world. If you seriously want to compare the two (or 3 or 4 since I have posted 3 different natural weapon wielding magus builds) it's on you to post yours. I'll even give you this to make it easier, whatever point buy and stat allocation you use for yours I'll drop into mine, no changes. Heck you can pick the Wealth to spend on their gear and spells as well.
Once you've done that we'll have anyone who's still interested pick 4 challenges (CR 10-13), terrains and initial Initiative rolls (for us and the challenge) and see how each build handles it. I'm confident my build will be able to hold it's own against everything they throw at us as well as or better then your build can.
Edit: you know what, lets take it a step further, whatever you post I'll just apply my build on top of your layout (race, stats, wealth, etc) and show that it's better that way. Keeps it really simple.
|
|
First, why don't YOU go back and read the ability again, you've obviously mis-read it. There is no exclusion for natural attacks with precise strike. All it requires is light/one-handed and piercing. Stop making things up.
Boosting party members isn't the question, it's needing boosts from party members to function is the issue. Your build needs it, mine doesn't. (I guess, you still haven't posted one yet). And for your point 4 the answer is Haste, ALL your examples had someone else cast haste on your magus, that's a buff and a pretty hefty one. Stop making things up.
Yes, those DR's are a corner case and truly don't matter. Worst case they are a speed bump and MAY let the target live an extra attack or two.
Why don't you read my post first, you are the one trying to convine others not me.
I'm comfortable in how my build works in theory and actual gameplay, you are the one who can't seem to understand it.
Oh and since you still haven't posted a build I'm assuming the challenge is too much for you then? That's fine why don't you go post in a different thread and we'll get back to answering the OP's questions.
Oi... okay, rules first.
1. DR/good, DR/evil, DR/admantine, and DR/cold iron are corner cases? That looks like most of the DRs in the game to me.
2. Boosting extra party members is a marginal and variable benefit-- but it is a benefit.
3. Precise Strike specifically disallows natural weapons, and only allows one-handed piercing weapons. A Slam is not piercing, nor is a claw. So... yeah, no, no Precise Strike for the Natural Magus. Please read the abilities before you talk about them.
4. What extra party member has put buffs on the Weapon Magus but not the Natural one? I mentioned that the party Wizard could have dropped Haste... and then went ahead and dropped the scenario in which he didn't, and the Weapon Magus cast it himself, and how the Weapon Magus was still ahead.
I am seriously doubting that you're reading the posts you're responding to at this point.
5. Read my previous post for why two people building separate characters under separate design principles does not allow for an effective comparison. Read my previous post for the sole thing I am waiting on to run a full comparison. Whenever you want to provide that, I can run the numbers.
6. Please, if you actually want to have a discussion on this subject, read the posts in question.
Avoron: I was just surprised because spell combat only works with a light or one handed weapon, is all.
kestral287: Frankly, you have also not provided a build. You have only talked about parts of a theoretic build. I find it ironic that you would complain about him not doing the same thing that you have neglected. As I said, if you feel YOU have something to prove then put your money where your mouth is and post a build. You do not need to wait for him to post a build first. Just like he doesn't have to wait for you to post a build first.
I'm glad that you are both being a bit more constructive towards showing your case now, though. I would actually like to see how it turns out. If you claim to be able to easily post a build, then go ahead and easily post it. I would recommend both do.
kestral287: Your excuses bore me. I will put it as bluntly as possible - post a build or stop accusing someone of not doing the same thing. It comes across as very hypocritical.
Builds can be changed until testing starts. Pick a date and no changes made after that date. Its simple. All Paizo produced options are available to both of you. All you need is a clear goal in mind. IMO - "most efficient opponent takedown while surviving several encounters" seems to be a good one. Or if you would rather just put them through a DPR calculator that is fine as well.
Honestly, this advice goes equally for Mathwei. I'm only not responding to him directly as he isn't making these excuses.
While I cannot speak for the rest of the board I can tell you that personally I plan on ignoring further posts from either of you in this thread that do not include a build. Its not a threat, I just prefer to stay focused on being constructive rather than endless debates on a message board. *shrug*
So i am going to follow the sample hexcrater build that was posted a while back (minus the hexcrafter part) but im not going to be doing frostbite since somebody else already has that combo handled, any suggestions for my first two feats?
Also, last week my old guy died to some insane pitfall + attacking statues trap so this guy is gonna be in play in a little under 4 hours from now
Help?
Ah, someone posted in this thread again.
Hazrond: I would suggest making a new thread and describe what you want to accomplish, what is allowed, stat array, etc for more directed advice.
Looks like kestral287 never got around to posting a build either. Can't say I'm surprised. I would say Mathwei's build works just peachy.
|
I'm going to back up kestral287. I posted an admittedly simplistic mathematical comparison for the sake of having something definite to talk about as opposed to just trading assertions (The AoMF isn't important - yes it is - no it isn't). That comparison showed among other things that the AoMF increases DPR by about 30%, and that DR reduces DPR by a similar amount. One page later, I see Mathwei ap Niall is back to claiming that the AoMF and DR "don't matter." Since I don't see any optimized build ignoring a 30% swing in DPR, I can only conclude that Mathwei ap Niall has ignored my post - which took about two hours to write. It's frankly not worth my time or kestral's to disagree with him further.
