Secrets of Magic Playtest!

The problem with that approach, Kilgorin, is that you are then effectively giving the Magus a class feature that just says "add your weapon damage to your cantrip damage", and that is going to throw the damage assumptions of the system all kinds of out of whack.

We're talking about spending two actions for an extra 1d4+INT damage. It's the same as the fighter's Power Attack feat, except the chance to hit is lower than a fighter.

Fighter with 18 STR and longsword using Power Attack - +9 to hit and an average of 13 damage.

Magus with 18 STR, 16 INT, longsword, using two actions to "Spellstrike" (as I described earlier) - +7 to hit and an average of 14 damage.

So a lower attack bonus is made up for with 1 extra point of damage on a hit. And you're only increasing the damage with cantrips by 2.5 every 2 levels. Hardly seems like a power creep. The only time the power really excels is with slotted spells, but limited to those that require a spell attack and limited by the magus's smaller number of slots.

One of the best ways to playtest classes is to push them to their limits—essentially, to try to "break" them, then report where and how they broke to guide revisions—which can be a little at odds with Organized Play, where you might be meeting people for the first time when you sit down at a convention table.

This makes sense and is very well worded. Thank you.

MaxAstro wrote:

The problem with that approach, Kilgorin, is that you are then effectively giving the Magus a class feature that just says "add your weapon damage to your cantrip damage", and that is going to throw the damage assumptions of the system all kinds of out of whack.

We're talking about spending two actions for an extra 1d4+INT damage. It's the same as the fighter's Power Attack feat, except the chance to hit is lower than a fighter.

Fighter with 18 STR and longsword using Power Attack - +9 to hit and an average of 13 damage.

Magus with 18 STR, 16 INT, longsword, using two actions to "Spellstrike" (as I described earlier) - +7 to hit and an average of 14 damage.

So a lower attack bonus is made up for with 1 extra point of damage on a hit. And you're only increasing the damage with cantrips by 2.5 every 2 levels. Hardly seems like a power creep. The only time the power really excels is with slotted spells, but limited to those that require a spell attack and limited by the magus's smaller number of slots.

This escalates a lot more for the Magus than the Fighter. Specifically, at 20th, it's 46.5 for the Fighter (or 60.5 with a d12 weapon), while for the Magus it's 71 with Telekinetic Projectile. And that's on a cantrip, not even getting into their actual spells.

I'm not overjoyed with the current Magus setup either, but doing this is a big deal and would require a very careful balance examination.

James Case wrote:

Hi everyone, update here:
Given the short playtest duration, Covid-related limited play environments, and the online convention lineup that falls during this playtest, we have decided against using the magus and summoner playtest classes in official Pathfinder Society games.

This is a real bummer as I was very much looking forward to playing these classes in PFS to test them out in different situations and different groups (I loved back playtesting the Investigator in PFS 1e).

That said, I understand the logic, especially with the short playtest run that was decided on.

can i just say that summoner really needs to be edited down. 8 paragraphs to explain basic concepts like shared HP pools? i think you need to trim the fat.

can i just say that summoner really needs to be edited down. 8 paragraphs to explain basic concepts like shared HP pools? i think you need to trim the fat.

Eh, it's the playtest. Editing, clarifying, and simplifying is always coming once they codify the rules.

Arcane Fist seems a bit overkill - it grants crit specialization at level 1, which admittedly isn't a showstopper, but it's both the quickest way to get access to crit spec and better than any other one-level unarmed feat, including being a Monk. In fact, it'd likely be easier to take the Magus Archetype and then nab Arcane Fist with it's "take a first level feat from" feat, if you wanted fast off-class access to the crit spec and the boosted unarmed strikes, because then you'd get access to the magus archetype's baseline abilities, whatever they may be, over the alternative of taking monk and getting a skill or martial artist, and getting scaling unarmed training if your class didn't already.

It's kind of niche in that it wouldn't then let you go on to take all the other unarmed-boosting feats, but it's still just a little bit off-kilter, I think.

Arcane Fist seems a bit overkill - it grants crit specialization at level 1, which admittedly isn't a showstopper, but it's both the quickest way to get access to crit spec and better than any other one-level unarmed feat, including being a Monk. In fact, it'd likely be easier to take the Magus Archetype and then nab Arcane Fist with it's "take a first level feat from" feat, if you wanted fast off-class access to the crit spec and the boosted unarmed strikes, because then you'd get access to the magus archetype's baseline abilities, whatever they may be, over the alternative of taking monk and getting a skill or martial artist, and getting scaling unarmed training if your class didn't already.

