Diego Rossi wrote:
Ok, go ahead and run the math on it then, you'll see it at MOST increases the DC to 15, that's it. As I said before
This can't cause the save DC to exceed 15 + 1/2 your character level.
Animal Companions and eidolon's DON'T HAVE CHARACTER LEVELS!!!This feat as written simply max's the DC for the poison to 15, that's it.
Now if you can find a way to do multiple attacks to inflict the poison and ruin the targets saves that's better but if you can already do that then this feat wasn't really needed in the first place.
It's not that big of a deal.
Yes, we are agreed that a very strict reading of the ability would allow it to work because natural weapons are weapons, but we believe the intent to be for applied poisons to manufactured weapons because the feat is ridiculously powerful if it can be applied to natural poisons.
It's really not that powerful of an ability, it has built in restrictions that keep it from ever being viable for what the OP is wanting to do.Remember that:
This can't cause the save DC to exceed 15 + 1/2 your character level.
Since homonculi and all familiars/critters don't have character levels this feat doesn't actually benefit them very much since it just lets them get a DC 15 poison which is negligible return on this investment.
Now if the OP REALLY wanted to max out the Homonculi's DC on this poison he can just spend extra gold to give it more HD which automatically increase the DC of the poison beyond this feat's limit (8,000GP equals what this feat does and 10,000+ exceeds it) with the added benefit of more HP's, a better attack bonus, better saves, etc.
This feat works for natural attack poisoners but it's not worth the cost, especially when there are MUCH better options of getting superior results.
Diego Rossi wrote:
Actually you are incorrect here, Natural attacks ARE weapons. This question was answered awhile ago and the Devs (SKR specifically had this to say):
Thorns: You should say "creatures striking with manufactured weapons" rather than "creatures striking with melee weapons," because natural attacks and unarmed strikes are melee weapons, and you're actually wanting to exclude manufactured weapon attacks from being affected by this ability.
Here's the link to the dev clarification: Dev Clarification
As for the homonculus qualifying for it please remember that this specific creature can be custom created by it's master, so with a bit of gold and a few skill checks it can easily hit the requirements for the feats and skills necessary to qualify for it.
I'll jump in and state that I'm on the other side of this interpretation. Blindfight appears to be designed to only offset the penalties from concealment and invisibility and not have anything to do with actual blindness. If the feat had a different name this wouldn't (probably) be in question.
Heck even the rules for concealment specifically call out the need for sight to bypass the bonuses from invisibility.
Although invisibility provides total concealment, sighted opponents may still make Perception checks to notice the location of an invisible character.
Here's the basis of the argument that blindfight doesn't help when in darkness, The feat has 3 separate paragraphs on what it does and since they separated them so completely they have to be examined that way.
A). In melee, every time you miss because of concealment (see Combat), you can reroll your miss chance percentile roll one time to see if you actually hit.
Exactly as written when you miss because of the concealment rule roll again once and check if that roll succeeds. No arguments on how this works.
B). An invisible attacker gets no advantages related to hitting you in melee. That is, you don't lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class, and the attacker doesn't get the usual +2 bonus for being invisible. The invisible attacker's bonuses do still apply for ranged attacks, however.
The feat specifically calls out the invisible condition and since that is a defined game term it only pertains when the target is under the effects of the invisibility condition. The invisibility condition itself references the blindfight feat and reinforces that it only affects invisible creatures.It doesn't say UNSEEN opponents it specifies INVISIBLE opponents only.
Next the Darkness definition reinforces the assumption that blindfight doesn't help here.
In areas of darkness, creatures without darkvision are effectively blinded.In addition to the obvious effects, a blinded creature has a 50% miss chance in combat (all opponents have total concealment)
It states that the player suffers the blinded condition, it doesn't say treat all opponents as invisible or even unseen just apply the blinded condition to the sufferer. The Blindfight feat specifies it overcomes the invisible condition not the blinded condition.
C). You do not need to make Acrobatics skill checks to move at full speed while blinded.
This is the only reference the feat has to the blinded condition which it calls out as a separate condition from invisible. This is the only thing the feat does when the character is considered blind. This shows that the writers were aware of the Blinded condition and only chose this single affect from that condition to be overcome by this feat. They could have easily said that Blindfight negates all or even just the combat penalties from the blinded condition but they didn't, they chose to only specify this one part of it. what this means is not only doesn't blindfight prevent you from losing your dex bonus in the dark you ALSO suffer all the other penalties that go along with the blinded condition.