Whatever amount of cash is available doesn't matter to my builds. Whether the game starts at 5 gold or 500,000 gold makes no difference to my builds since everything is non-gear dependent. If the AoMF is available then great it makes us more effective but if not it doesn't stop the character from doing everything it's designed to.
Yes, those DR's are a corner case and truly don't matter. Worst case they are a speed bump and MAY let the target live an extra attack or two.
Both quotes from this page.
I would like to point out however that Accurate Strikes opens up the option of a mixed build - a character who normally fights with a rapier or other manufactured weapon but in a big fight casts Monstrous Physique II to add secondary natural attacks. Such a character has all the advantages of the rapier build and can spend a 4th level spell slot to get 4 extra attacks. Yes, they're at -5, but if you're targeting touch AC you don't care.
Weirdo posted a build. Mathwei posted a build. Kudos to you two! Good builds too. You would think this would be an easy feat for someone who is writing a guide to do.
Weirdo, the way I see it the difference is between iterative vs. natural attack:
Natural attacks have the advantage of all hitting with the same attack boni. The other advantage being that many things that enchant a single natural attack enchant them all. The downfall being that you have to pay more for the enchantment to your attack. Another benefit is that there are several things that can enchant your natural attacks beyond what can be done for a weapon (Greater Magic Fang, Body Wraps, etc). There are also things that can increase the base damage of natural attacks like Improved Natural Attack, Strong Jaw, etc and these work for several natural attacks at a time. I can't think of any feats that work for manufactured weapons (Equipment Trick, I guess?) that will not work for natural attacks but the same isn't true the other way around. Feral Combat Training opens up a lot of possibilities and there are feats like Dragon Style, etc that help as well. These feats do not work for a manufactured weapon.
Iterative attacks have to use the decreasing by -5 for each attack routine. You can increase the existing enhancements to your weapon just like you can with natural attacks but the benefit is that it is cheaper and easier to get a magic weapon. The downfall is that while you get several iterative attacks you are probably getting less total attacks than the natural attacking character and at a decreasing bonus. While manufacture weapons have Lead Blades as an answer to Strong Jaw, Strong Jaw is more powerful. Threat range is often going to be greater with manufactured weapons, what with a Scimitar being so popular and all. Natural attacks can have their threat range increased as well but it isn't as good.
There are things that work on both like size increase. These kinds of things benefit natural attacks more than they do manufactured weapons because you are going to be hitting more often with more attacks with a natural attack routine. I am not by far an expert on Magi, nor do I feel a need to post a build as I do not have anything to prove here. Nor do I think that without a fair amount of research could I post a competitive build for one. However, these are things that hold true for all types of characters when considering manufactured weapons vs. natural weapons. I saw the builds and I still do not really see how the manufactured weapon Magus pulls out ahead. The natural weapon magus has more available to it to increase the effectiveness of it's attacks.
So if you will pardon my ineptitude perhaps you can point out where the flaw in this logic is?
|
|
I'm not an expert on magus optimization either, which is why I didn't actually post a build, I posted a mathematical comparison using Mathwei's build and an as-similar-as-possible-but-not-actually-optimal weapon magus. I also don't have anything to prove in the sense that I'm not invested in either outcome.
That said, here's the first problem with your logic:
However, these are things that hold true for all types of characters when considering manufactured weapons vs. natural weapons.
A magus has specific limitations with natural weapons, and advantages with manufactured weapons, that don't apply to most natural weapons builds. This is why natural weapons can be a very strong option for certain classes, but not as strong for a magus.
You mention multiple attacks at full BAB, but it's harder for a magus to get those attacks because of the limitations of spell combat (one claw is in use, and bite needs an arcana). That's why Mathwei's build is so reliant on using polymorph to get extra arms. If you don't use spell combat you get the usual benefit from natural weapons, but then you've got two major class features - spell combat and spellstrike - that you're basically wasting.
You mention Greater Magic Fang and Strong Jaw, but magi don't get those spells on their list. This makes the magus dependent on other party members or UMD if they want these major buffs.
The second problem:
There are also things that can increase the base damage of natural attacks like Improved Natural Attack, Strong Jaw, etc and these work for several natural attacks at a time. I can't think of any feats that work for manufactured weapons (Equipment Trick, I guess?) that will not work for natural attacks but the same isn't true the other way around. Feral Combat Training opens up a lot of possibilities and there are feats like Dragon Style, etc that help as well. These feats do not work for a manufactured weapon.
...
The natural weapon magus has more available to it to increase the effectiveness of it's attacks.