It's kind of niche in that it wouldn't then let you go on to take all the other unarmed-boosting feats, but it's still just a little bit off-kilter, I think.

I think it would work better as an Arcane Synthesis than a feat, personally.

I aggree with Angel, make the slide a normal part of Striking Spell (and rename that Spell Combat, make SpellStrike a separate feature/action) and replace Slide by Arcane Fist.

I aggree with Angel, make the slide a normal part of Striking Spell (and rename that Spell Combat, make SpellStrike a separate feature/action) and replace Slide by Arcane Fist.

Add me in on that too.

That said, I highly expect we'll have a handful more syntheses when all is said and done. Hopefully a more defensive style that can leverage the Shield cantrip to a greater degree than other casters?

My only concern with making slide a "default" is that I'm not sure how I feel about a ranged Magus having access to it; I think it's very intentional that you have to choose between slide and ranged weapons.

My only concern with making slide a "default" is that I'm not sure how I feel about a ranged Magus having access to it; I think it's very intentional that you have to choose between slide and ranged weapons.

its such a small benefit for the ranged magus, so i disagree, it just ends up being used defensively for them.

Defensively it's potentially a really big benefit; that's exactly my concern. It allows the ranged magus to kite very effectively.

Defensively it's potentially a really big benefit; that's exactly my concern. It allows the ranged magus to kite very effectively.

it allows it to kite while doing its main shtick

wich...every ranged attacker in the game currently can but eldritch archer wich still gets numerous other options.

Also, this would leave no incentive what so ever to have a magus wielding a 1 handed weapon, which feels like it would be pretty weird overall.

Also, this would leave no incentive what so ever to have a magus wielding a 1 handed weapon, which feels like it would be pretty weird overall.

in what way? because 1e? that seems a weird issue considering all the things that didnt get transferred over.

Defensively it's potentially a really big benefit; that's exactly my concern. It allows the ranged magus to kite very effectively.

You have to remember many spells have limited range: you're using a Telekinetic Projectile, Produce Flame, Tanglefoot and the like, you've only got a 30' range: not even a full move for a lot of creatures. It's not like you can keep it up unless it's just you and a single creature in an open field with nothing interfering.

Also, this would leave no incentive what so ever to have a magus wielding a 1 handed weapon, which feels like it would be pretty weird overall.

So they get another ability instead? It's not like they can't get another one.

I'm *so* happy that the new version of the summoner has a built in way to make dragon eidolons. That was one of my biggest issues with the unchained summoner.

I'm *so* happy that the new version of the summoner has a built in way to make dragon eidolons. That was one of my biggest issues with the unchained summoner.

*looks at avatar* Hmmmmm... >.>

About the magus, one handed could have another benefit yeah. Maybe the "book" feat could become a new synthesis, giving you different kind of bonuses by using your spellbook as a floating magic shield.
If you prefer a purely free hand magus, I'm sure we can find some things. Like, when they infuse a spell with Spell Combat, they can give themselves a +1 bonus to damage with their weapon for 1 round without using an action. Would stack with Energize Weapon.

Also, this would leave no incentive what so ever to have a magus wielding a 1 handed weapon, which feels like it would be pretty weird overall.

TBH I'm not sure you need special incentive for that right now. The intrinsic benefits of being able to do things like wear a shield or not have to spend additional actions on consumables is already pretty attractive compared to a couple points of damage.

And it kinda sucks right now that Slide is incompatible with things like the "Raise a Tome" feat the magus can pick up too.

I agree that raise a tome needs to be fixed to work with the one handed magus, but a full on shield for magus is a huge ask. Strangely (since warpriest does) the magus doesn't even get the shield block reaction, even though that seems like the quintessential warfare training feat, but that is probably because they have no actions available for a shield anyway. If shield magus becomes a thing, it is going to have to include a reactive shield feature built into the class.

The spell parry line is already a cool and powerful thing that the one-handed Magus can buy into to turn the weaker weapon choice into an advantage. If that's good enough for the Fighter I think it'd be good enough for the Magus.

