My own take on this that I posted a couple weeks ago was to simply give the Kineticist a CON-based resource. That way if nothing else they have a real reason to invest in CON and, since they have this limited resource, it can be used to add in a little extra power elsewhere compared to the current "low power but constant" method the class currently uses.
So full disclosure, I have not played Kineticist at all yet, nor have I read through every single detail of the class; I read through the baseline stuff, the default feats, and fire. Along with some air. I'm also not really one for white room math and all that stuff, but I see a lot of recurring comments talking about how CON isn't relevant as a KAS and how people want Burn- in some fashion- to return. However, it feels like people are kind of stuck in a rut of "power at a price" meaning that it has to mean it impacts your HP or CON ability somehow. But instead of that... What if Kineticist had a resource that was tied to CON? Clerics get extra slots for Heal/Harm equal to their CHA modifier. Alchemists get infused reagents equal to level + INT modifier. So there's precedent for this kind of thing already. With that in mind, perhaps Kineticist can get some sort of daily resource equal to their CON modifier that they can spend to boost their performance in some way. How? I'm not entirely sure. Maybe you can spend a point in place of expending your gathered element on an overflow ability. Maybe you can spend this resource to amplify your damage- increase your blast or overflow damage die by one size, add CON and/or level to damage, etc. Maybe you can gather elements as a free action by spending a point. Perhaps for X rounds you get certain benefits similar to the above? This gives Kineticist something that actually runs off of their CON score besides HP/Fort, and it's something that can be used to help Kineticist feel more powerful while also making said power resource-based, thus minimizing what Kineticist needs to sacrifice from its current setup. It also fulfills the "power at a price" theme somewhat since the resource is tied to CON, thematically signalling just how much of this power you can draw out and put to use. It could, potentially, even pave the way for a feat for more traditional burn. Letting players expend X amount of HP to regain the resource, extend it, or replace it after having run out. The idea is vague, I'm aware, but it's in large part because there are a lot of ways that Paizo could theoretically go about it. It's not an avenue I've seen other people offer up though, so I thought I'd throw my hat into the ring with this prospect. Who knows, maybe it's worth something.
Soulforger is, as far as we know, a free archetype that requires either divine casting or 14 Wisdom. With it, you can have a special set of armor and/or weapon that you can summon to yourself ala Super Sentai and Power Rangers. Given examples of the things a Soulforger can do with their weapon is giving your designated weapon the Returning rune and "Thrown 30ft" trait, even if it's a weapon like the greatsword. It's even been mentioned that you'll have a super powerful "finishing move" you can use with your weapon, with obvious restrictions that you can't spam it. Why am I mentioning all of this? For the context that whatever form the "finishing moves" are in, I really hope it's possible to combine them with Spellstrike somehow. Potentially overpowered? Maybe, I don't know. I just hope it's possible because I want to add Shocking Grasp/Disintegrate/Arcane Cascade to my "finishing move" for that additional personalization and flavor. Anyone else have any particulars they're really interested in/hopeful for based on what we know of SoM? Another idea I had- that I can't recall if it works or not- is a Wellspring Magic Oracle. Anxiety personified.
I'm going to echo the call for a book about dragons.
I could in all honesty probably go on, particularly regarding draconic mounts and the like, but I think this list is enough for the time being to give an idea of just what could be explored in a book about dragons and wyrmkind in general. And that's not even talking about the likes of the linnorm!
I wonder how well magus will work unarmed, or with a monk dedication. I just made a character from Worlds Without Number which was essentially this to an extent, and I wonder how well I will be able to transfer her over in PF2e One of the feats from the playtest was called "Arcane Fists" and essentially gave Magus 1d6 and the option to do lethal with unarmed strikes. Magus no longer gets their first feat at level one on account of just how much other stuff they do get, but I haven't seen anything said about them losing this feat. Personally I hope it stays in as well. I like the idea of playing a Magus who can fall back on just punching people if they get ambushed or disarmed.
That was asked in the after panel discord and the answer was simply "no" with no elaboration. There was some indirect elaboration, actually: "Intelligent weapons are kind of a GM decision. They are not an object or slave, they're a person, basically an NPC along with the party with their own motivations and actions in combat, so it's unlikely to really make a player-opt-in intelligent item for those reasons. But a GM interested in the idea and OK with the power boost of those extra actions can totally work with players to make a soulforged weapon intelligent, or I think you could pick an intelligent weapon as your soulforged weapon if you have one but I don't have my file open," Basically because of how powerful they can be and being another NPC for the GM to play and manage, they want to make sure it's in the GMs hands to decide when or if an intelligent weapon is included.