Dervish Dance, Fencing Grace, and the Whip Mastery feat chain are feats specific to certain manufactured weapons. INA and FCT are very nice but they're not clearly better than the manufactured-only options; IUAS+FCT is a heavy feat tax to use Dragon Style/Ferocity with your claws or slams. There are also other manufactured-weapon specific resources, primarily Greater Magic Weapon, Align Weapon, and as kestral287 pointed out, the Precise Strike arcana.
Read this FAQ.
Magus: When using spell combat, can the weapon in my other hand be an unarmed strike or a natural weapon?Yes, so long as the weapon is a light or one-handed melee weapon and is associated with that hand. For example, unarmed strikes, claws, and slams are light melee weapons associated with a hand, and therefore are valid for use with spell combat. A tail slap is not associated with a hand, and therefore is not valid for use with spell combat.
Spell Combat does not go to waste. And why does Spellstrike not work? I think it would for the same reason Spell Combat does in the above FAQ.
I was referring to getting GMF made permanent. It can stack with an AoMF. But you are absolutely correct, Wands work as well. Strong Jaw would be excellent for a Wand.
Good call on those feats but I feel like those are for niche builds. Whip Master is for sure.
IUAS + FCT are not a heavy feat tax. Certainly not any worse than Fencing Grace or Dervish Dance and Weapon Finesse. Especially considering you can make your full iterative attacks with IUAS and follow up with your natural attacks all at -5. Then you are getting use out of your FCT as well. If you go with Kensai you could pick Unarmed Strike as your "chosen weapon" and use Perfect Strike with it and/or your natural attacks.
I guess I'm just not seeing why they wouldn't work well.
Guys, I think we need to get back to the point here. Hazrond is asking for help with his build.
It is clear to me that the interactions of the rules here for these builds are very complicated. The end result should mean that whatever build you choose you should make sure to discuss it with your GM to make sure that he will allow the combos you are proposing and also that he understands what you are doing.
The build posted here is quite interesting though I don't understand all the elements of it, and since I wasn't planning on playing a Magus anytime soon a lot of it was TL;DR for me.
I would note that as a GM I don't think I would allow frostbite and chill touch to work at the same time even if one was from a wand. But your GM may differ.
Specifically, In games I play we use the point buy system to make a character with 15 or 20 points. Your character has 70.
For the record I count 51. You may not be factoring in the racial bonuses to the scores, which are included in his main array. Still, it would be hard to go wrong with that array.
about that, i have mentioned several times now that i am actually going to be using the Eldritch Scion archetype for this magus, which switches everything from Int to Cha...Yes, I know you mentioned it I'm just trying to convince you not to do it.
It's a bad archetype and it costs you more than it gives you...
Well, if you want to play a CHA-based spontaneous magus it seems to be the way to go.
The disadvantage of having to pay an eldritch pool to do spell combat is a pain but is necessary for him to have claws at 1st level. The disadvantage disappears at 8th level, at which point he is probably shape shifting anyways.
You normally lose a little bit with an archetype and this is no exception. But I don't think it's that bad and it works with his racial ability bonuses. I would prefer that you get an extra spell per day (which is the compensation that sorcerers get) but that's life.
Note that you can get Runestones of Power which are the spontaneous versions of Pearls of Power. But they cost twice as much. You can also get Pages of Spell Knowledge to increase your spells known.
|
|
Read this FAQ.
Spell Combat does not go to waste. And why does Spellstrike not work? I think it would for the same reason Spell Combat does in the above FAQ.
Magus: When using spell combat, can the weapon in my other hand be an unarmed strike or a natural weapon?Yes, so long as the weapon is a light or one-handed melee weapon and is associated with that hand. For example, unarmed strikes, claws, and slams are light melee weapons associated with a hand, and therefore are valid for use with spell combat. A tail slap is not associated with a hand, and therefore is not valid for use with spell combat.
A character can, without spellstrike, deliver a touch spell through a natural weapon. Spellstrike does not improve one's ability to deliver a touch spell through a natural weapon. Thus it is wasted in a build that exclusively uses natural weapons to deliver touch spells. It would be useful in a mixed build, or to make you less gimped if you fall back to a backup weapon to deal with DR, but a focused natural weapons build is wasting it most of the time.
Spell combat is trickier to understand, but first let's establish: spell combat can be used with natural weapons, but only with a specific natural weapon in one hand ("the weapon in my other hand") barring extra arms which give all magi extra attacks. Natural Spell Combat lets you add a non-handed natural attack. So the attack options for the two magi are:
A rapier magus at level 1, without spell combat, gets 1 attack.
If using spell combat to cast a non-touch spell, 1 attack.
If using spell combat to cast a touch spell, 2 attacks.
A magus with claw/claw/bite, without spell combat, gets 3 attacks.
If using spell combat to cast a non-touch spell, 1 attack*.
If using spell combat to cast a touch spell, 2 attacks**.
*A single claw - or 2 (claw + bite) with Natural Spell Combat.