Is it a case of bad writing and naming for this feat? Probably but we've had to deal with that before (Prone Shooter I'm looking at you), but in simple RAW terms this feat does NOTHING against the actual Blinded condition.
Chengar Qordath wrote:
Yup. The real issue is the name of the feat doesn't match what it does, like so many other feats out there.This feat functions as an anti-concealment/anti-invisibility feat, that's the main benefit of it. It specifically states what it works on (invisibility) and the only thing it does against invisibility is not require you to make an acrobatics check to move at full speed.
Ok, I now see where the confusion is coming from.
YOU are debating how you think the feat works based on other rules in the game.
I'M debating how the feat says it works and using that to fit it into the game.
Blinded is defined as The creature cannot see. This is what darkness inflicts on the target.This is different then invisible which states this object as visually undetectable but everything else is visible.
It's not a matter of a difference between the two conditions it's going by what the feat SAYS.It specifies, as I quoted, invisible attackers don't get a bonus against you. Invisible is a specific game term and has a set definition. This feat says it affects that defined game term. Blindness is a different but also defined game term and this feat doesn't mention it, therefore it doesn't affect it.
Thematically an invisible person can be detected by seeing their footprints in sand/dirt/water as they move or seeing them brush against something or just seeing them exhale and finding them. Total darkness or blindness prevent you from even seeing that which is why this feat doesn't protect you while in complete darkness.
If you and your GM don't want the feat to work that way for your games that's great, but in RAW games or under a different GM house rules like that probably won't fly.
And Blidfight doesn't help with this. If you go back and read the feat you'll see it only prevents you from losing your Dex bonus vs. invisible opponents. It does nothing against fighting in the dark.An invisible attacker gets no advantages related to hitting you in melee. That is, you don't lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class, and the attacker doesn't get the usual +2 bonus for being invisible.
As long as the character can't see they lose their dex bonus. There are no ways to remove the penalties from blindness.
Remember Monstrous Physique limits you to a max fly speed of 30 while the fly spell lets you hit 60 (or 40 in medium/heavy armor). Don't ever try to chase a target down with monstrous physique flying.
As for good forms, once you hit MPII then there is one vital form to add to your list, the Tikbalang. It's the only humanoid form that gives you pounce as well as defined foot related natural attacks.
The 3pp content is a problem but it's not really THAT big of a deal. Witches can force the reroll on more than just attack rolls all day as well.
As for the characters AC, well that's the easiest part to deal with.
Turn off the lights and this character becomes easy as pie to take out. Remember in darkness (or deeper darkness if the race has darkvision) the character is blinded which gives these penalties:
A blinded creature loses its Dexterity modifier to AC (if positive) and takes a –2 penalty to AC.
All the Dex bonuses go away, all the dodge bonuses go away, his Combat Insight class ability goes away, his Deadly Insight ability goes away, half of his (probable) defensive items and feats stop working.
Literally if you just turn the lights out when fighting this build it becomes a non-issue to defeat it.
Now if you are dealing with a build that has darkvision or Blindsight that has all this then you just invest in a single feat and kill the target with that. Improved Feint destroys this build as well though you need a second mook in the fight to beat it. Slightly harder but not enough to actually matter.
If you're going to make an Ettin Magus you should absolutely make him an Hexcrafter Magus. Let one head control the Witch Hexes and debuff opponents while the other does the melee combat and spell combat.
The biggest issue with poisons are the horrifically low save DC's. The only familiar type I've run across that can actually scale their poison DC high enough to be useful is the Homonculus. With the rules for actually increasing it's con score and bumping up it's actually DC. Using it's poison and the Poison Concentration discovery would make it worth investing in but overall Poison Steep is really the only truly effective DC poison I've found.
As for the milking rules I do believe I read it somewhere in one of the official splatbooks but will need to find it. But for poison amounts the rules are so vague that's going to be up to your GM. In general though a poison berry is a poison berry it shouldn't take more a couple at MOST to be effective.
Resurrecting this from the dead since I've been away for awhile but Witches are by far the strongest poison based class in the game.