The spell parry line is already a cool and powerful thing that the one-handed Magus can buy into to turn the weaker weapon choice into an advantage. If that's good enough for the Fighter I think it'd be good enough for the Magus.

i actually have trouble finding room for it. level 4, bespell strikes seems like a no nonsense damage buff that leads into even more damage for a slide casting magus.

level 6, energized strikes

8, spell swipe

10, portal slide

12, bespelled persistence

14, hasted assault

16, maybe here, maybe get it here. but then i dont get capture spell. so more likely quickened spellstrike

18, second chance strike

20, supreme

i know there are more feats, and you can argue options endlessly. but for slide casting, i dont see better options, and i can shore up my reaction and defenses vs spells via orc race with superstition reaction and or ferocity because they dont overlap often. plus gives me d12 hp start so i can start with 20HP.

level 4, bespell strikes seems like a no nonsense damage buff that leads into even more damage for a slide casting magus.

It's only for when you cast a NON cantrip spell and only until the end of the turn so for me, it's not super exciting: at most it's +1d6 to 4 strikes a day. You'd get more mileage out of the feat if you cast true strike and then make 2 strikes than using it with spellstrike.

Martialmasters wrote:

level 4, bespell strikes seems like a no nonsense damage buff that leads into even more damage for a slide casting magus.

It's only for when you cast a NON cantrip spell and only until the end of the turn so for me, it's not super exciting: at most it's +1d6 to 4 strikes a day. You'd get more mileage out of the feat if you cast true strike and then make 2 strikes than using it with spellstrike.

oh i know, but i have a free hand (scrolls, wands) and 3 spell slots, and can always get a staff and use its stuff too (like divination staff for true strikes), and when i get 1 action self haste its even better.

graystone wrote:

Martialmasters wrote:

level 4, bespell strikes seems like a no nonsense damage buff that leads into even more damage for a slide casting magus.

It's only for when you cast a NON cantrip spell and only until the end of the turn so for me, it's not super exciting: at most it's +1d6 to 4 strikes a day. You'd get more mileage out of the feat if you cast true strike and then make 2 strikes than using it with spellstrike.

oh i know, but i have a free hand (scrolls, wands) and 3 spell slots, and can always get a staff and use its stuff too (like divination staff for true strikes), and when i get 1 action self haste its even better.

If you're spending cash on it, sure you'll bet more out of it. I'm steering away from doing that though as it's not clear how the 4 slot system actually works with scrolls and staves once you start losing lower level slots. As it stands, IMO, it looks like you stop being able to cast spells of that level so you can only use scrolls/staves for spells that match your slot levels. If your group is allowing you the full range of scrolls/staves then go for it.

Martialmasters wrote:

graystone wrote:

Martialmasters wrote:

level 4, bespell strikes seems like a no nonsense damage buff that leads into even more damage for a slide casting magus.

It's only for when you cast a NON cantrip spell and only until the end of the turn so for me, it's not super exciting: at most it's +1d6 to 4 strikes a day. You'd get more mileage out of the feat if you cast true strike and then make 2 strikes than using it with spellstrike.

oh i know, but i have a free hand (scrolls, wands) and 3 spell slots, and can always get a staff and use its stuff too (like divination staff for true strikes), and when i get 1 action self haste its even better.

If you're spending cash on it, sure you'll bet more out of it. I'm steering away from doing that though as it's not clear how the 4 slot system actually works with scrolls and staves once you start losing lower level slots. As it stands, IMO, it looks like you stop being able to cast spells of that level so you can only use scrolls/staves for spells that match your slot levels. If your group is allowing you the full range of scrolls/staves then go for it.

you can use a lower level spell in a higher level slot by RAW. even if it doesnt heighten.

Arachnofiend wrote:

The spell parry line is already a cool and powerful thing that the one-handed Magus can buy into to turn the weaker weapon choice into an advantage. If that's good enough for the Fighter I think it'd be good enough for the Magus.

i actually have trouble finding room for it. level 4, bespell strikes seems like a no nonsense damage buff that leads into even more damage for a slide casting magus.

level 6, energized strikes

8, spell swipe

10, portal slide

12, bespelled persistence

14, hasted assault

16, maybe here, maybe get it here. but then i dont get capture spell. so more likely quickened spellstrike

18, second chance strike

20, supreme

i know there are more feats, and you can argue options endlessly. but for slide casting, i dont see better options, and i can shore up my reaction and defenses vs spells via orc race with superstition reaction and or ferocity because they dont overlap often. plus gives me d12 hp start so i can start with 20HP.