**The same claw, twice - or 3 with Natural Spell Combat.
Spell combat never increases the number of attacks a natural weapon magus gets, and can decrease the number of attacks.
Spell combat never decreases the number of attacks a rapier magus gets, and can increase the number of attacks.
So a natural weapons magus gives up its multiple attack advantage in order to use spell combat. If they use spell combat in a given round, on that round they "waste" their multiple attack advantage from natural weapons. If they want their natural attack advantage, they don't use ("waste") spell combat.
The flip side of this is that spell combat isn't as important to the natural weapons magus as the rapier magus - but I wouldn't call making something less useful such that you miss it less an advantage.
I was referring to getting GMF made permanent. It can stack with an AoMF. But you are absolutely correct, Wands work as well. Strong Jaw would be excellent for a Wand.
Strong Jaw would be extremely expensive as a wand: 15,750 gp if you can get it from a Ranger, or 21,000gp if you need the druid version (I think PFS requires using full-caster prices?)
Good call on those feats but I feel like those are for niche builds. Whip Master is for sure.
No more niche than FCT.
IUAS + FCT are not a heavy feat tax. Certainly not any worse than Fencing Grace or Dervish Dance and Weapon Finesse. Especially considering you can make your full iterative attacks with IUAS and follow up with your natural attacks all at -5. Then you are getting use out of your FCT as well. If you go with Kensai you could pick Unarmed Strike as your "chosen weapon" and use Perfect Strike with it and/or your natural attacks.
I guess I'm just not seeing why they wouldn't work well.
They do work well, but then your entire build revolves around FCT - especially if you're taking the Kensai archetype specifically to get FCT easier. The reason I call them a significant tax is that IUAS+FCT only give you the ability to use other feats & features with your chosen weapon - they require you to spend other resources to gain any benefit. Dervish Dance or Fencing Grace grant benefits on their own.
Spell combat never increases the number of attacks a natural weapon magus gets, and can decrease the number of attacks.
Spell combat never decreases the number of attacks a rapier magus gets, and can increase the number of attacks.
Okay, I think I understand what you are saying here, as a natural attacker always gets all of his attacks when he full attacks, so if he uses a hand to gesture then he loses his attack for that hand.
But does a spell with a range of touch require you to make that touch with the other hand? I don't think it does. A Magus is allowed to make the attack with the other hand but I don't think it's required. If that's true then when using spell combat you could deliver the touch spell with the hand that cast the spell, and spellstrike allows that to be combined with the natural attack of the hand. Or am I missing something?
If a 1st level Magus uses spell combat but does not have spellstrike, then when he casts a spell like shocking grasp with his off hand, he makes the touch with the off hand; he doesn't get the ability to use the weapon to deliver the attack until 2nd level.
So at 2nd level, he gets the spellstrike ability to deliver his touch with "any weapon" he is wielding as a free action. This replaces the free touch that comes with a touch spell. So it seems like he can still use the hand that cast the spell to deliver the touch.
But it's not an "extra" attack because you already could have attacked with that hand as part of a full attack, whereas a rapier magus gets a second attack with his rapier this way which he wouldn't have normally received.
Have I got it right?
So yeah. Does that appease you enough to stop the passive-aggressive b@#**%$!, Lune?
First of all I think I wasn't being passive aggressive at all. I think my statements ("agressive"ness) were pretty straight forward. But to answer your question... not really. I thought it was a pretty bad build to be honest and it isn't surprising it did poorly against your rapier Magus.
A rapier magus at level 1, without spell combat, gets 1 attack.
If using spell combat to cast a non-touch spell, 1 attack.
If using spell combat to cast a touch spell, 2 attacks.A magus with claw/claw/bite, without spell combat, gets 3 attacks.
If using spell combat to cast a non-touch spell, 1 attack*.
If using spell combat to cast a touch spell, 2 attacks**.
Yes, I follow. We agree here. I can see that the rapier Magus is getting the same number of attacks as the natural weapon Magus. This does not appear inferior to me. In fact, it looks fairly even.
They do work well, but then your entire build revolves around FCT...
I'm sorry... perhaps I was mistaken. I had thought that you were on the other side of this debate. So, your stance is that natural weapon Magus is a viable build that does work well if build correctly?
I want to point out something that I am fairly certain is being missed. With a single level of Monk you could take all of your iterative attacks, get the rest of his natural attacks that are not using that "hand", use Spell Combat and Spellstrike. To be fair, a rapier Magus could do this too. Well, that is, if he invested in IUAS or a Monk level. But he wouldn't be getting things that would improve his natural attacks as it wouldn't be part of his normal schtick. A natural attacking Magus would.