While I doubt a full-blown dragon ancestry will ever be a thing- and don't get me wrong, I really do wish it could be a thing, I would be incredibly happy with some kind of not!Dragonborn ancestry or heritage. Playing as a draconic race with all the potential abilities that could come from it would be so incredibly awesome, and I just love dragons as a thematic in general. If we got some kind of Dragonkin ancestry- which are a thing in Starfinder, so precedence is there!- after Magus and to a lesser degree Gunslinger and Automatons- I would have to bandwagon off of other people because everything that I currently want in PF2e would be in. Everything else would be "hey that's cool" or "I agree, I want that in the game too".
I never played Inquisitor, so I can't really say much. But they're basically meant to be religious assassins who preserve and protect the faith by taking out enemies that other members wouldn't be able to deal with. I think that should be played up a bit with special rules regarding anathema, perhaps even having their own code of conduct not unlike Champions. They should fill a niche similar to Rogue and/or Investigator, as they're described using guile and trickery and generally being pragmatic to levels normally unacceptable by their churches. They should get fewer skills at level 1 compared to Rogue and Investigator but similar skill progression, and then get Investigator-styled extra skill feats dedicated specifically to their religion (say, Religion + deity's chosen skill or skills). In terms of how they fight? Inquisitors should be the dedicated focus spell martial. Bards, Witches, even Oracles and Magi use focus spells in a complementary/supplementary way- Oracles and Magi more than others based on what we've seen- but Inquisitors should thrive in using focus cantrips and spells to augment their power. The sheer strength of their faith earns them a sliver of their god's blessing, used in ways that the god can't approve of but deems necessary. Focus cantrips and spells focused almost entirely on buffing an otherwise martial fighting style and debuffing the opponent. Perhaps even making Judgment a baseline focus spell for all Inquisitors.
I'd like to see spells like Storm Step, Damnation Stride, and Bladed Dash. Spells that feel a bit more dynamic in doing their thing rather than just standing there throwing out magic. But, maybe I've just been playing too much Wizard of Legend lately. I'd also like to see Scorching Ray make a return, along with the various attribute buff spells, if only because they're classics and really cool. And I too would like to see something to make spell attacks a bit more... maybe not simply stronger, but more relevant? I mean hell, I made a thread about the Sorcerer feat Split Shot, and as one comment pointed out there are exactly seven spells that work with it across all four traditions. I'd like to see some means of buffing or improving spell attacks (without having to resort to "fixer" feats), if just to expand on the options that casters have for how they build. I know they're supposed to fall short in single-target DPS compared to martials, but still.
What I liked most about the 1e Dragon Disciple was that it allowed full casters to build themselves into something beefier and more capable of fighting in the front lines. They had to sacrifice some of their spellcasting power (unless they took Prestigious Spellcasting multiple times), but in return they became a genuine melee threat. I feel like they should do something to lean into that kind of fantasy. For example, Claws of the Dragon; why not give Sorcerers a means of getting higher proficiency with the claws specifically? Let them get master proficiency at 13th- or even 15th-level. Hell, make a level 14 DD feat that increases their proficiency, or lets them use their spellcasting proficiency (while still using Dex stat and appropriate item bonuses) when using their dragon claws. Frankly I wouldn't be opposed to giving up the 1d6 slashing damage and/or permanent claws for something like that. Also, what about a "Resiliency" feat? "Class granting no more Hit Points per level than (10 or 8) + your Constitution modifier" so Barbarians can't abuse the Hell out of it, then "You gain 3 additional hit points for each Dragon Disciple feat. If you're a Draconic Sorcerer, you also gain these additional hit points if you take the Advanced Bloodline and Greater Bloodline Sorcerer feats." Suddenly the Sorcerer isn't as squishy, and can actually try fighting in melee without getting torn to shreds by a strong breeze.
I had the idea of certain firearms having an additional trait, called "Capacity/Magazine X", the number being how much ammunition the weapon could store before needing to reload. For example, a revolver could have the trait "Magazine 6" (probably lower like 4 or 5 realistically), meaning it can be fired six times consecutively before needing to reload. The tradeoff? Having Reload 2 or even Reload 3, so that after you fire off everything- which a Gunslinger will probably do frequently, given all their strike and reaction options- you're going to be forced to duck out of the fight for a turn so as to reload, or reach for a backup weapon.
So reading over the Inventor class.... has anyone realized it means you can do RWBY? Because as it stands Inventor legit lets you make a RWBY-styled weapon by level 4.
