PrinceOfPurple's page

PrinceOfPurple wrote:

you are playing it wrong... i mean you are using the spell strike action in a way that it is not written. like citricking said if you miss you hold the spell in your weapon until the end of the next turn. also imagine doing that with MAP prior to the magus (+5 to hit).

As I pointed out, my Wizard had a way of circumventing that with True Strike.

As a Magus, I can only apply True Strike to the weapon attack with the rules as they are presented, making the spell striking portion of the feat kind of useless.

I get it that save spells could be the way to do it, but most creatures that are at least your level or higher will just shrug them off. Spell attacks can make a difference in that context.

Also, while some ideas from the previous edition may not translate directly into this one (Mutagenist, I am looking at you), Shocking Grasp still screams Magus to me.

My main point is that the Magus' spell striking felt poorly executed in the sense that your main gimmick is 'You place spells into your weapon or body to hit enemies with a powerful Strike and spell combination. Because your spells per day are limited, you rely on trusty, carefully chosen cantrips. Even without spells, you can hold your own in battle.' but your little spells do not count as much for doing that and the cantrips that currently exist do not present great alternatives.

i see.. you can still true strike and shocking grasp as a magus without the strike, but i think you want more.

if the wording of spell strike was put in a way you could use true strike with the second part of the hit (with spell strikes too) it would be too strong in my opinion, and also would make true strike an must have which i don't like.
i would not like if the spell would always hit in case on the weapon strike hitting, because in this way every magus could dump int and this would not make sense.
i think one of the best ways to fix the proficiency (or save dc) of the spell would be make the spell attack part of the magus spellstrike a spell save!

i'll expain my idea
you use striking spell into a shocking grasp.
you hit the strike and roll to hit the "imbued" shocking grasp you fail!
you still hit for half the damage dice you would deal with the spell.

in this way you did :
1) 2 strike at the same map
2) apply the synthesis
3) made the spell more reliable even without buffing the magus casting proficiency
4) still get the i hit the enemy with the strike and grazed him with the spell kind of vibe

i think it would be a cool failure effect and paizo did something similiar with fighter feat.
what do you think about it?

Guys the negativity in the subforum for playtesting is oppressive right now. Also we need to give feedbacks on how we feel paizo design on new classes is effective or need to be bettered, not on how we want them to function because super optimized other classes have a little niche on current playtest without having the flavour or core mechanics.
right now the eidolon (from only a mechanicals standpoint) is a stornger version of animal companion, even without factoring in the bonus it gets from your proficiencies(inside and outside combat) or items he can equip (not added to the playtest but cited on page 15).
That is the place i think they should be, and the place i think paizo wanted them to be, since they MUST not be as strong as another martial class that would feel stupid playing that instead of a summoner.
The restricted casting is fine, summoner can't be as strong and versatile as full caster with that kind of "companion", even if other caster classes have their own additional niche.
I agree their ideal turn can get improved, but if you think about it they just need some more options, maybe a few conduit cantrips that would give niche advantages and come in in batches with different feats.
Synthesis is cool but should make you (your eidolon when you use it) a bit stronger since like i said you are still weaker than a normal martial class.
In Exploration and social activities right now the Summoner has an edge to any other class, since it can be aided (aid action) by his eidolon that will always have high proficiencies on the ones shared with the summoner. The eidolon can constantly scout around dungeons or the wilds and freely comunicate with eachother (telepatically even when not summoned) about dangers and ambush and if in need quickly getting unsummoned or even when getting 0 hp it simply do not die and the summoner don't get the dying condition but just unconscious (correct me here if im wrong) and some healer can get him up since the enemy will probably be at a distance of 100 feet (or more with unfettered).
The good thing is all the objection i read untill now can easily be fixed with more feats or a "racket/thesis/edge" choice containing one or more feats.
I'll expain, many of you want to make a more specialized summoner, the ones that want it to summon more monster (with cast a spell not eidolons) already have a few feats, and i can see myself taking them if i want that kind of flavour.
We still miss some alternative for other "archetipes" of summoner like the "eidolon-booster summoner" which will need more conduit counter that will surely be added since there are only 2 of them right now, and some options for the "fight-togheter summoner" which should still be weaker than a "fight-togheter ranger" since the summoner will have focus and limited casting options.
Eidolon customizing feat should probably be added to give them moster ability or something like that.
I'd also like to see some eidolons with a bit of casting among the ones that will be added, cool features could be implemented like casting something togheter or using 3 action to use 2 2-component spells.

Looking forward to what will come out of the class, the balancing work along with the class identity, flavour and customization is one of the strongest point of 2e in my opinion, and i like the place this class is going to fit inside the already exisit ones.