Synapse's page

Your houserule is the Magus' class feature "spellstrike", though it isn't restricted to any type of weapon.

By default you can only deliver touch spells as touch attacks or as natural/unarmed strikes provided you don't do it on the round you cast the spell.

You only need to treat the touch spell as TWF if it will use an attack not granted by your first array (the one granted by BAB) or the spell itself(as most do on the round they are cast).

Example 1: If you have 12 BAB and are holding a shocking grasp, you could Stab at 12, Grasp at 7 and Stab at 2.
Example 2: You are an angry barbarian with 16 bab, quick draw, a battleaxe and a stack of javelins. You smash someone at 16, throw a javeling at 11(plus an AoO if the smashed guy lived) and smash someone again at 6 and 1.

I don't have a problem with it, and would allow it(it's a great idea even, gives a reason to use those maneuvers), but it's not very clear and the key is defining what constitutes a Melee Attack.

"Activate a wand or staff" is not "cast a spell", thus it's not subject to the same restrictions. It's an entirely different beast because at no point it specifies it must be a wand of a magus spell.

If you have UMD to trigger, say, a wand of Shifting Sand, then you can Spellcombat it.

It's definitely a wasted arcana at the earliest levels. good thing there are better arcanas to take before, huh? :p

Being able to spam some blasting spell is invaluable in my book, though. A must have after level 6 or so.

Answering your question: yes, it works. And yes, with other spell triggers. And yes, with spell completions too.
=========================================================
Reason:
The only restrictions are "must be a touch spell" and "must be a magus spell". Thus you can use spellstrike any touch spell from the magus list, regardless of source.

Canonically, whips.

I may have expressed it wrongly, but I never talked about spellstrike. Here's the deal:

Flaming/Elemental Touch. This gives you a touch attack instead of being a touch spell with a bunch of charges like Chill Touch. This means you can cast it and, using spell combat, use those touch attacks as your full attack routine instead of whatever else you have (as in: you cast a spell and do a bunch of touch attacks)

Fire Breath does not require attack rolls at all, and so it doesn't fit anywhere in spell combat's "do all your attacks and cast a spell". You can, however, cast fire breath through spell combat. You just can't attack with it through spell combat.
(The latter is subject to defining what an attack really is)

Nope. Stick to your scimitars and sabers, the spell crit is stuck to x2. It's in the post Grick linked too.

Elemental Touch last more than one round. The first round you could Spell Combat but how do you handle the second round? The same with Fire Breath and Flaming Sphere, can you Spell Combat the next succeeding rounds?

Flaming Sphere works normally but you can't redirect it when you use spell combat (you don't have the move action), and fire breath does not interact at all with Spell Combat.

Spell Shield is a trap. The spell Shield is available for the same price, starts out better, lasts longer and gives you an immunity just for the encore. They also don't stack, which means Spell Shield only gets better after you beat int 18

Doesn't really change anything, does it? Last I checked spells with multiple touch targets have no expiring clause that isn't common to normal touch spells: lasts until discharged or another spell is cast.
Thus you don't need to unload it all in a single round.

Spellstrike with spells that allow multiple touches per casting? Was looking at that a little bit ago, and got turned off by the ammount of feats you would need. Was going to go half elf with Ancestral Arms alternate racial trait from the APG.

Or...you full attack, casting it through spell combat.

Strictly speaking, he needs to hold a weapon and have a free hand. The Magonk could flurry unarmed strikes as kicks and headbutts while holding a totally not-used-as-weapon weapon and cast on the remaining free hand. Oh, and the weapon doesn't have to be decorative or ever used as a weapon... put a wand or rod in it.

Actually, it's quite dubious on whether or not it can be used.
1) Spell Combat is "A full round action where you do all your attacks and cast a spell"
2) Flurry is "a full attack action

The two abilities do not use the same actions (though both fill a full-round action), so if you interpret spell combat's "all your attacks" as "a full attack action", you can flurry in spell combat.

TWF doesn't really apply to anything here other than giving players something to compare.

You also don't lose the spell if you miss, which is handy if you have higher str (which you should if you want to use all your class features).