Also very much interested in seeing a blog post or post-playtest stream regarding what they've learned and what they're going to consider for the two classes. I stayed mostly on the Magus side of things but it's my impression that apparently Summoner was about as controversial as the Magus. With two classes being so contentious in their current experimental forms, I'm really curious what insights Paizo will give. The most painful part though? The oncoming drip-feed of news and information that will be the next eight and a half months TT^TT
This is some very last-second feedback of my own, but something I've been told about from the latest Lost Omens book: a feat called "Mobile Magic Combat" for the Pathfinder Society archetype, Spellmaster. Mobile Magic Combat: Level 16
I read this feat and I immediately fell into a love-hate relationship with it. I love it because it's such an incredibly cool feat despite being so remarkably simple. There's so much flexibility you can do with this kind of feat; cast a one-action spell and then stride and strike twice. Cast Haste on yourself, then stride/strike/strike or stride/strike/stride, then get similar flexibility for the next minute. I hate it because this absolutely screams being a Magus feat. I know playtests are for only the most radical and experimental feats/aspects of a class, but if this isn't a roughly mid-level Magus feat I am absolutely going to cry. Not even talking about how it might interact with "that feature", thematically speaking it's just.... it's too perfect! If Paizo somehow doesn't make this a Magus feat, I can only call it an utter waste.
This is not a thread to talk about Striking Spell. If you want to do that, take it elsewhere.
1) Adding to the chorus of "Improve Spellstrike". Make it more reliable, make it more efficient, but overall make it fun to use. A Rogue feels good when they get off a Sneak Attack. A Monk feels good when they use Flurry of Blows. Spellstrike/Spell Combat/Whatever it becomes should feel first and foremost fun. 2) Also adding to the chorus of "More spell slots". Magus should not feel like it needs to MCD into a pure caster to have a usable number of spell slots. Maybe 2/lv, maybe "wave progression" as it's called, maybe just copy the number MCDs get w/ breadth, something. 3) More feats incorporating magic into combat maneuvers without being solely Spellstrike or using spells. Maybe a unique reaction that gives them a miniature True Strike, working similar to Cat's Luck and the like but only for attacks. Maybe they can imbue themselves with magic to make their maneuvers extra powerful, performing grapples/trips/shoves/disarms as two-action activities but gaining bonuses or additional benefits. 4) More "baked in" features. Some feats seem like they'd work better as part of the default Magus chassis, and the Magus is outright missing aspects like (at least some equivalent of) critical specialization. Things like Energized Strikes could be made a default part of the Magus, and the level 10 Syntheses feats could likewise be made an innate part of each Synthesis as a satisfying display of progression. 5) Adjustments to the current feats we have from the playtest. Some aren't practical, some aren't satisfying, some just don't work at all. Improve upon Raise a Tome for example, make the book & blade not only practical but effective. There have been a lot of complaints about other feats that could arguably use some more love & improvements, and I'm not going to go over all of them. 6) .....Something I can't remember after getting distracted, but I refuse to leave this blank lest I remember it later. EDIT: 6.1) Improve their proficiency progression! That's what I was forgetting! Magus gets their Master spellcasting at the same level pure Casters get Legendary. Champions and Monks both get Master in their spellcasting at level 17, while also getting legendary proficiencies at the same level. Hell, MCD characters can get Master proficiency at level 18 for the cost of a feat, while still getting their innate class benefits. I mean FFS, Investigator gets Legendary Perception at level 13; it should not be a stretch for Magus to get master/master at a relatively earlier level.
I get the feeling that, much like with the prior playtests, we haven't been shown all of the Syntheses that Magus will have available to it. More than likely we've been shown the most contentious or most complete ones, and Paizo is going to use the tests involving these three as a frame of reference for whatever else is used.
I put up an idea of my own about a week ago, and I've got no problems posting it here as well:
A bit wordy, but I think that between the tags and the consistent benefits with periodic burst, it would make the ability more worthwhile. Getting a sustained benefit from charging your spell with a weapon also helps the Magus get more bang for its buck with limited spell slots.
When I think of Focus Stances, I'll be honest here, I think of Bleach and Monk Stances (with the focus cost of Wild Winds and Grasping Shadows) having an unholy lovechild we get to play with. And going full weeb, I wonder if this might be better done with a Black Blade archetype. Hey, I'd play the f#@@ out of that. Frankly I'd play the hell out of both stance ideas. Now I'm also imagining a "sword beam" stance where you can make (short, 30ft at max) ranged spell attacks with your melee modifier, similar to how Wild Winds works.