I'm kinda trying to analyze these build-definers in a vacuum and ignore the separate issues that make them non-viable since the Magus has a lot of those. If we assume that the Magus functions well on a baseline then Spell Parry is a Good Thing that a 1H Magus would be able to build into that someone using a 2H weapon has no access to.

Honestly I like slide being an every Magus thing if only because otherwise they sort of turn into a stump since doing their full turn usually leaves them with no ability to move.

It’s already flavored in such a way that a Magus can sort of go their own way with the “how” it works, which is nice.

If portal was a Feat and the one handed Magus got something else in the class path that’d probably be enough, even if it was something akin to a magic shield or a free shield spell casting or the PF1 arcane theurge. A +1 AC would probably be appropriate.

you can use a lower level spell in a higher level slot by RAW. even if it doesnt heighten.

No you can't. I've seen a random post from some other place that supposedly has a dev say you can but that #1 isn't official, even if it was the dev and #2 isn't a rule written in any book, so it's about as far away from RAW as it gets...

I agree on idea of making Slide a generic part of the signature class feature and having Arcane Fists as a synthesis. In one my posts, I suggested as much.

The way I see it, a Synthesis could consist of two benefits:

How about making Spell Combat the 1h+free synthesis. The ability to release spells as a single action, "normally" after infusing them.

I think it would be very difficult to balance getting a full action discount on spells. I would value that significantly higher than getting a free Step, or even a free Stride.

The only thing I can see as a potential balancing factor is making the quicker spellcast deal reduced damage (say, 50%). So you could Strike+Shocking Grasp for 2 actions, dealing half damage or for the full three actions at full damage.

Of course, this wouldn't effect conditions, but I'm comparatively more fine with that.

Martialmasters wrote:

you can use a lower level spell in a higher level slot by RAW. even if it doesnt heighten.

No you can't. I've seen a random post from some other place that supposedly has a dev say you can but that #1 isn't official, even if it was the dev and #2 isn't a rule written in any book, so it's about as far away from RAW as it gets...

You absolutely can.

Both prepared and spontaneous spellcasters can cast a spell at a higher spell level than that listed for the spell. This is called heightening the spell. A prepared spellcaster can heighten a spell by preparing it in a higher-level slot than its normal spell level, while a spontaneous spellcaster can heighten a spell by casting it using a higher-level spell slot, so long as they know the spell at that level (see Heightened Spontaneous Spells below). When you heighten your spell, the spell’s level increases to match the higher level of the spell slot you’ve prepared it in or used to cast it. This is useful for any spell, because some effects, such as counteracting, depend on the spell’s level.

In addition, many spells have additional specific benefits when they are heightened, such as increased damage. These extra benefits are described at the end of the spell’s stat block.

Emphasis mine. Note that nothing says that only certain spells can be heightened, and in fact it says that heightening is useful for "any spell". Also, if only spells with "additional specific benefits" could be heightened, there would be no need to say "in addition".

Plus, just as an example, Charm would be a garbage spell at most levels if you could only prepare it at 1st, 4th, and 8th.

Emphasis mine. Note that nothing says that only certain spells can be heightened, and in fact it says that heightening is useful for "any spell". Also, if only spells with "additional specific benefits" could be heightened, there would be no need to say "in addition".

Plus, just as an example, Charm would be a garbage spell at most levels if you could only prepare it at 1st, 4th, and 8th.

I read it as being about casting a lower level spell in a higher slot without heightening it: if it's about heightening a 1st level spell to make it a 5th level spell so it fits in a 5th level slot, then I misread it and I 100% agree with you.

For context, there is a debate over in the 'can 4 slot casters use staves' thread about using un-heightened spells in higher level slots so when I was talking about not being able to use scrolls/staves, I assumed it was about that and not buying higher level heightened scrolls and staves.

Oh, do you mean for spontaneous casters? As in "can I spend a 4th level slot to cast Fear, which I only know at 3rd level"?

Yeah, that's a trickier question. I've ruled "no" for my home games but I don't know what the official answer would be.

