Secrets of Magic Final Week

Monday, October 12, 2020

Sketch of a pale male half-elf with white hair. He wears ornate robes and carries a sword in one hand. Magical fire dances in his other hand. Sketch of a dark-skinned human girl, wearing mage’s robes. She gestures to her eidolon, a dragon several feet taller than her.

Wayne’s new look for the iconic magus, and the brand-new iconic summoner and her dragon eidolon

The Pathfinder Secrets of Magic playtest ends on October 16! That means you have one more week to put the magus and summoner through their paces and fill out the survey. If you haven’t picked up the playtest yet, download it here. The surveys can be found at https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/SoMClassSurvey to take the main survey, as well as https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/SoMOpenResponse if there are details you’d like to add that aren’t addressed in the class survey. These surveys are the main way we can collect data and sort through it, but you can also join the discussion of the classes on the playtest forum.

If you’ve already filled out the survey, playtested with one these classes, or contributed to discussions, thank you so much! Our previous playtests have made a big difference for the final classes, and this one will as well. We appreciate you taking time in your games to improve our future releases!

Logan Bonner
Pathfinder Lead Designer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Pathfinder Playtest Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Pathfinder Second Edition
1 to 50 of 119 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Just completed my survey.

Basic Summery,

Magus: Needs full spellcasting(i.e. retaining spell slots, but not gaining 10th level spells or legendary spellcasting) and needs spellstrike to instead add a free strike action to the spell casting and tie the effect of the spell attack to the effect of the weapon attack.

Summoner: Needs full spellcasting(i.e. retaining spell slots, but not gaining 10th level spells or legendary spellcasting) along with having the eidolon have it's own pool of Hit Points. Also suggested a Summoning focus power along the lines of Summon Monster specialized to each magic tradition.

I argued that having more options doesn't make either class more powerful then any other due to the Action Economy. And the slower Proficiency progression makes them balanced compared to their more specialized peers.
The Magus should feel like a more desirable option to the Wizard/Fighter Multiclass and the Summoner especially for a Sakorian Godcaller should feel more like a full caster at the side of their deity or friend then heavily reliant on the eidolon being present to even be effective in any way.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Finished my survey too. IMO, both classes need a lot of work. Well see what happens when the book coms out I guess.

Dark Archive

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I kinda disagree about eidolon needing its own health pool since I think it helps to remember that eidolon isn't just the "pet", its the second character of the player.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
CorvusMask wrote:
I kinda disagree about eidolon needing its own health pool since I think it helps to remember that eidolon isn't just the "pet", its the second character of the player.

LOL Well some would rather have a pet and not a second character: linked actions/hp has been controversial from what I've seen.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
CorvusMask wrote:
I kinda disagree about eidolon needing its own health pool since I think it helps to remember that eidolon isn't just the "pet", its the second character of the player.
LOL Well some would rather have a pet and not a second character: linked actions/hp has been controversial from what I've seen.

The funny thing about the linked HP argument is that 1e eidolons already did that (sort of).

Level 1, summoner can take damage 1:1 to save eidolon from going down. Level 14, eidolon takes damage to prevent summoner going down.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Dubious Scholar wrote:
graystone wrote:
CorvusMask wrote:
I kinda disagree about eidolon needing its own health pool since I think it helps to remember that eidolon isn't just the "pet", its the second character of the player.
LOL Well some would rather have a pet and not a second character: linked actions/hp has been controversial from what I've seen.

The funny thing about the linked HP argument is that 1e eidolons already did that (sort of).

Level 1, summoner can take damage 1:1 to save eidolon from going down. Level 14, eidolon takes damage to prevent summoner going down.

If the playtest summoner had a Reaction to take the eidolons damage instead of a common hp pool, it'd be pretty close.

Sczarni

13 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I 100% disagree. Magus and summoner are such that I want them to expand on their unique features. Giving them full casting will make them very bland. Id rather get rid of magic all together for these two and come up with interesting spell like abilities for Magus through focus points and have even better ways than most at restoring focus points during combat. Maybe even a focus spell that allows you to mimic a single target spell to enhance damage, but still costs a focus point.

With summoner if we give them full casting, the Eidolon will be incredibly bland. It will be a flavorless AC. We already have those. They are called Druids.

Let's have something we don't have and that is an interesting Eidolon with a lot of customization built in. Why are people so keen on trying to reinvent existing classes? If you want a spellcasting class, we have those. Just play one of them. Lets get something truly unique.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

That Eidolon up there in the image at the beginning looks like a dragon puppy.