Poison steep overcomes the biggest weaknesses with poisons (Cost and DC) since the Hex is free to use (0 Cost) and ignores the DC of the spell and scales as the Witch goes up in levels (10 +Int Mod + 1/2 Witch Level). This gives you a very potent Con damaging ingest poison that Poison Conversion turns into an injury poison making it legal for Toxic Words to use. Use the Poison steep on a pound of berries or nuts and you have virtually unlimited poison attempts per day.
Now use Evil Eye on your target with Toxic Words (DC 19-2 because of Toxic Words) and target your opponents saves for the -2. Since Evil Eye ALWAYS works for at least 1 round the penalty from Toxic Words is negated and the target effectively needs to make a DC 19 save again or eat 1D3 Con damage (or using the new poison rules from Unchained eats 4 points of HP damage and advances a step on the Constitution Poison track) and a quick cackle to keep the penalties going.
Following round repeat but evil eye the ability checks instead so now they get an additional -1 to the fort save (since saves are considered ability checks) so now they have to make a DC 17 fort save with a -2 from evil eye (saves), a -1 from evil eye ability checks, a possible -1 from con damage (from the poison). Fail this check and the DC's go up by +2 every time you fail and the duration goes up by 50%.
It's even worse if you are using the unchained rules, those rules give an additional -2 to your save AND you take 4 points of damage each time you are forced to attempt this save so it's a DC 17 check with a -5 to your roll and if you fail the 2nd check you are at a -7. Fail it a 3rd time which you probably will since the 3rd round comes with a Misfortune and/or Ill Omen spell on top of that -7 AND a 3rd dose of poison and you become disabled and effectively out of the fight.
Not the fastest takedown since it takes 2-3 rounds to defeat most opponents but it does let you get the biggest bang for the money (ie no cost).
Witches are the nastiest poison users in the game now and if properly optimized can annihilate anything that can't handle poisons.
Just a Mort wrote:
That's why you don't use a familiar for this tactic, you purchase a Homonculus. All the perks of having a familiar with none of the downsides and at only 4K a pop you can always have 2-3 of them around at a time.
Well, this hex is far more potent and easy to use if you look beyond just this one hex.
Soothsayer is awesome, invest in it asap if you want to be a buffing witch.
It's not world-shaking good but it is a significant boost that, like all the other bouda powers, becomes that much better at higher levels. Usually a touch level spell only needs to be used 1x per average adventuring day at low levels so this tends to fulfill 90% of the times you'll ever need to use a touch spell at range. It's a nice mid-level ability and it looks to be just at the right level for average play.
My Self wrote:
If you're going evil, take a look at the bouda witch. Melee touch attacks at range, ability to double up on your Evil Eye hex for a single target, and ability to change into a hyena. While the change into a hyena part is meh, you give up your familiar and two hexes for all the features, which isn't all that bad of a deal, considering how good Evil Eye is.
Bouda is almost brokenly good and is worth almost everything it gets. While it loses some of the action economy advantage having a familiar gives the ability to use your touch spells at 30' isn't too bad of a trade.The real icing on the cake is Hyena Form, it's the best thing about this archetype. Natural spell, full ability to speak, 50' movement rate + scent, 10' reach, free trip attacks & +4 to strength and AC that lasts for 10 hours a day.
You are now impossible to sneak up on, chase down or mundanely stop you from casting spells. AND if someone does try to melee with you you can now effectively AoO them and knock them to the ground and move further away from them then they can follow you and attack (and almost out of the range of most of their attack spells).
This is a POTENT archetype with two annoying trade offs (no familiar and delayed access to major hexes).
No, that archetype screams NPC! Bad person doing stuff you need to send adventurers after her for! It's not designed to be useful as a PC, and it isn't.
It's actually extremely powerful for a PC, it just takes time for that power to make itself truly available.While the curdle thoughts ability is kinda weak by itself the ability to add a +2DC to any fear spell you cast is kinda potent at low levels.
Sunder Hope is a great counterspell ability with the added bonus that it can counter things that no one else can and doesn't eat up your standard action like it does to everyone else. Remember it states beneficial spell or ability, so class abilities (lay on hand, hexes, bard song, aid another, etc). You can stop all manner of beneficial effects that no other person in the game can prevent.
Finally, at 12th level you get a Hag servant for 12 rounds a week. Do you know how powerful that is? This gives you access to a full power Hag's Coven and all these spells:
It's a slow archetype but extremely powerful if you really put some effort into it.