Is there something in Spellstrike that prevents the AoO from casting a spell? The free melee attack doesn't provoke, but the casting of the spell still does. So unless you're exactly 5ft. away from your target (5ft. step can interrupt your other actions), you're still taking an AoO.

You are correct.

You still have to cast defensively, so a close ranged ranged touch spell provokes once instead of twice.

That's one thing. Higher level games will see that. Fast-casting prestige classes will see that. Gestalt games will see that a lot, and you know they will happen. Rarity is not an excuse to ignore the higher levels. The compatibility terms also mean you can't just ignore previous content either.

Please don't ignore the whole "nasty ranged debuffs no longer provoking" bit.

...More or less.
It works with Broad Study, so multiclassed and gestalt Magi will see more use of it.
You are also forgetting goodies like Disintegrate(let it crit on 18-20!) and debuffs like Flesh to Stone. The latter may not cause more damage, but rids you of pesky AoOs and the capstone beefs its DC.

Plus if that high level wizard has a bonded object then he can cast it spontaneously as well, and this is without digging deep into a limited but extremely useful points per day resource.

Plus, if the magus doesn't have broad study(Wizard), he can't Spell-Combat or Spellstrike it, and it'll be subject to arcane failure anyway.

Running a few simulations some time ago, the longsword is ahead of the scimitar.

While using spellstrike, the scimitar will be ahead any time you beat something that can take crits. Otherwise the longsword is better. Based only on raw bona, like enhancement damage and strength damage, the longsword loses out at some really big number, like +30 or something.

tl;dr: use a high-crit weapon. Damage loss when not spellstriking isn't big enough to matter.

ps.: exotic weapons suck.

Synapse wrote:

What? Touch to cure causes AoO? It's only an attack if the target creature is unwilling, and even then your touch is empowered by a spell, at which point it stops provoking AoOs as normal for touch spells.

The touch to cure provokes if you in a threathened space, so yes it provokes from the guy who's beating on you. Being empowered by a spell only protects you if the spell is a weapon spell like shocking grasp.

Casting the spell may provoke, but, as the rules say, "touching with a touch spell is armed and therefore does not provoke an attack of opportunity". Friendly spells are no exception.

What? Touch to cure causes AoO? It's only an attack if the target creature is unwilling, and even then your touch is empowered by a spell, at which point it stops provoking AoOs as normal for touch spells.

You are correct.

Synapse wrote:

It can be done, you have to pay the following prices:

1) Proficiency
2) Shield cost
3) Arcane Spell failure

Other than that, without a feat of some sort that allows you to attack with the shield and defend at the same time, you will not benefit from your shield as a shield (ac, special effects) on the rounds you attack with the spike.

A mithral shield has no arcane spell failure.

That is a way, correct. And using a mithral shield is "paying" the price =P It could be adamantine instead!

It can be done, you have to pay the following prices:
1) Proficiency
2) Shield cost
3) Arcane Spell failure

Other than that, without a feat of some sort that allows you to attack with the shield and defend at the same time, you will not benefit from your shield as a shield (ac, special effects) on the rounds you attack with the spike.

The requirements is "a light or one-handed melee weapon". It doesn't specify it must be a manufactured weapon, so a natural weapon works just fine.

Synapse wrote:

That doesn't change the spell's nature of having more than one target.

Can a 4th-level Magus with the Close Range Arcana cast Scorching Ray using Spellstrike?

The fact you only have 1 target to choose doesn't change scorching ray's nature as a multi-target spell.

That doesn't change the spell's nature of having more than one target.

Synapse wrote:

Craigory Primodious wrote:

Spellstrike only allows for the use of "Touch" spells. So I dont see this is relevant since you cant use ranged spelss with spell strike.

The Close Range arcana allows you to deliver single-target ranged spells as Touch spells, thus being usable with spellstrike. Stab a disintegrate!

If scorching ray allows for more than 1 target, it can't be Close-Ranged.

Disintegrate isn't a targeted spell, though. It produces an effect. i.e. A Ray.

It's a single target ranged touch attack. The ray doesn't change that.

Spellstrike only allows for the use of "Touch" spells. So I dont see this is relevant since you cant use ranged spelss with spell strike.