Contributing Artist

20 people marked this as a favorite.
UnArcaneElection wrote:

That Eidolon up there in the image at the beginning looks like a dragon puppy.

Or a stylised version of what a young teenage girl imagines a dragon-friend would look like.


I actually suggested in my feedback that slot-spellcasting felt more thematically relevant to Magi than Summoners, (though I did also note that it feels important for them to be able to summon,) so. I don't envy their position making new stuff for a crowd of people with many different views of these classes. :b

They have their own views, of course, and will make a good effort to provide something neat. Just remember: at the end of the day, There's Always Homebrew™.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Alfa/Polaris wrote:

I actually suggested in my feedback that slot-spellcasting felt more thematically relevant to Magi than Summoners, (though I did also note that it feels important for them to be able to summon,) so. I don't envy their position making new stuff for a crowd of people with many different views of these classes. :b

They have their own views, of course, and will make a good effort to provide something neat. Just remember: at the end of the day, There's Always Homebrew™.

I feel like 4 slot casting works great for Summoners IF they get some sort of expanded or renewable Summoning spell bonus slots to go with it.

Either a "Summon X as a focus spell" like Wild Shape that is a legitimate spell slot per encounter with a strict thematic limitation, or a "Summon Font" works, but at that point I think the "4 slots of anything they want" is a perfect compliment.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Have a final encounter for my second playtest today and then I'll be submitting mine (and hopefully having my players submit, which I was able to convince my last set to do).

Overall, I actually liked the Classes in play a lot more than I expected too, but I do still think they need tuning. Will post a second playtest thread probably tomorrow or tonight with the final results for the second.

Thanks for doing the Playtest Paizo! It's always an exciting time to be a part of the community.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

If you give Magus full spell casting they will be reduced to that of a arcane warpriest with spell strike instead of a font.

Please no more bad classes

Sczarni

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Martialmasters wrote:

If you give Magus full spell casting they will be reduced to that of a arcane warpriest with spell strike instead of a font.

Please no more bad classes

Exactly this.

Liberty's Edge

As much as I don't want to lose actual spell slots for the magus, I think I would prefer that over an arcane warpriest. I could live with focus spells and cantrips for the "magic" but if I can't murder things with my sword like a martial I'd much rather just make a wizard/fighter and be done with it.


zergtitan wrote:

Just completed my survey.

Basic Summery,

Magus: Needs full spellcasting(i.e. retaining spell slots, but not gaining 10th level spells or legendary spellcasting) and needs spellstrike to instead add a free strike action to the spell casting and tie the effect of the spell attack to the effect of the weapon attack.

Summoner: Needs full spellcasting(i.e. retaining spell slots, but not gaining 10th level spells or legendary spellcasting) along with having the eidolon have it's own pool of Hit Points. Also suggested a Summoning focus power along the lines of Summon Monster specialized to each magic tradition.

I argued that having more options doesn't make either class more powerful then any other due to the Action Economy. And the slower Proficiency progression makes them balanced compared to their more specialized peers.
The Magus should feel like a more desirable option to the Wizard/Fighter Multiclass and the Summoner especially for a Sakorian Godcaller should feel more like a full caster at the side of their deity or friend then heavily reliant on the eidolon being present to even be effective in any way.

Verzen wrote:

I 100% disagree. Magus and summoner are such that I want them to expand on their unique features. Giving them full casting will make them very bland. Id rather get rid of magic all together for these two and come up with interesting spell like abilities for Magus through focus points and have even better ways than most at restoring focus points during combat. Maybe even a focus spell that allows you to mimic a single target spell to enhance damage, but still costs a focus point.

With summoner if we give them full casting, the Eidolon will be incredibly bland. It will be a flavorless AC. We already have those. They are called Druids.

Let's have something we don't have and that is an interesting Eidolon with a lot of customization built in. Why are people so keen on trying to reinvent existing classes? If you want a spellcasting class, we have those. Just play one of them. Lets get something truly unique.

With some wanting to go one way and some wanting to go the opposite way, we could easily end up with 4 classes from this playtest.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Verzen wrote:

I 100% disagree. Magus and summoner are such that I want them to expand on their unique features. Giving them full casting will make them very bland. Id rather get rid of magic all together for these two and come up with interesting spell like abilities for Magus through focus points and have even better ways than most at restoring focus points during combat. Maybe even a focus spell that allows you to mimic a single target spell to enhance damage, but still costs a focus point.