Just a Mort wrote:
You are right that the defiler build would normally be able to do all those things but don't forget that the Undead and Construct type are immune to non-lethal damage so most of what the defiler is based on stops working (No frostbite damage, no shaken, no fatigued, no entangled (rime requires them to take damage but they can't since it's non-lethal). At best you could trip and grapple the target but without the debuffs on it you just took the nastiest creature you can fight and moved it adjacent to you and opened yourself up to a full attack from it. Not an ideal choice.
The transmog works better since at it's core it's designed to simply throw out massive mixed melee/spell damage at a steady constant rate where at least half of it ignores DR/Energy resistance. Remember it's damage is split pretty evenly between melee damage and elemental damage. This lets him ignore a significant portion of his opponents resistances and always be doing damage.
Also remember this default build is still based on the standard shocking grasp build but uses it as a rider attack from the AoMF (spell storing). It's going to do a ton of damage from it's full attack (default 3 from alter self + 1 from haste which he'll teach Flash +1 from the free attack he gets from Bladed Dash +1 from the AoO caused by 1 of the rest of the party which is their job as support characters).
Finally if the target does have significant enough DR/Hardness/Energy resistance, well we are playing a caster who has access to a pretty varied spell list as well as some very nasty hex abilities that lets you just fly out of reach and pound the target into the ground with your beard. Slow but steady and very high single strike damage.
edit: the one thing I've wanted to do is go back and add spell scars in as a valuable additional arcana since it effectively gives an additional 18 spell levels of casting per day. On this kind of challenge it would extend the Hexcrafters ability to continue fighting through the roof.
That won't work, read the Martial Versatility feat again.It specifies it only allows you to use that specific feat for any weapon in that group, it doesn't change the restriction from Arcane Pool to only affect one weapon at a time.
Defiler is more of a single target build that is not very effective against undead and swarms. No for this I'd recommend using the Melee Transmorg #2 from that same guide. It's far more effective at handling multiple opponents, doesn't care about the type specialties from undead, swarm or construct, and has the staying power to easily handle 3-30 battles without running out of spells. The only change would be switching from frostbite to Chill touch for undead & constructs. Undead won't take damage but they will need to make saves and since the build is throwing out 5-9 attacks a round it's a good chance the target will fail a save quickly.
Throw in being able to add any shared wizard/magus spell into Flashs' spellbook should let them wade through half a dozen or more challenges before ever needing to rest.
I am still regretting creating this build but whatever, it's out there now.Anyway, a standard action is not required to get the weapon ready, that's the point of the White Haired Witch dip. That hair is always active and can be used immediately (you don't even have to draw it, it's always on). The only time Prehensile hair is needed is if you want to attack at reach or want to cast spells with your hair hand.
As for the stacking issue it doesn't actually matter. If they do then great you can do it at range but if they don't you just need to take a 5 foot step closer and it works (or buy the lunge feat).
There are three points you'll need to address with your build that can interfere with your enjoyment.
1). Decide if DPS'ing or Debuffing are more important and put your 18 in that stat first. For a Hexcrafter that stat is always Int, since it powers your go-to abilities, your spells, hexes, knowledges and some of your direct damage abilities (prehensile hair, spell hex, etc).
2). Disable Device can be useful but remember unless you have the rogue talent you cannot use it to disable magical traps, etc. There's multiple ways to get it but each has an opportunity cost.
3). Strength. You are playing a melee character but have tanked your strength to the point you can barely carry any gear at all. Yes your attack and damage is provided by your dex but carrying capacity, encumberance, ranged damage, strength checks all still use your STR score.
Whether you have had your hair shaved or not has no impact on this hex.It specifies that you GROW the hair out to 10 feet, never states you have to have hair already. If that where the case then Kobold, Tengu, Nagaji, etc. would never be able to take this hex.
Look at the sorceror entry on their claws, they can grow their claws even of the form doesn't have nails.
Same way you make any other magic item, you have someone with the spell needed help you.Get yourself a divine caster to assist while scribing the scar (or get a scroll of the spell and use that to provide the spell you need) and get started tattooing. Now when you decide to cast them if it's not on your spell list you'll need to make a UMD check to cast it but that's easily done if you put some effort into it.
