Loremaster

Enrif's page

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber. Organized Play Member. 9 posts (24 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Organized Play character.


RSS


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I like the prospect of some 3 part APs now and then. Especially if they do both 1-10 Level and 11-20 Level APs, they then could be mixed and matched to create unique experiences.
The upcoming Fist of the Ruby Pheonix is an excellent idea that could be put after nearly any other AP.

Down the line a few years, and imagining we may have four low level 3part APs and four high level 3part APs, which would ordinarily only four APs to play, through the mix-and-matching it would be sixteen APs worth of possibilities to match them.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
WWHsmackdown wrote:
Shisumo wrote:
It will be very interesting to see if Martial Caster winds up being a must-have feat.
I literally can't imagine a magus build where I wouldn't take it.....there is no single class feat in the game that is as strong as 12 spell slots, regardless of what said spells are. The versatility alone is a must buy.

2 spell slot, which scale from 1st to 4th, leaving you at the end of the day with 2x 4th, 2x 8th and 2x 9th level slots + 5 cantrips


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

RAW it would look like it.

But on the other hand, the spell in your spellbook is not the heightened version, different from the learned heightened versions spontaneous casters learn. True Strike is still a 1st level spell there. Only once you prepare it, it's a higher level one. So technically you still can cast lower level spells, but you heighten them in your spell slots. The opposite is not true. you can never cast a 8th level spell with a 3rd level spellslot.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

While i think they should do this, if they do this with too many classes, it makes those classes who are stuck with their tradition look bad over time.

A primal Magus would be a 1e Ranger Like?
A divine Magus would be a 1e Paladin Like?

Kinda cool, but also, Ranger and Champion could feel worse as they lost that.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The current main focus spell is just magic weapon. Which would be ok, if it could work with potency and striking runes, but it does not.

Maybe that focus spell should work more like true strike?


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
beowulf99 wrote:


15% better than a fighter is never going to happen. That's what a +3 is after all, a 15% better chance, and 15% higher crit chance (assuming you don't still need 20's to hit).

The fighter is built around being the most accurate dude on the field. No way is Paizo going to casually make the Magus "better" than the whole point of one of the core classes.

At best I could see a side-grade situation, where you can be AS accurate as a fighter. But I can't see them making the Magus straight better.

That's a fair point. The idea was not to make the Magus by default better then the fighter. Only for using basically a three action skill, which locks the magus down for one turn. And the current wording implies that to crit is a important part to it. And since getting a higher attack roll (or lowering the targets AC) is the only way to improve your crit chance..


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Ferious Thune wrote:
I just don’t think two stats to one attack is in the design of the game or likely to ever be.

Looking at the Math it would be around the fighters hit chance

1st level magus: +4 Str or Dex , +3 Int, +2 Proficiency, +level = +10 for Striking Spell, +7 for all other attacks.

1st level fighter: +4 Str or Dex, +4 Proficiency, +level = +9 on any attack

20th level magus: +6 Str or Dex, +5 Int, +6 Proficiency, +level = +37 for Striking Spell, +32 for all other attacks.

20th level fighter: +6 Str or Dex, +8 Proficiency, +level = +34 on any attack

And the fighter would be more flexible. Doing all kind of other actions, getting demoralize, feint, movement. The Magus is more restrained as a compromise.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I wrote it in the other thread but here is my solution to this:

Enrif wrote:

I see one big problem with Magus, and others pointed it out. The Magus needs to hit, or rather, crit with their strike when using Striking Spell. This is the bread and butter ability of it afterall.

I think there is an easy solution to it: add your Intelligence Modifier to the attack roll made with a weapon or unarmed strike using Striking Spell. (and add your key ability modifier to the spell attack/save DC too.)
This way the magus can compensate for stopping at master proficiency, somewhat justify the few spell slots and the weird loss of action economy. When they hit, the really hit and make it count.

Also, Sustaining Steel should double those Temp HP i think. Twice the cantrip level, four times the spellslot level.

With this the Magus can be as accurate (Magus +3 from Str/Dex, +3 from Int, +2 from Proficiency = +8 = Fighter +4 Str/Dex, +4 Proficiency) or even more then a fighter, but not all the time. This would give the Magus the niche of a highly accurate, high damage character, but at the expanse of loosing actions, which the fighter could use to move around, raise a shield, trip, use an item, etc.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I see one big problem with Magus, and others pointed it out. The Magus needs to hit, or rather, crit with their strike when using Striking Spell. This is the bread and butter ability of it afterall.

I think there is an easy solution to it: add your Intelligence Modifier to the attack roll made with a weapon or unarmed strike using Striking Spell. (and add your key ability modifier to the spell attack/save DC too.)
This way the magus can compensate for stopping at master proficiency, somewhat justify the few spell slots and the weird loss of action economy. When they hit, the really hit and make it count.

Also, Sustaining Steel should double those Temp HP i think. Twice the cantrip level, four times the spellslot level.