...

A Magus with no magic and just spell-like abilities...sounds like a Warlock to me.

Maybe just me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
KrispyXIV wrote:
Alfa/Polaris wrote:

I actually suggested in my feedback that slot-spellcasting felt more thematically relevant to Magi than Summoners, (though I did also note that it feels important for them to be able to summon,) so. I don't envy their position making new stuff for a crowd of people with many different views of these classes. :b

They have their own views, of course, and will make a good effort to provide something neat. Just remember: at the end of the day, There's Always Homebrew™.

I feel like 4 slot casting works great for Summoners IF they get some sort of expanded or renewable Summoning spell bonus slots to go with it.

Either a "Summon X as a focus spell" like Wild Shape that is a legitimate spell slot per encounter with a strict thematic limitation, or a "Summon Font" works, but at that point I think the "4 slots of anything they want" is a perfect compliment.

Can I give those summon slots up for more buff spells or utility spells or something instead?


Dubious Scholar wrote:
KrispyXIV wrote:
Alfa/Polaris wrote:

I actually suggested in my feedback that slot-spellcasting felt more thematically relevant to Magi than Summoners, (though I did also note that it feels important for them to be able to summon,) so. I don't envy their position making new stuff for a crowd of people with many different views of these classes. :b

They have their own views, of course, and will make a good effort to provide something neat. Just remember: at the end of the day, There's Always Homebrew™.

I feel like 4 slot casting works great for Summoners IF they get some sort of expanded or renewable Summoning spell bonus slots to go with it.

Either a "Summon X as a focus spell" like Wild Shape that is a legitimate spell slot per encounter with a strict thematic limitation, or a "Summon Font" works, but at that point I think the "4 slots of anything they want" is a perfect compliment.

Can I give those summon slots up for more buff spells or utility spells or something instead?

Thats why my favored solution is a Summoning Focus spell. Lots of good alternative focus spell options that could be centered around alternative play styles, like Eidolons.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

For Magus I personally wanted a cantrip combat based character, using light to blind enemies, mage hand to pull them off balance, a spiked shield variant to bash enemies with, that kind of thing. I don't want it to fall into the trap of just another caster

Sczarni

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I definitely don't want just another caster either.

I'd love for it to be a martial flavored with a huge dose of magic though.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think the main design issue with making the Magus is the core differences between casters and martials. Ie. What their feats do, how they interact with the game.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
KrispyXIV wrote:
Thats why my favored solution is a Summoning Focus spell. Lots of good alternative focus spell options that could be centered around alternative play styles, like Eidolons.

It might need a restriction on the spells a summon could cast, but otherwise I like that idea.


I'm very scared of the Magus getting more casting because that likely means the Magus will have to lose some martial prowess, which is a big problem for me. I just want Striking Spell to be better and the class to get better feats. I also wouldn't mind a focus cantrip/spell only Magus too. I loved the 4E Swordmage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I'm still largely in favor of the focus solution, spell striking is kinda clunky with real spells, I could accept it but hopefully they do it with an eldritch shot style implementation at least. Casting with actual slots strikes me as something that could be added through class feats for utility purposes-- just give us Focus Striking Spells with Oracle Progression.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
scary harpy wrote:
Verzen wrote:

I 100% disagree. Magus and summoner are such that I want them to expand on their unique features. Giving them full casting will make them very bland. Id rather get rid of magic all together for these two and come up with interesting spell like abilities for Magus through focus points and have even better ways than most at restoring focus points during combat. Maybe even a focus spell that allows you to mimic a single target spell to enhance damage, but still costs a focus point.

...

A Magus with no magic and just spell-like abilities...sounds like a Warlock to me.

Maybe just me.

Ssshhhh... We are not allowed to have full class warlocks here...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
thaX wrote:
scary harpy wrote:
Verzen wrote:

I 100% disagree. Magus and summoner are such that I want them to expand on their unique features. Giving them full casting will make them very bland. Id rather get rid of magic all together for these two and come up with interesting spell like abilities for Magus through focus points and have even better ways than most at restoring focus points during combat. Maybe even a focus spell that allows you to mimic a single target spell to enhance damage, but still costs a focus point.

...

A Magus with no magic and just spell-like abilities...sounds like a Warlock to me.

Maybe just me.