So...while the 10th level rapier Magus is getting his third attack with his Rapier and having to deal with the increasing negatives of iterative attacks the natural attacking Magus can get all of his iterative attacks with IUAS, his natural attacks that are not using that "hand" and still take advantage of Spell Combat and Spellstrike. That should be at minimum 4 more attacks that the rapier Magus isn't getting. They are secondary attacks so suffer the -5 penalty, but it is only a single -5 penalty. When his BAB goes up to allowing 3 iterative attacks he can make all of those at the increasing negatives just like a rapier Magus but still keeps his natural attacks at only the -5. If he gets Multi Attack it is only -2. And all of those attacks benefit from AoMF, GMF, etc.
|
|
Yes, I follow. We agree here. I can see that the rapier Magus is getting the same number of attacks as the natural weapon Magus. This does not appear inferior to me. In fact, it looks fairly even.
It is fairly even. That's the problem. The main perk of the natural weapons build is that it gets more attacks. If the number of attacks is even, then the natural weapons build is missing out in other areas (crit range being the big one here).
And that's the big reason that a natural weapons magus is an odd build that will differ in important ways from either a "typical" natural weapons user or a "typical" magus.
I'm sorry... perhaps I was mistaken. I had thought that you were on the other side of this debate. So, your stance is that natural weapon Magus is a viable build that does work well if build correctly?
Easy mistake to make. I think it's a viable but probably not optimal build (like perhaps the staff magus). It works fine in my rapier example, which would have been moderately optimized pre-ACG, but falls behind in kestrel's updated comparison.
I've mostly been arguing with Mathwei ap Niall because he seems to think that the natural weapons magus is an optimal build, and has glossed over major weaknesses in a way that would mislead the OP or anyone else taking build advice from this thread.
I, personally, would play a natural weapons magus, but I wouldn't play one in a campaign where I expected frequent and varied DR (like the one I'm currently running) or endurance adventuring days in which I'd run out of polymorph. And I'd be more likely to play one if the party had a druid to cast strong jaw on me, or another caster to give the party haste so I could focus on getting my polymorph online.
You could probably do something really interesting for a natural weapons build with a dip in monk, but I think it would be more about FCT goodies than getting an iterative UAS. Might post a build later, spent most of the night baking.
...the other five are all at -5 BAB...
You must have missed where I said, "Multiattack"? ...and suddenly all those extra attacks are at only -2.
An optimized Magus would look very different from what I posted.
Well, I'm glad you agree because that is exactly what I was just saying. But you are the self proclaimed Magus expert. Why not make an optimized build yourself? Then pit it against the rapier Magus? Hey, that way you wont even be proving me right. You will be proving yourself right. And I know how much you like that.
Weirdo: Being that Mathwei has wrote a guide on Magus (albeit a limited guide) I would tend to believe that he knows what he is talking about. I would not say that you do not know what you are talking about either. However, I can see the strengths of it. I'm not sure about "optimal" but I can definitely see it as being effective and even competitive.
As I said before as I do not proclaim myself as an expert on Magus I would prefer not to post a build myself. I will leave that to people who have more experience than me. I will point out that even without knowledge of Magus I can see the effectiveness without a full build in front of me. I can imagine some things that would go into the build. So I can likewise imagine that you (and the other naysayers) can as well.
|
|
Weirdo: Being that Mathwei has wrote a guide on Magus (albeit a limited guide) I would tend to believe that he knows what he is talking about.
That doesn't mean he can't be wrong. Look at the evidence in this thread. Look at the fact that you thought the build kestral used - Mathwei's build - "was a pretty bad build to be honest."
Now, if Precise Strike didn't include that line about not working with natural attacks, I'd be all for it. Throw in Weapon Focus (Slam), Feral Combat Training (Slam), Boar Style (or Weapon Focus (UAS) and Hamatulatsu Strike, to dodge the Style swift action tax), and at the cost of being slower on the setup you could pick up Precise Strike for all seven of those attacks. That'd be a lot more damage and would almost certainly push you ahead. But, that's an "if", not reality, and any GM who allows that will deserve what happens.
Here's an interesting idea for the monk dip. Kata Master lets you use an UAS with swashbuckler deeds, which when combined with FCT lets you use a natural weapon with Precise Strike. That makes up a big chunk of the damage difference between the natural weapons build and the new rapier magus. You also gain the ability to treat your natural weapons as manufactured weapons for purposes of spells like GMW or Align Weapon (via a monk's UAS ability).
To get options that the weapon magus doesn't, we play a catfolk. Claw Pounce + Dragon Style means you shred things on a charge and can charge under most conditions. The pre-requisite for Claw Pounce, Nimble Striker, also makes Lunge a very attractive option; for three feats you get pounce and reach with no AC penalties. Catfolk can also use claws without spending a polymorph spell - though from level 8 on you'll still want Monstrous Physique in significant fights. Also I was finishing up my post when I saw yours and realized that Calikang get slams, not claws, which does put a crimp on higher levels if an alternative can't be found.
I'm going for Eldritch Scion for this because of Cha synergy and because the OP was initially interested in spontaneous casting. Plus, a bloodline that grants claws is a good alternative to catfolk (though in that case you don't get the racial feat line).