Okay this is a reminder for everyone: this is a thread about the Magus, and what people want to see improved or changed besides the hot topic Striking Spell. If you wanna argue things like STR vs DEX damage comparisons for other classes like Swashbuckler or Investigator, you are more than welcome to do so elsewhere. Please keep focused on the topic at hand.
I'm sorry but I just.... entirely disagree with this. Magus is not "warrior first, mage second"; that's a martial class with a caster dedication, or an Eldritch Trickster. The Magus' biggest thing, it's central theme before even spellstrike or spell combat, is that it uses magic and weaponry in equal measure. Magus uses not sword first, magic second; it uses whatever the situation calls for. It doesn't have the extensive capabilities of a true specialist in either field, but it's also much more than one dabbling in the other. Magus is the iconic "gish" class that's supposed to be a 50/50 mix. It's a casting class, and it's being introduced in a rulebook that is literally "Secrets of Magic". I'm sorry but in what way or what understanding is the Magus not a class defined as much by its casting as it is its martial prowess?
Unique activities with magical flavor. Barbarians get sudden charge, Fighters get power attack and Magi should get some similar stuff too.
I'm in full agreement with this. Take Portal Slide for example. It and probably Capture Spell (and Raise a Tome, were it written better) are probably some of the most flavorful and unique feats available to Magus right now, and they just look so absolutely fun. Honestly Portal Slide is probably one of the reasons I propose more spells for Magus; I wanna be teleporting around the battlefield more often than four times a day, even though I understand why it can't be allowed to work with cantrips. I feel like a lot of the feats in the playtest are already trying to deliver on that. I was pleasantly surprised by how fresh the ones past 6th level looked, in that they were all trying to add some kind of magical spin on combat actions, like Spell Swipe and Cascading Ray instead of Sweep. I think keeping on that track is the way to go. I think the problem is that it's a "magical spin" on otherwise normal combat maneuvers. Rather than being something genuinely unique and all its own, several of these feats are "Martial/Caster feat, but spellstrike". Which, of course, exacerbates that particular problem. Many of the feats aren't so much a magical spin as they are... a magical or martial derivative. I'd like to see Focus Cantrips, and Focus Stances. We could get some really wild stuff with focus stances. You just made me realize that Monk is the only class with a focus point stance, AFAIK. Magus could absolutely change that, and I for one would be more than happy to have something like that.
Your unarmed attacks scale with the other proficiencies. We're going to add that explicitly to the final version. I think an old template got used by accident. Probably not the best place to put this, but: I hope you're having a good day. I'm sure you've seen a lot of the heated discussion about the Magus and the state of its balance. And between here and Reddit, I'm sure there have been less than civil comments among them. So I hope you're having a good day, and I hope that peoples' comments aren't getting you down. Thank you for bringing the Magus to us so early in PF2e's lifespan. Whatever opinions I may have on the class myself, I really do look forward to the finished project and seeing what else is coming out in the book. I just wish I wasn't going to be 27 by the time it comes out .-.
So, yeah. Striking Spell. There's been a lot of discussion about it. A LOT. There's been a lot of discussion on what to do with it, or how to fix it. I've taken part in that myself, to limited attention or success. But here's the thing that we're forgetting in all this in all this hubbub: Magus is more than just Striking Spell/Spellstrike. Yes, it's a core feature of the class. Arguably THE core feature, which can make or break the class. I'm not going to dispute that at all. But a Rogue is more than just Sneak Attack, Barbarian is more than just Rage, and Sorcerer is more than just its Bloodline. These are iconic and central to the class yes, but there's also the entire rest of the class to consider; a Barbarian with 6 HP/level would not be a good class to play, after all. Quite a while back, I made a thread that asked what people wanted for Magus. Now that we actually have (a version of) the Magus, I'm making a new, similar thread here: What else, besides Striking Spell, would you like to see changed or improved upon with the Magus? Hit Die? Initial skills? Saves? So on and so forth. Paizo has undoubtedly gotten the message loud and clear that people are not satisfied with Striking Spell; it takes up at least 90% of this particular forum. But we shouldn't miss the forest for one unfortunate tree, lest the rest of them suffer for it. For me? I'd like to see Magus shifted away from the four-slot casting that Paizo has been trying out. Some close friends of mine have argued that giving a martial class inherent casting better than what others get from multiclassing would be overpowered, and probably negate any other class as an option for gish options. But currently by and large people feel like Magus has to MCD with other casting classes, and that in itself is obviously a problem. I'd like to see Magus get an overall 2/level casting paradigm, and maybe specify that Magus class features/abilities only work with spells they get as a Magus. Additionally, Magus is supposed to be the premier gish class. Currently everyone is so focused on Striking Spell as to forget that little fact. Additionally, I'd like to see the scaling of their proficiencies altered. Monk and Champion get master proficiency in their spells before Magus does. Whereas Monk/Champion both get a multitude of features and their spells are mostly optional, for a Magus those spells are absolutely central. Casting at expert until level 19 when their casting stat is already sub-par is just too much. Multiclass dedications get master proficiency before Magus. While yes they sacrifice class feats, they still get their own core features on top of their MC options. Magus, currently? Not so much. So yes, those are the two things I'd like to see the Magus get. And yes, I know these are in a void and that a cascade effect of fixing Striking Spell and implementing additional buffs could go the opposite direction, making Magus overpowered. But I choose to believe that Paizo will, given time, parse through everything and figure out what's for the best. We just need to give them options and feedback to point in the appropriate direction. So what about all of you? What do YOU think can be done to make Magus feel better as a class? And I do emphasize, besides fixing Striking Spell. That horse is being beaten to death so thoroughly you'll need a Wish spell to bring it back.