Ssshhhh... We are not allowed to have full class warlocks here...

Just call them kineticists and it'll be ok. ;)


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Pawns, PF Special Edition, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
zergtitan wrote:

Just completed my survey.

Basic Summery,

Magus: Needs full spellcasting(i.e. retaining spell slots, but not gaining 10th level spells or legendary spellcasting) and needs spellstrike to instead add a free strike action to the spell casting and tie the effect of the spell attack to the effect of the weapon attack.

Summoner: Needs full spellcasting(i.e. retaining spell slots, but not gaining 10th level spells or legendary spellcasting) along with having the eidolon have it's own pool of Hit Points. Also suggested a Summoning focus power along the lines of Summon Monster specialized to each magic tradition.

I argued that having more options doesn't make either class more powerful then any other due to the Action Economy. And the slower Proficiency progression makes them balanced compared to their more specialized peers.
The Magus should feel like a more desirable option to the Wizard/Fighter Multiclass and the Summoner especially for a Sakorian Godcaller should feel more like a full caster at the side of their deity or friend then heavily reliant on the eidolon being present to even be effective in any way.

I disagree with you here on this. Magus does need some more spell slots, but they do not need full casting. If they get full casting then they'll need to drop down to Expert proficiency on both Weapons and Armor. They'll basically just be an Arcane version of a Warpriest. I'm not really against this as an option but I've always pictured Magus as more of a Martial character than a Caster and doing this will deny them a decent bit of martial ability.

If your argument is that you should feel like a Fighter with MC Wizard, but with full spellcasting capability, no feat sinks, and action economy boosts to make it so that you get a free attack whenever you cast a spell.... Then I'm going to have to 100% disagree with you on that. You'd be better off playing in a Dual-Class game as a Fighter/Wizard or Fighter/Sorcerer at that rate. You'll get more of the feeling that you're looking for without making the Magus the obvious superior choice to most other classes.


graystone wrote:
thaX wrote:
scary harpy wrote:
Verzen wrote:

I 100% disagree. Magus and summoner are such that I want them to expand on their unique features. Giving them full casting will make them very bland. Id rather get rid of magic all together for these two and come up with interesting spell like abilities for Magus through focus points and have even better ways than most at restoring focus points during combat. Maybe even a focus spell that allows you to mimic a single target spell to enhance damage, but still costs a focus point.

...

A Magus with no magic and just spell-like abilities...sounds like a Warlock to me.

Maybe just me.

Ssshhhh... We are not allowed to have full class warlocks here...
Just call them kineticists and it'll be ok. ;)

Eh, I don't see why we have to do that.

Call them Warloghe or Warlow...or call them Warlock and make the class different from D&D!

Pathfinder should really have it's own Warlock; it has other classes D&D does not.


scary harpy wrote:

Eh, I don't see why we have to do that.

Call them Warloghe or Warlow...or call them Warlock and make the class different from D&D!

Pathfinder should really have it's own Warlock; it has other classes D&D does not.

I was more commenting on the warlock and the kineticist being pretty close in theme and abilities. With the amount of crossover, anything you could label a warlock you could also label a kineticist IMO.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
Gloom wrote:
zergtitan wrote:

Just completed my survey.

Basic Summery,

Magus: Needs full spellcasting(i.e. retaining spell slots, but not gaining 10th level spells or legendary spellcasting) and needs spellstrike to instead add a free strike action to the spell casting and tie the effect of the spell attack to the effect of the weapon attack.

Summoner: Needs full spellcasting(i.e. retaining spell slots, but not gaining 10th level spells or legendary spellcasting) along with having the eidolon have it's own pool of Hit Points. Also suggested a Summoning focus power along the lines of Summon Monster specialized to each magic tradition.

I argued that having more options doesn't make either class more powerful then any other due to the Action Economy. And the slower Proficiency progression makes them balanced compared to their more specialized peers.
The Magus should feel like a more desirable option to the Wizard/Fighter Multiclass and the Summoner especially for a Sakorian Godcaller should feel more like a full caster at the side of their deity or friend then heavily reliant on the eidolon being present to even be effective in any way.

I disagree with you here on this. Magus does need some more spell slots, but they do not need full casting. If they get full casting then they'll need to drop down to Expert proficiency on both Weapons and Armor. They'll basically just be an Arcane version of a Warpriest. I'm not really against this as an option but I've always pictured Magus as more of a Martial character than a Caster and doing this will deny them a decent bit of martial ability.