Catfolk, cat's claws alt trait
Magus (Eldritch Scion) with dip in Monk (Kata Master / MoMS)
20 PB:
Str: 16
Dex: 15 (13+2)
Con: 12
Int: 10
Wis: 8 (10-2)
Cha: 16 (14+2)
Level increases to Str.
1 - Weapon Focus (claw), Eldritch Pool, Bloodline*, Spell Combat
2 - Spellstrike
3 (Monk) - IUAS, Dragon Style, Dragon Ferocity**, Panache
4 - Flamboyant Arcana
5 - FCT (claw)
6 - Bonus Feat (Nimble Striker)
7 - Arcana (Precise Strike Deed), Lunge
8 - Medium Armour, Bloodline Spell
9 - FEAT, Spell Combat w/o Eldritch Focus
10 - ARCANA, Bloodline Spell
11 - Fighter Training, FEAT
12 - BONUS FEAT, Bloodline Spell
13 - FEAT, ARCANA
14 - Heavy Armour, Bloodline Spell
15 - Claw Pounce, Improved Spell Combat
16 - ARCANA
17 - Counterstrike, FEAT
18 - BONUS FEAT
19 - Greater Spell Combat, ARCANA
20 - Greater Spell Access
*Bloodline choice is not essential to build. Arcane is good for extra buffing, while Celestial patches up your DR disadvantage vs evil outsiders.
**If you take Dragon Style with your normal 3rd level feat, you can take Dragon Ferocity as your monk bonus even though Kata Master loses stunning fist. This means you've got two levels where you're not getting much use out of them (before FCT at 5th). If retraining is allowed, consider taking FCT + Dragon Style at 3 and then retrain to FCT + Dragon Style + Dragon Ferocity at 5.
Combat Style Master reduces swift action use, so it might be useful in the open feat slots. To take it you need a second style (which you can use with Dragon thanks to MoMS), probably Tiger Style. Improved Natural Attack is actually not worth it compared to Weapon Specialization.
Now, this is probably still not optimal since you're more or less spending a level to make up the Precise Strike gap, you still rely on Polymorph to keep your number of attacks up enough to compete with the high crit range, and you're still potentially vulnerable to DR. But it will pull its weight, and it's interesting both mechanically and thematically - the build really feels flamboyant and showy, with lunging and acrobatic charges.
Now, if Precise Strike didn't include that line about not working with natural attacks, I'd be all for it.
Well then...
A monk's unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.
I'm not sure what you meant by "Precise Strike" because the only thing by that name I could find is a teamwork feat. I am going to assume you meant Accurate Strike which says:
Accurate Strike (Ex)
Prerequisite: Magus 9
Benefit: The magus can expend 2 points from his arcane pool as a swift action to resolve all of his melee weapon attacks until the end of his turn as melee touch attacks.
I do not see where it specifies that they have to be manufactured weapons. It says "melee weapon attacks". But even if it does have to be a manufactured weapon the above quoted part in Monk's Unarmed Strike takes care of that.
As for that working with your natural attacks that is what Feral Combat training is for.
Prerequisite: Improved Unarmed Strike, Weapon Focus with selected natural weapon.
Benefit: Choose one of your natural weapons. While using the selected natural weapon, you can apply the effects of feats that have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite, as well as effects that augment an unarmed strike.
Special: If you are a monk, you can use the selected natural weapon with your flurry of blows class feature.
I would not base the effectiveness of a build on Accurate Strike though considering the speed at which that would eat up your Arcane Pool. However, for DPR calculations I would definitely want it there.
And when the thread opens by asking how well it works, mechanically
Actually, that is not what the original post was asking. Its right there in the topic. It is asking "A Natural Attacking Magus, Can it Work?". To which I think we have found that the answer is a resounding "yes".
That doesn't mean he can't be wrong. Look at the evidence in this thread. Look at the fact that you thought the build kestral used - Mathwei's build - "was a pretty bad build to be honest."
It also doesn't mean that he is automatically wrong because the build that was posted is suboptimal. Nor does this go towards answering the question that was posed.
Also see above about the difference between Precise Strike (a teamwork feat?) and Accurate Strike (a Magus Arcana).
What you say about the Catfolk build is close to what I had in mind. I would probably use Kensai rather than Eldritch Scion but I can see why you chose that.
Also, I can tell that Mathwei agrees with me about Accurate Strike working as he said this, here:
4. Caliking, you only get 4 natural attacks (the other 2 or iterative attacks with weapons) making all of them at BaB-5 and your iterative attacks are also at -5 (except the first one). You get a lot of attacks but with the natural penalty and the spell combat penalty you will be missing a lot. Arcane accuracy will remove the penalty (mostly) but any of the other forms will give you so much more from it.
(Calikang is nice but please remember you only get what's on their stat block so only 4 natural attacks and nasty penalties if you try to wield manufactured weapons. A sorceror or witch/hexcrafter who can grow claws however would get all 6 attacks).
Also all of it's special abilities are lost since the polymorph school doesn't allow you to get ANY of it's powers. It's a nice form but not good enough.