@Malag, I've quoted the text and DEV clarification supporting my stance, if you wish to continue stating I am incorrect I would love to see what rules text or DEV post you are using to justify that position.
Paladin of Baha-who? wrote:
No, you are putting conditions on the faq that aren't there.
It specifically states using any of these items is not spellcasting for these purposes or any other. That's why the question has the
and so on
For every purpose you want to add onto it using a scroll does not count as casting a spell. They made it as broadly defined as possible and threw every single thing that could be affected by casting a spell on the list AND added and so on to indicate that other options that call on the "cast a spell" language was included.
Here's the important line to pay attention to:
not using magic items that emulate spellcasting or work like spellcasting
Magic items EMULATE or WORK LIKE spellcasting but are not actual spellcasting. Only casting a spell dissipates charges. Heck for awhile there SKR was advocating that having multiple touch spells active were a valid and normal part of the game. It was in his ask thread so not worth digging up for a rules debate but indicative of how at least some of the paizo employees play the game.
I'm guessing you might need to brush up on your search skills then. if you search the messageboard for Myrmidarch the first result explains this issue to you.
Or this one:
Or this one:
Every version of the Magus is explicitly restricted from using spellcombat with ranged weapons. Spellstrike yes but no spellcombat.
The reason why this works is spelled out in the core rulebooks + faq update.
First the core rule
Holding the Charge wrote:
Holding the Charge: If you don't discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell, you can hold the charge indefinitely. You can continue to make touch attacks round after round. If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates.
Now the FAQ update
By the rules if you use a spell in a bottle item like a scroll, potion, wand, spellscar, etc. it is NOT "casting a spell" allowing you to have multiple touch spells running at once.
They actually already addressed the meat in this argument back in July of last year.
Yes you can take hexstrike as a magus since the hex arcana works exactly like the hex class ability.
Zero damage is still normal damage, it's just zero.The part you need to look at is under the rules for combat maneuvers.
combat maneuvers wrote:
Combat maneuvers are attack rolls, so you must roll for concealment and take any other penalties that would normally apply to an attack roll.
The only requirement for a spellstrike is that it be delivered via a melee attack which combat maneuvers are explicitly called out as.
You're original assumption is correct. Trips, Disarms, Sunders, etc are all attack rolls and are valid choices for spellstrike.
To use this ability, the magus must have one hand free (even if the spell being cast does not have somatic components), while wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand. As a full-round action, he can make all of his attacks with his melee weapon at a –2 penalty and can also cast any spell from the magus spell list with a casting time of 1 standard action (any attack roll made as part of this spell also takes this penalty).
I bolded it for you. Full round actions means from the beginning of the round to the end of the round that weapon HAS to be in his hands. Using quickdraw means there is a time in the round when the weapon isn't there so you fail to fulfil the full round action requirement of spellcombat.This has been discussed ad nauseum for years and this is how it works, go read the discussions on the Myrmidarch and you'll see.
that was actually an old statement that was revised when they changed the rules on spellcombat requiring hand based attacks. At that point Calikang became the top choice of forms for MPII.Also I do appreciate your efforts to continue the argument for the natural based Magus but you don't need to. I gave up on this thread long ago do to the sheer number of false assumptions and incorrect rules they are spewing in here.
Honestly they have decided that it shouldn't work so are using every possible excuse to deny the rulings the devs have made to minimize the effectiveness of the build.
I'd recommend letting it go and watch this thread spiral off the normally read pages and try again later. Right now no one who would be interested in this will be able to get past the noise to signal ratio of these thread. That's what I did but my name keeps coming up.
Oh and since you might have missed it, Prehensile Hair is hand based and qualifies for Spellcombat. It's part of the basics of the build. Cast with the beard and attack with the claws/slams, if you feel like it drop a feat for Natural Spellcombat for the bite and keep the full routine going.
No, this doesn't work.Remember spellcombat requires the weapon in hand for the entire round so quickdraw doesn't cut it and throwing doesn't cut it.
You cast the spell and if it is a touch spell you get one attack. If it's NOT a touch spell you don't get to attack at all.
If you want to use spellcombat then you have to switch to a melee weapon and if it isn't a ranged melee weapon (Like a throwing Dagger) you can't spellstrike with it.
It's a trap, run from it.