If your argument is that you should feel like a Fighter with MC Wizard, but with full spellcasting capability, no feat sinks, and action economy boosts to make it so that you get a free attack whenever you cast a spell.... Then I'm going to have to 100% disagree with you on that. You'd be better off playing in a Dual-Class game as a Fighter/Wizard or Fighter/Sorcerer at that rate. You'll get more of the...

This is a really interesting point that I personally worry about how the developers are handling the feedback, but that is mostly because I don't know how I would handle it/am certain that many people are glad that I am not responsible for designing the final class.

I think that the Magus class preview has dragged up some players' buried dissatisfaction with how multiclassing and class balance around spell casting has been handled in PF2. The Gamemaster Guide does offer a beautiful alternative in the form of Dual class characters, but I think some people will not be satisfied with the class unless it functionally merges a dual class character into a single class frame.

It will be interesting to see if new classes are going to be built aware of how they will interact with alternative option rules, like those found in the GMG, or if they will just be balanced around working with "core" rules options, as a dual class magus fighter could be quite powerful crit machine monster, while a dual class magus wizard would probably be exactly what a lot of people are wanting the magus to be as class identity: Accurate with spells, plenty of them to cast all day, and losing nothing of their martial prowess.

It would be a shame, I think, for the core magus class identity to have to fit exactly what would be possible from it with an already existing set of rules to make that possible.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
zergtitan wrote:
Magus: Needs full spellcasting(i.e. retaining spell slots, but not gaining 10th level spells or legendary spellcasting) and needs spellstrike to instead add a free strike action to the spell casting and tie the effect of the spell attack to the effect of the weapon attack.

...This is less of a suggestion and more of a wishlist - and not a particularly realistic one at that.

Full spellcasting plus incredibly good action economy on spellstrike PLUS two hits from a single attack roll?

Would you like the Magus to not get above Expert in weapons OR spells? Because that's about the only way that's happening.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I too think that all three is too much. Just one or two of these fixes can already accomplish what the Magus needs


2 people marked this as a favorite.
MaxAstro wrote:
zergtitan wrote:
Magus: Needs full spellcasting(i.e. retaining spell slots, but not gaining 10th level spells or legendary spellcasting) and needs spellstrike to instead add a free strike action to the spell casting and tie the effect of the spell attack to the effect of the weapon attack.

...This is less of a suggestion and more of a wishlist - and not a particularly realistic one at that.

Full spellcasting plus incredibly good action economy on spellstrike PLUS two hits from a single attack roll?

Would you like the Magus to not get above Expert in weapons OR spells? Because that's about the only way that's happening.

There's no reason why they can't have a functional action economy like the other martials and some lower level spell slots. Striking spell is only going to be significantly powerful with higher level slots which are already limited to 4 per day.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Becoming an arcane warpriest would break the class. Warpriest is bad but it's a subclass option. Making an entire class bad is a terrible decision.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I think these classes might need a second round of playtesting after they were revised


13 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Seisho wrote:
I think these classes might need a second round of playtesting after they were revised

~checks off a square in Playtest Bingo~


4 people marked this as a favorite.

>_> *eyes MaxAstro with side eye of prescience, thinks real hard*

Um...I think...the playtest...should...Go for two more weeks, have unlimited dev input and then offer twenty seven different options, six Feat suite versions for a survey monkey response and [thinks furiously]....be reformatted into a new PDF plus hardcover limited edition that comes with new art by someone who isn’t Wayne Reynolds becoz reznz

*crosses fingers, closes eyes and hopes with all heart to hear a square being checked*


2 people marked this as a favorite.
OCEANSHIELDWOLPF 2.0 wrote:

>_> *eyes MaxAstro with side eye of prescience, thinks real hard*

Um...I think...the playtest...should...Go for two more weeks, have unlimited dev input and then offer twenty seven different options, six Feat suite versions for a survey monkey response and [thinks furiously]....be reformatted into a new PDF plus hardcover limited edition that comes with new art by someone who isn’t Wayne Reynolds becoz reznz

*crosses fingers, closes eyes and hopes with all heart to hear a square being checked*

*checks sheet*

...only twenty seven options? So close. SO close.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Dangit! rage-flips the bingo table I....quit!!! I was this close...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
thaX wrote:
scary harpy wrote:
Verzen wrote:

I 100% disagree. Magus and summoner are such that I want them to expand on their unique features. Giving them full casting will make them very bland. Id rather get rid of magic all together for these two and come up with interesting spell like abilities for Magus through focus points and have even better ways than most at restoring focus points during combat. Maybe even a focus spell that allows you to mimic a single target spell to enhance damage, but still costs a focus point.