Oh, do you mean for spontaneous casters? As in "can I spend a 4th level slot to cast Fear, which I only know at 3rd level"?

Yeah, that's a trickier question. I've ruled "no" for my home games but I don't know what the official answer would be.

Mmhmm, I rule "yes". If you want to spend a 4th level slot for a 3rd level spell, be my guest.

Oh, do you mean for spontaneous casters? As in "can I spend a 4th level slot to cast Fear, which I only know at 3rd level"?

Yeah, that's a trickier question. I've ruled "no" for my home games but I don't know what the official answer would be.

A dev explicitly stated in a reddit thread that downcasting is legal, whether or not that's good enough for you is another story. (wanna say it was actually Jason).

It's certainly not overpowered to do so IMO.

MaxAstro wrote:

Oh, do you mean for spontaneous casters? As in "can I spend a 4th level slot to cast Fear, which I only know at 3rd level"?

Yeah, that's a trickier question. I've ruled "no" for my home games but I don't know what the official answer would be.

A dev explicitly stated in a reddit thread that downcasting is legal, whether or not that's good enough for you is another story. (wanna say it was actually Jason).

LOL I'm not sure it's an actual dev posting, it's on some other place I don't frequent and even posts HERE aren't official unless the post itself says so... So, for myself that post isn't even worth reading.

It's certainly not overpowered to do so IMO.

I don't think it's a problem either way: I think what's important to know is if you are forced to take the heightened effect up to your level or if you may intentionally take a lower one. This is a different issue on what level it is for dispelling it for example as that should still be slot level.

Midnightoker wrote:

MaxAstro wrote:

Oh, do you mean for spontaneous casters? As in "can I spend a 4th level slot to cast Fear, which I only know at 3rd level"?

Yeah, that's a trickier question. I've ruled "no" for my home games but I don't know what the official answer would be.

A dev explicitly stated in a reddit thread that downcasting is legal, whether or not that's good enough for you is another story. (wanna say it was actually Jason).

LOL I'm not sure it's an actual dev posting, it's on some other place I don't frequent and even posts HERE aren't official unless the post itself says so... So, for myself that post isn't even worth reading.

Midnightoker wrote:

It's certainly not overpowered to do so IMO.

I don't think it's a problem either way: I think what's important to know is if you are forced to take the heightened effect up to your level or if you may intentionally take a lower one. This is a different issue on what level it is for dispelling it for example as that should still be slot level.

Well here is the comment just in case any one else wants to see it:

Link

But for the purposes of a Spontaneous Slot, it would obviously be a direct downgrade entirely. As in, you may spend your 4th level slot to cast a 3rd level spell you know but as a 3rd level spell in every regard (as if you had spent a 3rd level slot to do so).

This really only matters in the context of someone not having a lower level slot to cast the spell they want available, but having a higher level slot they haven't spent yet.

The number of times this is actually going to occur is already minute, and considering Spontaneous casters are a bit behind the curve compared to Prepared when it comes to versatility, I find that perfectly acceptable.

It's not really that complicated.

I don't think it's a problem either way: I think what's important to know is if you are forced to take the heightened effect up to your level or if you may intentionally take a lower one. This is a different issue on what level it is for dispelling it for example as that should still be slot level.

Oh! This, on the other hand, I've ruled the other way. If you know Dimension Door at 5th level, and you want to cast it at 5th level, but get the 4th level effect, I'll definitely allow that.

Again, no idea what the official ruling is.

Hoping we get a reference to the OG summoner in some way shape or form in the official release. I'd say his Eidolon is definitely a Beast Eidolon.

I love our gnome boi~

Hoping we get a reference to the OG summoner in some way shape or form in the official release. I'd say his Eidolon is definitely a Beast Eidolon.

I love our gnome boi~

It could be anything, though.

What the Eidolon looks like is irrelvant, it’s what it can do that counts.

This is why the current eidolon doesn't have enough customization.

That eidolon should be possible to make, but right now that eidolon is physically impossible to make.

This is why the current eidolon doesn't have enough customization.

That eidolon should be possible to make, but right now that eidolon is physically impossible to make.

Ok. What about it can’t you make? What does that eidolon actually do that you can’t do with the playtest version?

Here are Padrig’s PF1 stats. What about this can’t be done in PF2?