I'm thinking you shouldn't do it. You may want to re-read the card caster archetype before going this route since as it's written it doesn't work.
The card caster is a terrible archetype for the same reason that the Myrmidarch is terrible, it doesn't have any synergy with the default magus abilities.
Remember, it only modifies how spellstrike and Arcane Pool work so it's not compatible with spellcombat which requires a melee weapon in your mainhand which a net isn't. No spellcombat means you can't cast and attack unless you cast a touch spell which gives you 1 attack a round. PERIOD.
This is a TERRIBLE archetype, don't do it.
First, why don't YOU go back and read the ability again, you've obviously mis-read it. There is no exclusion for natural attacks with precise strike. All it requires is light/one-handed and piercing. Stop making things up.
Boosting party members isn't the question, it's needing boosts from party members to function is the issue. Your build needs it, mine doesn't. (I guess, you still haven't posted one yet). And for your point 4 the answer is Haste, ALL your examples had someone else cast haste on your magus, that's a buff and a pretty hefty one. Stop making things up.
Yes, those DR's are a corner case and truly don't matter. Worst case they are a speed bump and MAY let the target live an extra attack or two.
Why don't you read my post first, you are the one trying to convine others not me.
Oh and since you still haven't posted a build I'm assuming the challenge is too much for you then? That's fine why don't you go post in a different thread and we'll get back to answering the OP's questions.
Kestral, you have made several unwarranted assumptions in this thread that truly cloud the basic discussion that was going on.
Basically this is what's going on, I have posted a build (a build that's over a year old and viewed by hundreds) that is designed to be as self-reliant, self contained and as immune to GM fiat as possible. Whatever amount of cash is available doesn't matter to my builds. Whether the game starts at 5 gold or 500,000 gold makes no difference to my builds since everything is non-gear dependent. If the AoMF is available then great it makes us more effective but if not it doesn't stop the character from doing everything it's designed to.
The parts of your build that you've posted so far is dependent on having enough cash for a +3 weapon as well as extra party members to through buffs on it to equal what the natural wielder does for themselves.
My design has been out there forever and works, yours seems to only exist in your world. If you seriously want to compare the two (or 3 or 4 since I have posted 3 different natural weapon wielding magus builds) it's on you to post yours. I'll even give you this to make it easier, whatever point buy and stat allocation you use for yours I'll drop into mine, no changes. Heck you can pick the Wealth to spend on their gear and spells as well.
Edit: you know what, lets take it a step further, whatever you post I'll just apply my build on top of your layout (race, stats, wealth, etc) and show that it's better that way. Keeps it really simple.
Not sure what you mean but if you are referring to round 1 as I said it's simply a setup round where getting all your buffs and positioning right is most important. That is exactly what you wrote for the weapon magus did that round. If you're making a different point I'm missing it.
2. Given that I am currently playing a Strength-based Rapier Magus, we're going to have to disagree on this front. Dex-to-damage is common and valuable at low levels, but if I was building for 10th level from the ground up? Strength all the way. And almost certainly a rapier. Rapier's advantage is the high crit range and Precise Strike access, and the only thing that makes it traditionally bad for Strength is that you can't two-hand it... which a Magus doesn't care about.
This one is a matter of individual taste, I personally find the bloat from the ACG and it's poorly designed abilities distasteful and haven't updated any of my builds to include them. I'm sure there is enough in there to double the power of any of my builds but it's too unpalatable to me to use any of it. Someone else can address this point if they care to.
3. The established setup presumed Haste was pre-buffed. Hasted Assault would be a waste. Hence I swapped it with Accurate Strike in your build, which I would call fair since you explicitly defended the Natural Magus in Weirdo's numbers using Accurate Strike at 10th level. With your build you can have one or the other, but not both. I presumed the one you argued with and the one more favorable for your build under the setting.
I fail to see how anyone can presume haste is pre-buffed. The short duration, relatively high spell level and limited number of casters who can do it leaves this firmly in the cast during combat world for the majority of encounters. The only way it could active before the first round of combat is with an extra character casting it or a free surprise round for the magus where I'd rather cast Monstrous Physique with a swift action hasted assault for better acction economy.
6. What happened to your contention that the Natural Magus does not need an AoMF? Shifting the goalposts doesn't help your argument, it weakens it.