So I couldn't find any place to put this, but there's something I felt the need to point out after looking at items on AoN. Spell-Storing is, as it stands, outright a better version of Striking Spell. You can store any single-target spell in your weapon, it uses the same results as your attack roll (meaning a hit with your weapon is a hit with the spell attack), and spells have a flat DC of 30. For comparison, a full caster of the same level has a DC of 32. Reading this, I couldn't help but be slightly annoyed. Yes, it requires one minute of casting a spell into the weapon. That means you can only use it once per combat, and you'd need your caster to sacrifice slots to empower it. And at 3rd-level or lower, the spell is never going to have a lot of raw power. But it's nonetheless a more functional and feasible version of Striking Spell.
By and large when trying to hit an enemy, any enemy/enemies between you and the target give a +1 to the target's AC. It's only a single +1 regardless of enemy numbers or their size, but still a thing. It feels like Comet Strike is trying to incentivize and reward aiming for difficult targets. But it kind of falls short because the Magus' Striking Spell ability seems (on paper) so lackluster.
So, lots of people find Striking Spell to be.... contentious, putting it both mildly and nicely. Despite being a free action metamagic given at level 1 to all Magus, it ultimately does nothing to improve the spell's capabilities or truly deliver on the fantasy of imbuing your weaponry with your arcane prowess. That sucks, obviously. But it's equally as obvious that Paizo is trying to be very careful with how they balance the Magus. If Striking Spell is too strong, then Magi are likely going to be doing more single-target damage than most other martial classes. And I think that's part of the problem: the Magus chassis is trying to fit too much into one feature. So my suggestion is to decouple Striking Spell into two separate components, combined under the familiar name of Spell Combat: Imbue Weapon and Spellstrike. Both of which are as follows: Imbue Weapon
Spellstrike
By having the two separated, I feel like the power can be distributed and made a bit more satisfying rather than trying to cram everything that makes Magus' fighting style appealing into a single innate metamagic ability. Not to say that this isn't without some drawbacks; you'll notice that the crit-fishing aspect is gone, and Imbue Weapon requires a spell that can target a single enemy. Meaning things like Daze, Disintegration, Ray of Frost and even Electric Arc, but no Fireball or Hydraulic Push or Weird. I did that because it seemed like most of the complaints also had a sentiment of "It's worth it if Spellstrike can only use select spells, as long as it feels better to use". Making Spellstrike not only a Flourish but also a Finisher also means that more often than not you're putting it all into one attack, with all the risk and reward that comes with it. Now, some VERY important disclaimers: I have not yet played Magus. It's entirely possible I will never get to play Magus until its official release. And the idea of Spell Combat is made largely in a void, with little consideration for Magus Syntheses or feats. But since most everyone's biggest issue with Magus is how Striking Spell feels inconsistent and not worth using, I figure making fixes to that first and foremost would make any other hypothetical changes worth it. I'm also aware that Imbue Weapon could potentially be far too powerful, as it gives you a means of exploiting or bypassing weaknesses as early as level 1. The alternative is giving it the effect of Energizing Strikes instead (a small but meaningful 1 damage), or perhaps pushing Spellstrike back to be available at a later level. Maybe I'm being impertinent, offering theorycrafted alternatives like this when the playtest hasn't even been going 48 hours. But most of what could be said about the downfalls of Striking Spell have already been said, so I opted to offer a solution instead.
