| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm wondering what classes really should be in the "first pass" of new classes.
I count: Magus, Oracle, Witch, and the Occultist (it's the resonance class). Anything else?
I'd like Summoner to be on that list, but I can live without it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don’t know that we need Occultist right away just because it uses one of the new mechanics. Sorcerer and Alchemist can have a while as the royalty of resonance.I feel like one could pretty easily slot the Occultist into "Mage-Knight- Defensive version" to be the counterpart to the Magus's "Mage-Knight - Offensive version" just based on how those two played in PF1.
Much like how the Fighter is the "good at weapons class" and "good at armor" was given to someone else, as per the fighter blog.
I'm not sure it's the right approach to split two variations of the same concept to two different classes with very different fluff. In particular, shouldn't the offense/defense of a mage-knight depend more on spell and fighting style selection than whether they're an arcane or psychic caster?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't care about the magus specifically, but warrior/mage is an archetype that should be supported in the core rules (as opposed to being a prestige class bolt-on as it was in 3.5/PF1). For all we know, the new action economy might do the trick without the need for a class.
Based on the Cleric Class Preview, the Magus (and Bard for that matter) will get a maximum of 4 spells per spell level. The arcane pool could be the spell points mentioned. The arcana could work similar to domain powers.
We don’t know how the classes will progress aside from class feats and so on.
And we know if a caster wants to cast 3 spells on a round he can, as long as they have one component.
So if they give a class spellstrike and they state as part of the somatic component or touch spell, you can make a melee attack.
So let’s say Shocking Grasp is a level 1 VS spell of touch range
A level 1 magus can use spellstrike to cast the spell and attack, and then attack a second time with his sword at the usual -5.
Or let’s say you have a spell that is only verbal touch, then you can power attack and then spellstrike with the spell with 1 component only with -5.
And there you go, the first part of what makes a magus a magus.
The second part is that as you level up you can use full amour without arcane spell failure chance.
The third is arcane points.
The fourth are Arcanas and they are Magus Feats.
Well if we don’t get it as core I hope it will be easy enough to homebrew.
(I know that dual wilding changed a lot now, you make attacks with each weapon with any of your action but you get a lesser penalty that attacking multiple times with the same weapon. That’s why spell combat is not really needed)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The magus isn't just a fighter that can cast spells or a wizard that can fight. A magus would need a specific set of proficiencies, spellcasting, skills, and class features that might not be possible with an archetype.
I would like to see a warrior-mage viable from core, as well, but I also don't need it to be the magus. A bag of feats to allow armored casting and spell strike, and I am good.
I enjoy the magus in PF1, including those things unique to it (arcana, spell combat, etc.), but I don't think it needs to be in the new Core.
Warriors that mix spellcasting and weapon swings are fine. Even cutting down a tasered (= Shocking Grasp-ed) target is clearly viable to me.
But no Bladed Dash, ever. That entire abomination of a spell line is a horrible insult against other martial characters.
Warriors that mix spellcasting and weapon swings are fine. Even cutting down a tasered (= Shocking Grasp-ed) target is clearly viable to me.
But no Bladed Dash, ever. That entire abomination of a spell line is a horrible insult against other martial characters.
With the way action economy has been revised for PF2, I doubt spells like Bladed Dash or similar will be common. At least I hope they wont.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
With the way action economy has been revised for PF2, I doubt spells like Bladed Dash or similar will be common. At least I hope they wont.
I dunno, a two action spell that let you move double your speed and make one attack would exactly duplicate a Fighter's Sudden Charge (a first level Class Feat), except it would cost a Spell Slot to use rather than being at-will.
That seems reasonable enough.
I have loved the Pathfinder Magus. Fantastic class, modular, flavourful and efficient.
I hope to not see it in Pathfinder 2. Instead I want to see its features distributed and melted into other classes. I want to see Clerics hammering inflict spells with maces. I want to see wizards imbuing their weapons and using transmutations to become good combatants. I want to see shields temporarily bulwarked and used for bashing counter spells.
I do hope to see a new version of the Magus, a true gish, closer to the Eldritch Knight, but enough archetype versatility to embody the nimble magus too.
Out of curiosity, why is Bladed Dash an abomination? I haven't looked at that spell much.
Out of curiosity, why is Bladed Dash an abomination? I haven't looked at that spell much.It's not an abomination by itself, it's the fact that you can combine it with spell combat to essentially cast it, move 30 feet, and full attack.
Not quite correct.
Bladed Dash allows you to immediately move 30' without provoking, and do a single attack somewhere along the move.
Greater Bladed Dash (Bard 5, Magus 5, Skald 5: hence level 13 characters) allows you to make a single melee attack against every creature you pass during the 30 feet of your dash. You cannot attack an individual creature more than once with spell.
Neither spell guarantees that you will hit, you still have to make your attack roll.
I am having trouble seeing how it is an abomination.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's an "abomination" because of spell combat. Which allows you to cast a spell and do a full attack at the cost of a -2 penalty to all your attack rolls that round as a full round action.
So you use Spell Combat to cast Bladed Dash, move 30 feet, attack someone along the way, then use a Full Attack Action on whoever is close to you. That's a Full Attack plus an extra attack plus full movement, which is two turns worth of actions, just for -2.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's an abomination because of spell combat. Which allows you to cast a spell and do a full attack at the cost of a -2 penalty to all your attack rolls that round as a full round action.
So you use Spell Combat to cast Bladed Dash, move 30 feet, attack someone along the way, then use a Full Attack Action on whoever is close to you. That's a Full Attack plus an extra attack plus full movement, which is two turns worth of actions, just for -2.
And a 2nd level spell slot. Maybe it should be 3rd level, but I'm not seeing the abomination...
I should add that I only used abomination because that's what other people were calling it. It looks kinda too efficient but I have no strong feelings about it.
It's an "abomination" because of spell combat. Which allows you to cast a spell and do a full attack at the cost of a -2 penalty to all your attack rolls that round as a full round action.
So you use Spell Combat to cast Bladed Dash, move 30 feet, attack someone along the way, then use a Full Attack Action on whoever is close to you. That's a Full Attack plus an extra attack plus full movement, which is two turns worth of actions, just for -2.
Given the list of other really good 2nd level spells competing for spell slots, most magi won't have more than 1-2 bladed dash/day, even at high level.
I'm not sure about core, but I'd like Paizo to get it's new re-imagined version of the Magus in V2 as soon as possible.
But... I'd like them to do a good job instead of just re-hashing what they had in 1E.
Another class I'd really like to see is Kineticist, mostly because 2 of my players play them, and they are really young (7 years old). We'll continue playing V1 until that happens.
Also, I like hybrid classes, as long as they bring something new to the table. For example Hunter is quite popular at my tables and is different enough from a Druid and Ranger to warrant a class.
No arcane spell failure on armor!
An armed and armored wizard sounds intriguing.
Or an Arcane Armor Training feat that doesn't suck.
There is no need for arcane armor training. There is no arcane failure in the play test document.
Oh, I thought it was something you wanted rather than something that's already in.
Very good. Arcane spell failure seemed like something that, again, was a holdover from older editions that didn't make a lot of sense given the numerous (usually class-based) exceptions.