I never changed that assumption, I have always stated he doesn't need it merely that it is recommended that he take it if he has the available cash or wants the extra flexibility. The weapon Magus doesn't need a +3 weapon but if he chooses to take it the better for him it is.
7. Taking the Amulet of Mighty Fists means that you're down spell slots since you no longer have the WBL for Pearls of Power to offset your greater spell costs. Look back at Weirdo's post regarding wealth or read down in mine.
Irrelevant argument and un-true in any case. The natural attack magus casts fewer spells per day then the weapon magus and gets a longer and bigger overall benefit from them. Your example magus uses greater invis (a rounds per level spell) while mine uses MPII which is a minutes per level spell. An order of magnitude longer lasting with fewer counters to it. We use the same attack spell for equal value but the Natural magus spends fewer Arcane Pool points since he doesn't enchant his weapon that way (he can he just doesn't need to).Since we have fewer expenditures of those pool points we don't need pearls since we can recover the spells that way AND at this level have the extra cash (that 2K extra that was left over from the amulet) is easily enough to purchase a Wyroot backup weapon to keep that arcane pool full. Irrelevant argument.
8. Using Monstrous Physique I cuts the natural attack suite down from six slams (-1 for Spell Combat, +1 for Haste, conditional +1 for Spellstrike) to four claws. This is a massive damage loss. Anything less than the Calikang puts the Natural Magus drastically below the Weapon Magus in damage output.
And it doesn't matter. The point of playing an advanced class is knowing when to use the right resource. If fighting a boss fight you use MPII if it's a lieutenant you use MPI if it's a grunt use alter self. Smart players scale their resource expenditure to the challenge since any damage after the target hit's zero is wasted damage.
9. Second round of combat goes by the DPR established by Weirdo, save that Precise Strike (+10 damage on every attack) was not included, which easily pushes the Weapon Magus above the Natural in DPR. The reason I didn't look into it heavily is that Weirdo already did a solid job of it, save for taking it easy on the Natural Magus by not including the best damage booster the Magus has access to.
See my comments for point number 2, but if absolutely necessary there are enough ways to easily add or exceed the extra 10pts per hit (easiest of the top of my head is to use the witchwyrd form and take Final embrace to double both the natural attack and frostbite damage easily beating the boost from precise strike).
10. Weapon Magus in this example is using Frostbite, not Shocking Grasp. Please, understand the numbers Weirdo used and I built on before you comment on them. Now, I personally prefer Shocking Grasp to Frostbite, but that's not what I assumed for this comparison.
Frostbite or shocking grasp makes little difference, the net outcome is still about the same. XD6+(x*10) damage from frostbite nat builds will always do more damage then 4D6+(4*10) where x equals a number between 6 and 9. With shocking grasp builds it's even worse since that's 14D6 (avg 42). The minimum damage from the nat build exceeds the average from the weapon build. The weapon build has to crit just to stay competitive each round so is burning spell slots every round.
General notes: As I touched on a few times in this post, the idea of "it enhances all of your attacks" does not really mean much. A Weapon Magus will be making all of their attacks with, well, their weapon. So the Amulet of Mighty Fists is completely offset by the cheaper Rapier, the Deliquescent Gloves affect both characters equally at best (a mild edge to the Natural Magus if your GM is willing to actually let it apply to all attacks)
The rapier isn't cheaper, it's more expensive as long as the natural attacker has more natural attacks then the weapon wielder has normal attackers. Remember each natural attack is a separate weapon and all that entails.
No, only the first attack you make while invisible is against flat-footed ac. Every attack after that is against normal AC.
I will have to disagree a bit on your assumption of natural attacker priorities but that's strictly due to your lack of experience with the natural attack routine. Now taking on your assumption that this all begins inside of full attack range and each magus is built on the same point buy and wealth chassis it would be diffrent.(Also a Rapier wielding Magus is going to be dex based since rapiers are more of a dex based weapon and need the Weapon finesse feat bringing available feats to the same. AND Haste is not something that can be assumed is running before a battle begins. It's a significant investment to have that active and as short as it lasts there is no way to justify it being on as a pre-buff.)
Combat begins with:
This puts both of the 2 magi in roughly the same position save the nat wielder is outside of full attack range and has more attacks and a better average attack bonus and base damage with probably better defense against any opponent who can deal with invisible foes.