Keep in mind that Magi are going to be (at least) casting from the arcane tradition. They're going to have the entire arcane spell list available to them. So subclasses that specialize/focus on one particular kind of casting is going to be a bit difficult. Magi that use different fighting styles in tandem with their magic though? That'll probably be easier. But in all honesty I could see them going without subclasses at all.
Given that Magi are- supposedly- going to have less spells per day than other casters, I can't help but wonder/hope if Paizo is going to also bring back Spell Recall. That was, as far as I know, very much unique to the Magus in 1e.Isn't that basically wizard's Drain Bonded Item? Kinda, but Magi used their Knowledge Pool and expended points from said resource in order to restore their spell slots. It wasn't a once a day thing like it is with the Wizard.
All this talk of Master/Master for magus makes me really sad for all the martial bard fans out there. It is a bit of a shame, but they've got Warrior Muse now. And they have their composition cantrips as well, making them some of the absolute best buffers and utilitarians in the game. If they could go so far as getting Master/Master proficiency on top of that, they'd be way too strong. And that's not getting into what their other muses have to offer. As you guys can imagine, I am absolute ecstatic to see that Magus is coming back as its own standalone class. The sheer VALIDATION- ahem- I feel is almost palpable. I really hope this thread serves to give them at least some amount of feedback to make use of when it comes to working on the Magus.
Important thing: multiple sources of energy resistance- to my knowledge- do not stack. If they do, I'll be more than happy to be proven wrong, but otherwise? Players only benefit from the highest amount. Secondly, I'm glad that Kobolds benefit from this archetype. Really, I am. Nothing against them. But for the Sorcerer specifically the archetype is just... very underwhelming in comparison to its PF1e version, where your bloodline powers not only came online faster but also got buffed once you reached the level you'd unlock them as Sorcerer. This is especially on account of the Dragon Disciple archetype being drastically more restricted compared to the prior edition, where anyone with sufficient arcane casting and the Draconic language could start dipping into it. And yet with that tightened restriction comes... really very little for the one casting class you'd think it would be designed to complement. I mean hell, Dragon Arcana is quite literally a dead feat for Sorcerers! You'd think it could do something for them, but... nope. It just feels like Dragon Disciple is lacking in the fantasy for a more physical Draconic caster, and that sucks because I was really looking forward to it.
I like the idea of a caster (Wizard/Sorc/Witch/etc) riding atop an animal companion by way of the Cavalier archetype. Command your animal companion, stride into spell range, fire off the spell, stride on out. Rinse and repeat as you strafe and harass your enemies, who still have to deal with a very angry beast if they get into close range. I especially like it with the idea of the Riding Drake. And (if it were legal) I love the idea of a mounted caster whose animal companion is equipped with Hellfire Boots. I can't decide if that would be a better PC or a better enemy.
I'm guessing that "OP" refers to "Organized Play" but I still have no idea exactly where someone is supposed to look.
I'm going to emphasize a point I made earlier: Talk to your GM and party. Ask them how they feel about the situation. If they're fine with it, then boom; you don't have a problem to solve. Trying to be self-aware and willing to fix a problem is genuinely commendable, and a good attribute to have. But from the sounds of it, you're not even sure if you guys have a problem that needs to be fixed. Communicate with your table, get their input, then act based on that. That's the first thing you should do.
To be fair, it does mean that Alchemists can keep themselves prepared for the long-haul. You never know when you're gonna have prolonged or even multiple fights without a chance to restock, rest, or even heal. Wizards also can't sell off their cantrips or hand them off to someone else. Not without investing in crafting, which Alchemists more or less already do.
Snip Wait... but Alchemist's goggles give an item bonus. Higher-leveled bombs also give an item bonus. Bonuses of the same type don't stack, right?
For my part on the matter, I think that Magus would get by more than well enough by way of focus spells, but more specifically focus cantrips and class feats. Magus arcana basically fall into one of the two anyways; something that modified how you fight or function in a way that class feats do now, or giving you an extra attack or maneuver. Which again, could either be covered under new class feats or as focus cantrips. I remember one arcana called "Pool Ray", which let you spend a point to fire off a ray attack at your foe. This attack could also be used with spell attack and spell combat. I could totally see that as a focus cantrip; weak enough that it's not your go-to option, but an entirely viable backup that makes you at least consider taking it. Also an absolutely crazy idea I had was throwing or planting your weapon, then using it to either bounce your spell off of or as a point of origin for your spell. Kinda like what familiars can do, I guess.