...

A Magus with no magic and just spell-like abilities...sounds like a Warlock to me.

Maybe just me.

Ssshhhh... We are not allowed to have full class warlocks here...
Just call them kineticists and it'll be ok. ;)

Hey hey. Don't ruin my chances of them bringing back actual kineticists when they inevitably bring back psychic casters. >.>


MaxAstro wrote:
zergtitan wrote:
Magus: Needs full spellcasting(i.e. retaining spell slots, but not gaining 10th level spells or legendary spellcasting) and needs spellstrike to instead add a free strike action to the spell casting and tie the effect of the spell attack to the effect of the weapon attack.

...This is less of a suggestion and more of a wishlist - and not a particularly realistic one at that.

Full spellcasting plus incredibly good action economy on spellstrike PLUS two hits from a single attack roll?

Would you like the Magus to not get above Expert in weapons OR spells? Because that's about the only way that's happening.

I'm thinking 2 slots per level (1 when they first get a new spell level), and change Striking Spell to work more like Channel Smite: 2 actions and expend a spell to Strike and deal +1d8/spell level damage of the kind dealt by the spell. You could then add feats that work off that, e.g. "When your spellstrike deals cold damage, the target must make a Fortitude save or be Slowed for one round."


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Staffan Johansson wrote:
MaxAstro wrote:
zergtitan wrote:
Magus: Needs full spellcasting(i.e. retaining spell slots, but not gaining 10th level spells or legendary spellcasting) and needs spellstrike to instead add a free strike action to the spell casting and tie the effect of the spell attack to the effect of the weapon attack.

...This is less of a suggestion and more of a wishlist - and not a particularly realistic one at that.

Full spellcasting plus incredibly good action economy on spellstrike PLUS two hits from a single attack roll?

Would you like the Magus to not get above Expert in weapons OR spells? Because that's about the only way that's happening.

I'm thinking 2 slots per level (1 when they first get a new spell level), and change Striking Spell to work more like Channel Smite: 2 actions and expend a spell to Strike and deal +1d8/spell level damage of the kind dealt by the spell. You could then add feats that work off that, e.g. "When your spellstrike deals cold damage, the target must make a Fortitude save or be Slowed for one round."

I don't want a warpriest.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Martialmasters wrote:
Staffan Johansson wrote:
MaxAstro wrote:
zergtitan wrote:
Magus: Needs full spellcasting(i.e. retaining spell slots, but not gaining 10th level spells or legendary spellcasting) and needs spellstrike to instead add a free strike action to the spell casting and tie the effect of the spell attack to the effect of the weapon attack.

...This is less of a suggestion and more of a wishlist - and not a particularly realistic one at that.

Full spellcasting plus incredibly good action economy on spellstrike PLUS two hits from a single attack roll?

Would you like the Magus to not get above Expert in weapons OR spells? Because that's about the only way that's happening.

I'm thinking 2 slots per level (1 when they first get a new spell level), and change Striking Spell to work more like Channel Smite: 2 actions and expend a spell to Strike and deal +1d8/spell level damage of the kind dealt by the spell. You could then add feats that work off that, e.g. "When your spellstrike deals cold damage, the target must make a Fortitude save or be Slowed for one round."
I don't want a warpriest.

Warpriest has 3 slots/level, 10th level spellcasting, the harmful/healing font and a much wider selection of focus spells.

There is still lot of wiggle room to make Magus more caster-like without falling into Warpriest territory.
If anything, it seems like a logical progression: 4 slot casters have close to no martial features, 3 slot casters have some martial features, and 2 slot casters have decent martial features, but no 10th level slot and fewer Focus Spells to choose from.

Scarab Sages

15 people marked this as a favorite.

Responded to both surveys, had to cram the second with my full list of Summoners built as I didn't realize I'd have trouble submitting the first survey multiple times, rip.