The Close Range arcana allows you to deliver single-target ranged spells as Touch spells, thus being usable with spellstrike. Stab a disintegrate!

If scorching ray allows for more than 1 target, it can't be Close-Ranged.

Spellstrike is usable with any manufactured weapon, and only for melee attacks.

So yes, you can use spellstrike through a greatsword. You can also use it on your longbow, you just won't be able to shoot the spell (whack people with the bow, will you!). Or, more ludicrously, cast spellstrike through the gnome you happen to use as a bludgeoning weapon in the bar brawl.

tl;dr: a magus with 9-level spells is no more overpowered than a wizard with 9-level spells. Magic is about clever control, and Spell Combat "doesn't work that way"
=========================================================
You are putting too much value on the full attack. Full attacks are not even remotely competitive with spells, that's the nature of third-edition magic.
You know that enlarged raging frenzying goliath barbarian/fighter/frenzied berserker/whatever that power attack pounce-leap-charges for 4 attacks all with like +60 to damage each?
Still almost completely stopped by a level 1 spell. Rendered useless by a level 2 spell.
That said, magi have a lot of restrictions to be able to full attack and cast a spell at the same time, so most power in that attack is on the spell itself.

Thus, the power of spell combat comes from the action economy. It's about getting off an extra round of attacks, controlling the battlefield while also contributing to damage. It's nice and powerful, but far from overpowered.

In the "Casting Spells" section, touch spells, it says you deliver the spell in the same round you cast it, not in the same action.
Since the only restriction is "same round", you can cast, move and deliver.

Any other action you can normally take is valid too, so you could for example cast, use a swift action, move, call someone names and then deliver the spell.

Spell combat requires a full round action to perform, so spring attack is out for that tactic, unless you stored a spellstrike from a previous round. Whirlwind attack might be allowed as it is a full round action. Whether or not that is a legal combination I'm not sure.

It's not. You can't do two full-round actions in a single round without some gimmick behind it (generally, spells and class features that allow you to do so).

I agree with the lack of attractiveness of the class past Improved Pool. A magus 11/whatever is likely going to have more interesting class features, often even compensating for possible loss of caster levels. Heck, a bland boring eldritch knight will only lose 1 caster level to gain bab, hp and the same number of feats, even without spell critical.

The 3.5 FAQ says that "Temporary hit points gained by multiple applications of the same effect don't stack", so it works exactly like bonus-giving spells like <Animal>'s <Noun>.
That also complies with the general guideline that same-named bona applying to the same thing shouldn't stack. Said guideline didn't change in Pathfinder.

Also Vampiric touch (level 3) at CL 10, it deals 10d6 damage and you gain that much temp HP, and it stacks.

Since when do they stack? They didn't before in 3.5. New applications of vampiric touch just give you the better of "current" or "roll" temp hp.

Haste more than <Animal's><Adjective>, since those lose their value early. Much of the good stuff is there though: Enlarge Person, True Strike, Feather Fall, Invisibility, Mirror Image, Fly, Haste, some of the polymorphs and their upgrades...

It's also pretty much a nonissue for the following reason...

Most campaigns won't go high enough to make use of it.

That's not an excuse to let things slip, though. There's no point in designing a 20 levels class if you don't want to see all 20 levels in good standing. The fact less people will use the latter 7 or 8 doesn't make them less worthy of attention.

Armored Casting is overestimated. One of the biggest things the 3.5 devs said upon making the duskblade was "Yeah, sorry about hexblades, we thought it was nasty but it was quite lame."

Sure sure, but the rules do point that staves are "like walking sticks, quarterstaves or cudgels". Not only are they not required to be a weapon, different staves can also be different weapons.

Well, spell combat says you can "make all your attacks with your melee weapon". If your melee weapon is natural, you perform all attacks common to your full attack with natural weapons (which is all natural weapons, with one at fullbab and 1,5xSTRMOD and all others at fullbab-5 and 0,5xSTRMOD), making sure not to use a claw if it'd leave you without free hands.