First of all, I was actually a little giddy to see that I was "ripped off". Means the conversation has made an impact and inspired people, and that gives me a sense of accomplishment. Regarding the meat of the subject; I actually really do like the theme and concept of the Shifter. Taking something as established as the Druid's wild shape changed in such a way to make it focus on martial prowess? That is actually really cool. Personally while wild shape is painfully obvious, I'd also want to see Shifter get the wild morph focus spell along with the feats that let them do more with said spells. More than just the transformations, I want to see Shifter get feats based on using those transformations with martial attacks and maneuvers. Probably the more difficult part of it is how polymorph spells work now. You could, I suppose, go a route similar to how Barbarians work with their animal instinct and resulting transformation. As well as just how many possible transformations there are and making feats to match up with all of them. Most of all though I'd really just want the Shifter to fit into that "wild fighter" kind of thematic, attacking with fang and claw but in a way that's nonetheless reminiscent of a controlled martial art form. I mean in MMO's brawlers and such are always using daggers or knuckles or "claws" ala the Shredder/Wolverine. You never see something focused around outright leaping at and shredding your foes, and Shifter provides that without being hampered by being a spell-focused class.
I don't think you'll find anyone believing that gish classes should be able to cast at legendary proficiency, or that they should get 10th-level spells by default. Personally, I'm in the "master/master each" camp, without any bonus spells.
Hey so, seeing as it is in fact taking up about half the discussion on its own, I've made a new thread specifically for discussing proficiencies for not just the Magus, but for other gish classes that might also return. Please focus discussion regarding proficiencies on that thread from here on out. I'm not super thrilled to split this thread in half as I've been very happy with all the positive discussion, but at this point it's somewhat beating a dead horse for this particular thread. There are a lot of other potential ideas for the Magus that we could be sharing and discussing, so I'd like to give room to those as well. But this whole proficiency thing has people pretty passionate, so I quite honestly encourage everybody to keep up said discussion. Just, y'know, use the appropriate thread please. EDIT: Also to clarify; mention of proficiency isn't so to say banned (since I don't have any actual authority to do that anyhow), I just don't want it to be the primary focus of this thread at the expense of whatever other ideas people might have.
Hello! So about a week ago I made the thread "What do YOU want to see in a Magus?", and to be honest? I'm rather happy with the amount of discussion and attention it's gotten. As someone who's always had a lot of love for the theme of the Magus- even though I've never gotten to play one- it's heartening to see that so many people are passionate and have a favorable opinion of what is probably my favorite class. However, while at first it was just as much part of the discussion as anything else- because the thread is about what people want to see in the Magus- talk of proficiency and how proficiency should be balanced has been superseding everything else, like discussion of possible feats, skills, and capabilities. So following the suggestion of one "Puna'chong", I decided to make this thread specifically for the focus of discussing Magus proficiency options. But then I thought "why stop there?"; after all, there are a few other "gish" classes that I'm sure people want to see coming back, like the Bloodrager, the Skald(?), and any others I might have missed. They're gish casters in a similar vein to Magus, so why exclude them from the discussion? And so I've made this discussion for not only the Magus, but for all potential returning gish classes as well. Hope it helps, and keep it constructive!
Based on the replies throughout this thread, I think you're missing the point. At the end of the day, your typical Druid is primarily a spellcaster. They get by with their spells such as Barkskin, Tanglefoot, Fireball, Heal, etc. The transformations are an entirely viable part of their build, but they are not central to how the Druid operates thematically or as a class. As proven by the fact that if it better fits your character you can instead have an animal companion or harness the power of weather's fury. For the majority of the people who have posted in this thread, the central theme of the Magus is its capabilities as a "gish"; it may not be the premiere caster or martial, but it is equally proficient in both. And by combining the two, they become more than the sum of their parts. However else they play- the frequency of their spells, the tradition they use, the particular weapon in hand- the foremost central theme of a Magus is that whether it's by spell or sword, they can bring the hurt and do so reliably. To gate that for the Magus would be similar to restricting the Fighter's capabilities with weaponry, or a Champion's proficiency with armor. Saying they can only get the equivalent of legendary proficiency in each only in limited circumstances. If you do that, then if a Magus doesn't use their focus points then what are they? A worse Wizard. Why go through the hassle of playing a Magus when you can get the same weapon proficiency by playing a Wizard, with more spells and metamagic and even arcane theses and school specialization?
Hey, we have "Force Bolt" compared to Magic Missile. So I wouldn't object to that. Another thing I could see them bringing back is a feat I mentioned earlier in the thread, Spellcut and the spell attack portion of Smash from the Air. I mean come on. Using your martial weapon to cut through and deflect an incoming spell as a reaction? How does that not have "Magus" written all over it?