For the record he didn't rate Calikang strongly. As you can see, it is his 4th choice. The point is that he agrees that Arcane Accuracy works with natural attacks. Honestly, I do not understand where this disagreement comes from.
|
|
Precise Strike: Applies to A, but never if A = Natural Attack
Kata Monk (or Boar Style or Hamatulatsu Strike) = Unarmed Strike is A
Feral Combat Training = Natural Attack is Unarmed Strike is A
Precise Strike applies to unarmed strike, because of Kata Monk, but since we have the "excluding natural attacks" line, it still should not apply to natural attacks.
If that's the case, then the Kata Master cannot use their unarmed strike with Precise Strike, since the UAS also counts as a natural attack. This is clearly not the intent, thus the more reasonable reading is that the kata master's ability specifically overrides the "no natural weapons" clause. Note that kata master says swashbuckler deeds work with UAS full stop, while Boar Style etc merely change the damage type of your UAS to piercing (giving it the property it needs for deeds to work, but not bypassing other restrictions).
Regular Magus can actually pounce via Bladed Dash, if only at half the range. Dash is a really cool spell.
Dash is a cool spell, but it's not pounce: it only lets you attack any given creature once.
That doesn't mean he can't be wrong. Look at the evidence in this thread. Look at the fact that you thought the build kestral used - Mathwei's build - "was a pretty bad build to be honest."It also doesn't mean that he is automatically wrong because the build that was posted is suboptimal. Nor does this go towards answering the question that was posed.
If the build he posted was suboptimal, then he has failed to provide evidence that the natural weapons magus is optimal. He also failed to provide evidence for the claims that DR and AoMF are unimportant - where I provided counterevidence.
Meanwhile, I've also attempted to answer the question posted by comparing a generic natural weapons magus with a similar rapier magus that's not optimal but that "works." The verdict:
Conclusion: natural weapons exclusive build is viable, and under optimal conditions can beat a simple [ed: not optimized] crit-fishing magus on damage. However, DR is a serious weakness and an AoMF is a must. You shouldn't ignore weapon damage – it may be a minority of your damage output but it's a significant minority and a decent Str mod may give you an edge over that guy with the rapier. Also from the OP's POV you'll need to abandon your natural natural weapons for a polymorphed form, otherwise your number of attacks won't keep up.
As for build...
What you say about the Catfolk build is close to what I had in mind. I would probably use Kensai rather than Eldritch Scion but I can see why you chose that.
I really like Kensai and it seems a natural fit with the monk dip, assuming the GM lets your chosen weapon be a natural weapon or UAS (neither of which are actually a "martial or exotic melee weapon"). The MAD factor put me off, especially with diminished spellcasting on top of the lost level - painful when your high-level game relies on polymorph. I might see what I can do with that later, maybe a different race with more appropriate stat mods. Of course, with stats like the OP's it's less of an issue...
|
|
That works, but as you say true pounce is superior if you can get it.
I'm not sure Kata Master + FCT is all that exploitable. As far as I can tell, the classes that have the most advantages with natural weapons - druids, rangers, barbarians, alchemists, and synth summoners - don't have access to precise strike. The classes that could make use of it are the swashbuckler itself, the magus (through arcane deed) and the daring champion cavalier. Precise Strike is a big boost to the magus, but it's not overpowering - losing the caster level hurts and you have to choose between the otherwise optimal FCT (claw) and the calikang's 6 slams.
The natural weapons swashbuckler and cavalier run into the same problem as the magus: precise strike requires you to give up your attack with the weapon in your other hand. So they go from having two claw attacks (and maybe a bite), to one claw attack with + level damage (and maybe a bite with no bonus damage because it doesn't have FCT). That doesn't sound impressive to me compared to a rapier. If you flurry with your claw you get the same attack sequence as someone flurrying with UAS, which also gets precise strike in this multiclass, so the claw's no improvement. And again, this requires a monk dip and you can't flurry in armour.
Honestly, the last few posts have less turned me off natural weapons magus and more off allowing magi to take Precise Strike as an arcana. It's an unnecessary buff for the rapier & scimitar that widens the gap between those weapons and a number of suboptimal but viable weapon choices like the katana (which requires an extra feat to use precise strike) or the staff (for which you are SOL).
|
|
Actually reading the Monk now... I don't think it'd apply. The quote I see is:
A monk's unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.So, for the purpose of Precise Strike, which improves manufactured weapons, it's a manufactured weapon. Nothing in that wording says "an unarmed strike is a natural weapon", only that it may be treated as one. My understanding of that quote is that you use it as whichever is more beneficial to boosting the unarmed strike, so basically everything works. But unless that wording is transferred via Feral Combat Training... I don't think it works.
Yes, that wording is transferred with FCT. That was Lune's point - if the UAS counts as a manufactured weapon for Precise Strike, so does the FCT weapon.