Only thing I have to say about the playtest as a whole that isn't just somewhere on the boards already is advice to Paizo for future playtests: Please hire or assign a member of the playtest team to be a moderator on the board to resolve disputes and break up flame wars. In addition, it would provide a source to keep tabs on the discussion and resolve any rules questions as they arise, which would greatly help with the clarity of intent for the playtest. I had to drop out of posting about the Summoner midway through the playtest as the constant debating, name calling, and vitriol present was making me feel physically stressed. Some folks literally posted on the forum how the tone of some conversations was killing their interest. At least one person accused those in the other camp of "gaslighting".

Maybe I'm the only person here partial to this opinion, but as my first time actively participating in the Playtests, board interactions will not be something I remember fondly in the future.

Here's to Summoner being a great class come the full release, I have high hopes for what you guys will make.


Staffan Johansson wrote:
MaxAstro wrote:
zergtitan wrote:
Magus: Needs full spellcasting(i.e. retaining spell slots, but not gaining 10th level spells or legendary spellcasting) and needs spellstrike to instead add a free strike action to the spell casting and tie the effect of the spell attack to the effect of the weapon attack.

...This is less of a suggestion and more of a wishlist - and not a particularly realistic one at that.

Full spellcasting plus incredibly good action economy on spellstrike PLUS two hits from a single attack roll?

Would you like the Magus to not get above Expert in weapons OR spells? Because that's about the only way that's happening.

I'm thinking 2 slots per level (1 when they first get a new spell level), and change Striking Spell to work more like Channel Smite: 2 actions and expend a spell to Strike and deal +1d8/spell level damage of the kind dealt by the spell. You could then add feats that work off that, e.g. "When your spellstrike deals cold damage, the target must make a Fortitude save or be Slowed for one round."

I don't want a warpriest. I know I'm a broken record in this. But I still think it's a terrible decision to want an entire class to be a warpriest. At that point, we can just get the warmage wizard school and do that.


Martialmasters wrote:
Staffan Johansson wrote:
MaxAstro wrote:
zergtitan wrote:
Magus: Needs full spellcasting(i.e. retaining spell slots, but not gaining 10th level spells or legendary spellcasting) and needs spellstrike to instead add a free strike action to the spell casting and tie the effect of the spell attack to the effect of the weapon attack.

...This is less of a suggestion and more of a wishlist - and not a particularly realistic one at that.

Full spellcasting plus incredibly good action economy on spellstrike PLUS two hits from a single attack roll?

Would you like the Magus to not get above Expert in weapons OR spells? Because that's about the only way that's happening.

I'm thinking 2 slots per level (1 when they first get a new spell level), and change Striking Spell to work more like Channel Smite: 2 actions and expend a spell to Strike and deal +1d8/spell level damage of the kind dealt by the spell. You could then add feats that work off that, e.g. "When your spellstrike deals cold damage, the target must make a Fortitude save or be Slowed for one round."
I don't want a warpriest. I know I'm a broken record in this. But I still think it's a terrible decision to want an entire class to be a warpriest. At that point, we can just get the warmage wizard school and do that.

That proposal would be different from the Warpriest in multiple ways, so I don't know why you think it would be just an Arcane Warpriest. There is middle ground between Warpriest and the current Magus that is definitely worth exploring.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lightdroplet wrote:
Martialmasters wrote:
Staffan Johansson wrote:
MaxAstro wrote:
zergtitan wrote:
Magus: Needs full spellcasting(i.e. retaining spell slots, but not gaining 10th level spells or legendary spellcasting) and needs spellstrike to instead add a free strike action to the spell casting and tie the effect of the spell attack to the effect of the weapon attack.

...This is less of a suggestion and more of a wishlist - and not a particularly realistic one at that.

Full spellcasting plus incredibly good action economy on spellstrike PLUS two hits from a single attack roll?

Would you like the Magus to not get above Expert in weapons OR spells? Because that's about the only way that's happening.

I'm thinking 2 slots per level (1 when they first get a new spell level), and change Striking Spell to work more like Channel Smite: 2 actions and expend a spell to Strike and deal +1d8/spell level damage of the kind dealt by the spell. You could then add feats that work off that, e.g. "When your spellstrike deals cold damage, the target must make a Fortitude save or be Slowed for one round."
I don't want a warpriest. I know I'm a broken record in this. But I still think it's a terrible decision to want an entire class to be a warpriest. At that point, we can just get the warmage wizard school and do that.
That proposal would be different from the Warpriest in multiple ways, so I don't know why you think it would be just an Arcane Warpriest. There is middle ground between Warpriest and the current Magus that is definitely worth exploring.