Also remember that a full attack with both a crafted and natural weapons is "full weapon iteration + all natural weapons once each at -5 and 0,5xSTRMOD", so a magus with BAB 12, one bite and one claw could do "3 sword attacks, a claw attack and a bite attack" normally...and during spell combat "3 sword attacks and a bite attack" to leave the free hand.

LazarX... Always assuming the worst...

I was curious about this myself, wondering if it's Kosher to wear a Buckler...

PRD:Buckler wrote:

You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm

...despite the fact that the Magus rules seem to exclude it:

Magus Playtest:Spell Combat wrote:

To use this ability, the magus must have one hand free, while wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand.

(emphasis mine)

The solution here is simple. The buckler does not occupy the hand, so when you aren't using the buckler, the hand is free. If you want to spell combat with a buckler, you just won't get its AC and enchantments until the next round. Same deal for wielding 1hs with two hands.

Or "Instead of having a free hand, the magus must hold the wand or staff"
Or, to allow for both casting and wands, "A hand holding a wand or staff is considered free for spellcasting and spellcombat purposes."

What would you want to see in an arch magus prestige class for pathfinder??

or does magus 20 pretty much do it all?

i was thinking about a prestige that requires a level or sorceror, works like mystic theurge (for the spells of both classes) and adds spontaneous casting to the character, but never gets medium or heavy armor...

any comments?

I'm not sure I understand the concept of such a class...It would be "more magus than magus"? Then It would have to be "more [(fighter+wizard/2)+synergy tricks] than [(fighter+wizard/2)+synergy tricks]". What would that be, a wizard/fighter gestalt with similar or more synergy features?

Synapse wrote:

Curiously, it is also not possible to use spell combat with wand wielder.

What do you mean? here is the wording for Wand Wielder, which clearly says that it is about firing a wand instead of a spell DURING SPELL COMBAT:

"Wand Wielder (Su): A magus with this magus arcana can
activate a wand or staff in place of casting a spell when
using spell combat."

You must hold the wand to use it, similarly the staff.

Yes, it's pedantic. Yes, it's ridiculous and obvious. No, that doesn't mean the RAW works as intended; it is enough of a big deal as the game matures, so if this issue isn't fixed, it will be a bother on some game tables. A single statement can fix the problem, so it's only expected that it must be fixed before releasing, instead of erratas and FAQs.

Reread the bolded part you quoted again you kind of left out the "anytime you'd normally be allowed" qualifier for free actions. You can't for instance insert a free action in the middle of your spell cast. Nor in the middle of a weapon attack. Actions are whole and indivisible. When you do an iterative attack series, you can't say I'll take my first attack on target a and wait to see if it drops before I declare the targets on the rest of my iteratives. You have to declare them all at once.

You can. Free actions can be done anytime between anything you do in your turn. Take the 5' step for example.

LazarX wrote:

That is allowed. But Wand Wielding is IN PLACE of Spell Combat not in addition to.

This confuses me greatly. The whole point of Wand Wielder is to modify the way Spell Combat works. It's not possible to use Wand Wielder without Spell Combat.

Curiously, it is also not possible to use spell combat with wand wielder.

Pendagast wrote:

so back to the OPs original question, is seltyiel going to be a magus/ek, now? or a ftr/wizard/magus/ek?

and if so id like to see that build to 20 (just to see how the paizo guys envision it)

You forgot the third possibility... that he might be presented both ways. Although I think the choice is going to be between the original F/W Eldritch Knight and straight Magus.

A 20 level build might be nice to see. But I think the sweet spot for iconics is in the 10-15 range, still within that level area before D20 based play seriously breaks down. If a character does not excite me by level 10, he won't at level 20. And quite frankly I see no point in a Magus taking up ANY of the established prestige classes.

It breaks down at 7... Sometimes at 1.

Now THAT is a satisfying answer :p Notice how when people just said "they said so" they didn't believe.

I believe the true question is... Is Seltyiel a placeholder? The only evidence we have of Seltyiel being something other than an EK is his placeholder image on the beta for the new class.
I don't think he's gonna be retconned into a magus. All new classes got their own iconics, Seltyiel is an iconic of two or three things already, and the effort to make a new iconic from scratch requires sort of the least effort involved in making a new class.