Now three important details that your example forgot to address:
2). For the 18,000 GP that the rapier wielder spent on their weapon the Nat wielder could have bought a +2 AoMF (Spell storing, Merciful for Debuff builds, Spell Storing Cruel for hexcrafter builds, or just a fury-born and rock a +5 enhancement bonus against every opponent shortly after the fight starts). AND they'd still have 2,000 GP to spend on anything else they want. They come out ahead on the WBL even if they do buy the AoMF which is Great and recommended but not NEEDED.
3). Natural Builds do not require a 4th level spell, that is simply the level where the best form is available. These builds have viable spells to keep them going for every level. (Stone Fist, Alter Self, Monstrous Physique 1,2,3,4). Anything past 1st level spells gives them 3+ attacks a round while past 2nd level they have 4+ attacks a round.
Now if you really want to examine the difference between these two builds, do not look at the first round of combat since both use that round activating their powers, instead look at the second round.
At this point both builds are ready to start handling the challenges on the same footing . Honestly it's a pointless comparison though. The Rapier wielding, shocking grasp builds are designed for rocket tag and run out of juice quickly while the Natural Weapon Builds are designed for longevity and survivability. They are also designed to avoid drawing the ire of GM's by one hitting every opponent they meet.
Impressive math output and far beyond my ability to plot but add two more moving parts to this to show the in play effects. Touch AC and strength bonus. At this level the Natural attacker will always be using Accurate strikes against touch AC's to make sure their hit chance exceeds 90% and since these are built around transformation spells they should always have at least a +1 to +3 greater damage bonus from the strength boost over the weapon wielder.9Yes the weapon wielder benefits from the accurate strikes as well but the increased number of attacks is a significant damage boost).
You are adding conditions to the ability that don't exist. There is no requirement for it to "Function as a hand" it simply has to be associated with a hand. The Developers have stated this over and over Claws work with Spellcombat, Slams work with Spellcombat and all Unarmed strikes work with spellcombat. Why it works is unimportant, they say it works so it works. Period.
Monks get a special mention because they can do everything everyone else can and more. Normal characters can't use Knees and Elbows with UAS Monks can. Normal characters provoke when making UAS, Monks don't and Normal characters do 1/2 damage with their offhand attacks, monks don't. THAT'S why monks get a specific writeup, they simply do it better.
If you want to play a game where the rules of the world match ours then go play life. DnD/Pathfinder is a simulationist game with different rules and a more flexible meaning of the term WHY.
Fine I'll spell it out for you as simply as I can. That is an optimization guide designed to squeeze out every advantage possible. None of it is necessary for a functional character, it's designed to show you the limits of what's possible.As for why it's unnecessary I'll say it again "Melee damage from the natural attacks is unimportant, it's all about hitting the target with the spell effect." If your spells are doing 30 or 40 or 90 points when they hit that makes the 1D4+whatever from the actual weapon a joke.
The reason you choose natural attacks over manufactured attacks is because it's SOOO much easier to get more natural attacks and they all have a higher chance of hitting and discharging the spell.
Here's the best way of looking at it, let's say you do have that rapier +3 and you're hasted and you spell combat to get your frostbite off. Best case you are going to get 4 possible attacks that round with at least one of them having a less then 50% chance to hit. Your +3 rapier is going to add 3D6+9 (19pts of damage on average) to your total damage.
As for the Eldritch claws feat you don't take it to get through the DR, you take it so you can freely attack every type of creature you are likely to encounter. Being treated as magic lets you freely hit incorporeal or creatures that require magic weapons to affect. We don't care about the DR since your spell damage ignores DR.
As for the rest of your post we have no idea what you are asking there.
No. That is not true and I showed you direct FAQ quotes stating that you do not need Natural Spellcombat for claws, slams or unarmed strikes. The Devs have also directly stated that since prehensile hair functions as a hand it also doesn't need it either.Now if you do not want to listen to the people who created the game telling you how it works then there's nothing that's going to convince you so I'll just stop trying, it's not worth the effort.
Secondly you are wrong on the unarmed strikes as well.
Unarmed Attacks, Core rulebook, pg 182 wrote:
Monks and Brawlers are allowed to add elbows and knees to this list but ALL characters can make unarmed strikes with Kicks, Headbutts and punches.Honestly, would you just stop making things up? Your attempts to confuse the actual rules of the game are wearing thin.