Bladed Dash absolutely needs to make a return as a spell alongside Magus. Make it an Arcane/Occult spell, make it so you move up to your speed, and you make the melee attack using your spell attack proficiency. Hell, make it a 1-to-3 action spell, letting you make a number of attacks equal to the number of actions spent. Heightened versions could increase the distance you travel and the number of attacks you can make per action spent. Could even do the whole thing where MAP doesn't apply until after the spell ends. Fits perfectly in between the caster niche of "Efficient AoE for multiple enemies" and not only hitting but also getting right into melee range.
62) A Wizard w/ the Cavalier archetype, an idea I had since the playtest and saw Cavalier as an archetype. A mounted caster who uses said mount to move about the battlefield. I was playing and learning about Fire Emblem at the time, and I discovered those horse-mounted caster units. Seemed like something that was really different so I got interested in making my own.
I have written of this elsewhere, and have read other people say similar, but I personally think that something like shifter would be a really cool ancestry. It could be a cool way to appease a lot of the playerbase - the ones who like oddball animal races, and the ones who dislike animal races. The way that ancestries are a pool of feat choices, you could make the feat choices similar to a familiars. You can pick a feat for, I dunno, being especially big and get a bonus to hp, and a feat for terrain expertise in savanah or something. Then you say my PC is a giraffe person. Bamn, that one guy who has dreamed his whole life that he could be a giraffe man in a ttrpg gets his wish. Meanwhile, all those animal races are out of the way, so half the races that come out that are animals that a part of the playerbase hates, are out of the way so more traditional fantasy races can be added. You're thinking Skinwalkers, a race that existed well before the Shifter did. One that, sadly, didn't work too well with Shifter on account of both of them requiring a combination of move action + standard action to use both transformations. I myself would also love to see Skinwalker become an Ancestry- or even a Heritage with a large number of Lineages- but I don't think it's at all satisfactory to replace an entire class like the Shifter.
Just wanna say; one way or another really happy to see all the discussion going on and happening so quickly. When PF2e was being previewed and people were going "We can multiclass Wizard into Fighter or vice-versa, Magus is dead", I got the impression it wasn't a particularly valued class. Really happy to see people passionate about the Magus and its thematic.
I've seen some threads and comments around here, asking what class people most want to see brought back. I'm pleased and pleasantly surprised to see that generally speaking, Magus is the first and most popular pick. In my eyes, that's great. I'm a huge fan of the Magus' theme combining spells and martial prowess in ways other classes can never replicate, and I'm hopeful Paizo takes note of the community interest. But something comes to mind that I can't help but question. While I've seen lots of comments asking for Magus, nobody really says what they actually want out of the class. Besides having an even mix of martial and magic "gish" instead of archetype dabbling for one or the other, nobody's really gone into specifics. I've seen some want it as an archetype or some want it as a class focused on focus spells. Seeing as how I've been trying to do my own theoretical write-up of the Magus class anyhow, I figured I might as well ask the question: What do people want to actually see in the Magus class? What do you think best encapsulates its theme? Hell, what do you think is the actual theme of the class? Answer! Talk! Discuss! Maybe if Desna is kind Paizo will see this thread and give consideration to the conversations within. One can hope, right?
I know Magic Trick is probably something that slipped by a lot of peoples' notice, as it's something that was released near the end of PF1e's lifespan and while PF2e's release was right around the corner. In fact, I hadn't even bothered to read about it until today, in spite of the fact that I was pretty interested myself! And honestly? This feat looks really, really fun. Being able to alter and customize spells like this is unique and really interesting. The unique ways you can use the various spells is honestly something I haven't seen before, even with Metamagic feats. I especially love how it lets you alter the properties of Fireball, but more noticeably breathes new life into relatively mundane spells that probably don't see a lot of use. I for one would really, really like to see a feat like this pop up in PF2e. Maybe as an archetype feat, maybe as a new class feat for casters, maybe even as a general feat of some kind. All I know is that the idea of being able to mold and transform your spells and use them in innovative ways is a really cool idea, and I'd love it if Paizo could mix this into the simplicity they've brought with PF2e. I mean, I know I love the idea of focusing all the raw power of an AoE spell on a single enemy, just because you want to mercilessly overkill them that badly. I could see a few ways to make Magic Trick a very unique and versatile feat, or maybe even a series of feats or hell, a full on archetype involving the manipulation of bog-standard spells. What about you guys?
Anyone else feel like when it comes to potentially releasing an all-destroying monstrosity, there are two keys too many?So ASMODEUS the Ruler of Hell, should have the only one? I say no, no he should not! I said two keys too many. The copy and the original should both be long gone.
|