If I were to not allow Precise Strike Arcane Deed I absolutely would do so as a straight ban. I don't like banning things but if I do I'm honest about the reasons, and in this case it's because I don't like what it does, not because I don't think it's supposed to work.
|
|
Also, I can tell that Mathwei agrees with me about Accurate Strike working as he said this, here:
For the record he didn't rate Calikang strongly. As you can see, it is his 4th choice. The point is that he agrees that Arcane Accuracy works with natural attacks. Honestly, I do not understand where this disagreement comes from.4. Caliking, you only get 4 natural attacks (the other 2 or iterative attacks with weapons) making all of them at BaB-5 and your iterative attacks are also at -5 (except the first one). You get a lot of attacks but with the natural penalty and the spell combat penalty you will be missing a lot. Arcane accuracy will remove the penalty (mostly) but any of the other forms will give you so much more from it.
(Calikang is nice but please remember you only get what's on their stat block so only 4 natural attacks and nasty penalties if you try to wield manufactured weapons. A sorceror or witch/hexcrafter who can grow claws however would get all 6 attacks).
Also all of it's special abilities are lost since the polymorph school doesn't allow you to get ANY of it's powers. It's a nice form but not good enough.
that was actually an old statement that was revised when they changed the rules on spellcombat requiring hand based attacks. At that point Calikang became the top choice of forms for MPII.
Also I do appreciate your efforts to continue the argument for the natural based Magus but you don't need to. I gave up on this thread long ago do to the sheer number of false assumptions and incorrect rules they are spewing in here.Honestly they have decided that it shouldn't work so are using every possible excuse to deny the rulings the devs have made to minimize the effectiveness of the build.
I'd recommend letting it go and watch this thread spiral off the normally read pages and try again later. Right now no one who would be interested in this will be able to get past the noise to signal ratio of these thread. That's what I did but my name keeps coming up.
Oh and since you might have missed it, Prehensile Hair is hand based and qualifies for Spellcombat. It's part of the basics of the build. Cast with the beard and attack with the claws/slams, if you feel like it drop a feat for Natural Spellcombat for the bite and keep the full routine going.
Mathwei, I share your frustration. But, I do not think it was all for naught. With the proper guidance I think that everyone has reached the same conclusion now.
I think that there have been several miscommunications. I take responsibility for my part in that, I know that text isn't always the easiest form of communication. It took a while to get to the crux of the matter but I think everyone is on the same page now.
I might be in the minority on that one but it looks like a grey area at best.
What is the grey area then? I think I got lost in your description of what you disliked. Is it something about Feral Combat Training?
Anyway, thank you for running the numbers with the IUAS and FCT in. Perhaps it would have been easier if I just would have posted sooner that a natural attacking build should include that. I do not mean it as a personal slight but I thought it should be an easy assumption to make. I think if that build went with Kensai it would work well too. I would try to include Multiattack as well but that would likely have to be pushed back significantly due to other feats being higher priority. I understand that it is with DM permission only but I haven't found a DM who wouldn't regularly allow that feat for a character who can take advantage of it regularly. Those two things should push the DPR up significantly.
I think we are all in agreement than the answer to the OP's original question is: "Yes. In fact, it can work fairly well." Maybe we should create another thread and see how far we can optimize it? I'd be down for giving some suggestions.
|
|
I guess I didn't make the point I was trying to clear with the Unarmed Strike thing. An unarmed strike is normally treated as a manufactured weapon, so it getting Precise Strike isn't really a big deal. But a Natural Weapon getting it looks to me like trying to sneak through a loophole because that was explicitly shot down in the text, and treating it as both A and B doesn't change the fact that underneath, it's still B, and Precise Strike doesn't work with B. I similarly don't think I'd be okay with a Monk's unarmed strike getting some ability that was said "this works for natural weapons, but never if they're unarmed strikes". The fact that you can treat the unarmed strike as a natural weapon doesn't mean it no longer is what it is.
While an unarmed strike uses iterative attacks, it is actually normally treated as a natural weapon for purposes of spells and effects that enhance natural vs manufactured weapons. For example, magic weapon reads "You can't cast this spell on a natural weapon, such as an unarmed strike (instead, see magic fang)." Align weapon has similar wording.
The entire point of the monk's special UAS ability is to bypass such restrictions. A monk's UAS does in fact stop being a natural weapon if that's disadvantageous to the monk.
That's also not factoring in that the pre-reqs to set up would require a +1 to hit (Weapon Focus), just the raw "what happens when I add 15 precision damage to each hit".
So you're also not factoring in the downsides of the monk dip: lost BAB, lost level of spellcasting, slower progression of class features, the fact that precise strike itself is a level behind? Plus the opportunity cost of selecting FCT over some other feat?
On top of that, while it's a big jump for the natural weapons magus, it still doesn't increase its DPR far above the example weapon magus - certainly not enough to make it overpowering given the above costs.
Natural Magus: 84.9375 (no spell), 96.05(SG), 165.75 (FB)
Weapon Magus: 71.9825 (no spell), 127.525 (SG), 158.075 (FB)