Because having more spell slots will result in paizo going "welp, they want more spells, so reduce Magus proficiencies in weapons and armor to cap at expert"

If a dev wanted to post that they wouldn't do that great, but I have tremendous faith in my intuition, and from seeing how they do things with crb and APG I don't see them not doing it.


Martialmasters wrote:
Lightdroplet wrote:
Martialmasters wrote:
Staffan Johansson wrote:
MaxAstro wrote:
zergtitan wrote:
Magus: Needs full spellcasting(i.e. retaining spell slots, but not gaining 10th level spells or legendary spellcasting) and needs spellstrike to instead add a free strike action to the spell casting and tie the effect of the spell attack to the effect of the weapon attack.

...This is less of a suggestion and more of a wishlist - and not a particularly realistic one at that.

Full spellcasting plus incredibly good action economy on spellstrike PLUS two hits from a single attack roll?

Would you like the Magus to not get above Expert in weapons OR spells? Because that's about the only way that's happening.

I'm thinking 2 slots per level (1 when they first get a new spell level), and change Striking Spell to work more like Channel Smite: 2 actions and expend a spell to Strike and deal +1d8/spell level damage of the kind dealt by the spell. You could then add feats that work off that, e.g. "When your spellstrike deals cold damage, the target must make a Fortitude save or be Slowed for one round."
I don't want a warpriest. I know I'm a broken record in this. But I still think it's a terrible decision to want an entire class to be a warpriest. At that point, we can just get the warmage wizard school and do that.
That proposal would be different from the Warpriest in multiple ways, so I don't know why you think it would be just an Arcane Warpriest. There is middle ground between Warpriest and the current Magus that is definitely worth exploring.

Because having more spell slots will result in paizo going "welp, they want more spells, so reduce Magus proficiencies in weapons and armor to cap at expert"

If a dev wanted to post that they wouldn't do that great, but I have tremendous faith in my intuition, and from seeing how they do things with crb and APG I don't see them not doing it.

As I said, you are making baseless assumptions by thinking a 2 slot/level with no 10th level caster will be treated the same as Warpriest, despite all the marked differences between both. We don't know much about the design process of classes, but rejecting an idea wholesale because of how the design team "might" react to it doesn't sound very logical to me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lightdroplet wrote:
Martialmasters wrote:
Lightdroplet wrote:
Martialmasters wrote:
Staffan Johansson wrote:
MaxAstro wrote:
zergtitan wrote:
Magus: Needs full spellcasting(i.e. retaining spell slots, but not gaining 10th level spells or legendary spellcasting) and needs spellstrike to instead add a free strike action to the spell casting and tie the effect of the spell attack to the effect of the weapon attack.

...This is less of a suggestion and more of a wishlist - and not a particularly realistic one at that.

Full spellcasting plus incredibly good action economy on spellstrike PLUS two hits from a single attack roll?

Would you like the Magus to not get above Expert in weapons OR spells? Because that's about the only way that's happening.

I'm thinking 2 slots per level (1 when they first get a new spell level), and change Striking Spell to work more like Channel Smite: 2 actions and expend a spell to Strike and deal +1d8/spell level damage of the kind dealt by the spell. You could then add feats that work off that, e.g. "When your spellstrike deals cold damage, the target must make a Fortitude save or be Slowed for one round."
I don't want a warpriest. I know I'm a broken record in this. But I still think it's a terrible decision to want an entire class to be a warpriest. At that point, we can just get the warmage wizard school and do that.
That proposal would be different from the Warpriest in multiple ways, so I don't know why you think it would be just an Arcane Warpriest. There is middle ground between Warpriest and the current Magus that is definitely worth exploring.

Because having more spell slots will result in paizo going "welp, they want more spells, so reduce Magus proficiencies in weapons and armor to cap at expert"

If a dev wanted to post that they wouldn't do that great, but I have tremendous faith in my intuition, and from seeing how they do things with crb and APG I don't see them not doing it.

As I said, you are...

That's fine, but until devs reply in what they'd consider taking away for said slots, I'll keep being the broken record. I just don't see them now making the already clunky under performing class when more underperforming in exchange for being able to fill up our lower slots with true strike to try to math fix it.

What I will say, is in not against more slots, just against losing martial proficiency for said Slots.

Just a lot more work to say Everytime lol.

1 to 50 of 119 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Secrets of Magic Playtest / General Discussion / Paizo Blog: Secrets of Magic Final Week All Messageboards