Martialmasters wrote:

you can use a lower level spell in a higher level slot by RAW. even if it doesnt heighten.

No you can't. I've seen a random post from some other place that supposedly has a dev say you can but that #1 isn't official, even if it was the dev and #2 isn't a rule written in any book, so it's about as far away from RAW as it gets...

It's literally how wizard spell casting works.

You learn fireball.

At level 20 you can use that fireball spell you learned long ago and cast it out of your 10th level slot...

graystone wrote:

Martialmasters wrote:

you can use a lower level spell in a higher level slot by RAW. even if it doesnt heighten.

No you can't. I've seen a random post from some other place that supposedly has a dev say you can but that #1 isn't official, even if it was the dev and #2 isn't a rule written in any book, so it's about as far away from RAW as it gets...

It's literally how wizard spell casting works.

You learn fireball.

At level 20 you can use that fireball spell you learned long ago and cast it out of your 10th level slot...

I think the point is more on spontaneous casters. That if you know fireball as a 3rd level spell and it isn’t one of your signature spells, you couldn’t then use a 5th level spell to cast it with the effects of a 3rd level spell because you’ve run out of 3rd level slots. I.e. you can only cast spells in the slots you have them jn your repetoire for, not using higher level slots for lower level spells.

Martialmasters wrote:

graystone wrote:

Martialmasters wrote:

you can use a lower level spell in a higher level slot by RAW. even if it doesnt heighten.

No you can't. I've seen a random post from some other place that supposedly has a dev say you can but that #1 isn't official, even if it was the dev and #2 isn't a rule written in any book, so it's about as far away from RAW as it gets...

It's literally how wizard spell casting works.

You learn fireball.

At level 20 you can use that fireball spell you learned long ago and cast it out of your 10th level slot...

I think the point is more on spontaneous casters. That if you know fireball as a 3rd level spell and it isn’t one of your signature spells, you couldn’t then use a 5th level spell to cast it with the effects of a 3rd level spell because you’ve run out of 3rd level slots. I.e. you can only cast spells in the slots you have them jn your repetoire for, not using higher level slots for lower level spells.

Maybe I am wrong and I'll have to double check. But I remember reading that all the summoner and Magus spell slots are considered signature spell slots.

Also unless I'm misunderstanding. But Magus isn't strictly spontaneous as it needs to prepare it's Slots still so would treat a staff as a prepared caster.

Paul Watson wrote:

Martialmasters wrote:

graystone wrote:

Martialmasters wrote:

you can use a lower level spell in a higher level slot by RAW. even if it doesnt heighten.

No you can't. I've seen a random post from some other place that supposedly has a dev say you can but that #1 isn't official, even if it was the dev and #2 isn't a rule written in any book, so it's about as far away from RAW as it gets...

It's literally how wizard spell casting works.

You learn fireball.

At level 20 you can use that fireball spell you learned long ago and cast it out of your 10th level slot...

I think the point is more on spontaneous casters. That if you know fireball as a 3rd level spell and it isn’t one of your signature spells, you couldn’t then use a 5th level spell to cast it with the effects of a 3rd level spell because you’ve run out of 3rd level slots. I.e. you can only cast spells in the slots you have them jn your repetoire for, not using higher level slots for lower level spells.

Maybe I am wrong and I'll have to double check. But I remember reading that all the summoner and Magus spell slots are considered signature spell slots.

Also unless I'm misunderstanding. But Magus isn't strictly spontaneous as it needs to prepare it's Slots still so would treat a staff as a prepared caster.

Magus is prepared. Summoner does have that clause. I’m not where this problem is in relation to the playtest. Maybe someone missed the Summoner text?

Temperans wrote:

This is why the current eidolon doesn't have enough customization.

That eidolon should be possible to make, but right now that eidolon is physically impossible to make.

Ok. What about it can’t you make? What does that eidolon actually do that you can’t do with the playtest version?

Here are Padrig’s PF1 stats. What about this can’t be done in PF2?

Chained Eidolon Evolutions

If reworked to Unchained Summoner:

Unchained Summoner Evolutions not to mention the choice of a subtype that gave abilities actually relevant to the subtype and not just things that should had been evolutions in the first place.

In any case the link you gave is literally level 1, the most basic of basic of Eidolons.