Spell casting accuracy is way more complicated with the magus than it seems. An anecdotal look at 13th level
Angel Hunter D wrote:
I think it's a given that Striking Spell won't go to publication in its current state.
But if someone told me I HAD to play a Magus right now, I would dip into an archetype that offers some other offensive gimmick for my bread and butter.
Dubious Scholar wrote:
It's obviously not what they intend, but it's literally what they have written.
I agree entirely- which is why I think the language they chose to express that needs to be rewritten.
I understand what the sigil is supposed to do, but as written the sigil goes WAY beyond that:
"The link between you and your eidolon takes the
Can't be obscured by anything? So if I close my eyes, my eyelids won't obscure my view of them? A wall won't? A mountain? Invisibility?
Anyway, clearly the intent is just that the link between eidolon and character is always obvious, rather than anything silly like the above. I'd just suggest taking another pass on the wording used to describe the sigil.
But I suppose a Magus could pick up Double Slice and forgo their Synthesis, so I can try that as well.
It wouldn't "fix" Striking Spell, but I think there's an interesting Magus(Shooting Star)/Dual Weapon Warrior build to be had using throwing weapons, Dual Slice, Dual Thrower, Dual Onslaught.
nicholas storm wrote:
My soloution would be to never have the spell dissipate. That way you can pre buff and you never waste spells
Or at least move the time limit on dissipation out to 1 minute. Then you don't really have to worry about what carrying around an extra spell into another combat might look like.
Even changing the dissipation, there'd still be some basic to-hit issues with Striking Spell though.
I don't think Eldritch Shot would be a good fit on the Magus though- too few spell slots makes losing spells on misses hurt so much worse. Plus Striking Spells works with so many more spells in general.
I'd rather see them make Striking Spells work at a math level than just copy/paste Eldritch Shot's mechanics.
There is a lot of complaining going on but I find it hard to believe anyone has actually playtested this yet. It came out yesterday. So could judgement be reserved?
There's always value in playtesting, but nothing here is so complex that certain things won't be apparent to simple inspection.
You know, at first I thought Strikers Scroll was the only way to use a scroll with Striking Spell, just by implication of the feat's existence.
But seeing how there doesn't seem to be any rule that would actually cause that to be the case, the only benefit if Strikers Scroll that I can see is that it would let you use the scroll while keeping your grip on a 2-handed weapon.
And I though this was a bad feat before!
Angel Hunter D wrote:
And if Striking Spell is situational, it should be a feat, not a core class feature. Monks Flurry all the time, Champions get shield and reactions all the time, Rangers Hunt - Why aren't Magi supposed to be using Striking Spell?
I'd be happy if they just split the difference-
It's okay if there are going to be turns where maybe you wouldn't want to use Striking Spell- but it pretty clearly needs to be more useful than it is currently (especially at low levels where there's not going to be a stack of feats to make it worthwhile).
Shooting Star does work with a much larger variety of spells than Eldritch Shot will, and you do get subsequent chances to hit with it if your initial shot misses. That's not to say that Shooting Star is better than Eldritch Shot- but they're different enough that I wouldn't just replace SS with ES.
Shooting Star does seem pretty weak when compared to the other two syntheses though, so I do think it needs some improvement just for internal class balance.
I feel like you're having a one sided argument here. I'm not opposed to them tweaking Striking Spell to be more reliable. I am pointing out that if they do make Striking Spell more reliable, they'll want to tone down Slide Casting.
I'm not saying they shouldn't be able to Striking Spell every turn, I'm saying that if/when they get there Slide Casting is probably too much bang for the buck.
If they enhance the accuracy much (or the wrong way), I could see them needing to nerf Slide Casting. Right now its balancing factor is that you probably aren't going to get to use Striking Spell every single turn as you'll often make multiple attacks fishing for a hit.
It compounds too if you pick up a feat through an archetype that gives you extra action efficiency on a Strike. Pick up something like Acrobat's Tumbling Strike and you might reliably doing 5 actions worth of stuff every round before even looking at haste effects.
Bast L. wrote:
You can work around the action economy though, whether trough the several available haste effects, or simply leaning on attack patterns that don't require using your own spells to Striking Spell every turn.
It's situational, and I kind of wish Capture Spell was a viable option for the non-Spell Sliding syntheses, but I do think this feat is pretty much good to go as written. Worst case, the other available level 8 Magus feats are also strong if not even stronger.
It does not feel like an advantage if it removes gameplay opportunity. It's like the DM removing all undead from the game because you have a Paladin and a Cleric in the party. (to a less extreme extent)
I mean this as gently as I can, but if your DM is removing that many options just to hamstring characters, then they could stand to improve considerably as DMs.
From my point of view- Capture Spell means I can focus my tactical choices around mitigating area of effect damage. Whether that's because I know that targeting me specifically is a large risk for my opponents, or because I know my opponents are leaving their Disintegrates at home and just bringing bigger Fireballs, the end result is about the same for me.
Like the 10th level synthesis feats be "casting a non-cantrip spell" instead of "a spell from a spell-slot".
I can see why they wouldn't want to do that- that's a window for future abuses if something comes along that would allow at-will casting of a Striking Spell eligible spell (non-cantrip).
I realize that many of these are discussed in detail in their own threads, this is just a review of feats with issues as they seem to me at present. If I don't mention a feat, it's because I think it's good or very good.
Raise a Tome: as mentioned elsewhere, this is nearly incompatible with the Magus Synthesis features. Also, it could stand to have the flavor text explain the the book is mystically protected or something, because as described it's pretty implausible.
Spirit Sheath: nice feat, but the action economy benefit of getting a free interact to draw with Striking Spell might better be spun off into its own level 1 feat that would work with any sheath, not just a "spirit" one. Or better yet just make that a default benefit of Striking Spell.
Spell Parry: this feat should also benefit from an additional +1 if the weapon in question has the Parry trait. That aside, this is probably my favorite feat chain in the class.
Strikers Scroll: as a feat, this is pretty bad both mechanically and aesthetically. I'd suggest dropping the requirement to "affix" the scroll- this just isn't strong enough to burden it with a prep time. Even then, this is really limited for anyone who doesn't also have the Scroll Trickster archetype
Martial Caster: all of the level 6 feats are strong, but this one is so essential to the class that the other two are almost trap options for their level. It's fine that the Magus is spell-slot starved as a balance feature, but that makes anything that gives additional spell slots EXTREMELY valuable.
Comet Spell: Shooting Star is already the synthesis that see the least benefit from Striking Spell, and this feat requires both a battlefield geometry that will rarely happen and target selection that likely won't be optimal for the situation. This feat needs to be much stronger to give Shooting Star some teeth- right now a Shooting Star Magus would be better of with any of the other available level 10 feats (Cascading and Quickened are just much better than this).
Whirlwind Spell: While I acknowledge the action economy inherent in this, I'm not convinced it's so strong as to warrant its level 20 requirement. Consider dropping this to level 18 (or lower?).
Look, I know this is a fantasy game, but-
As a life-long reader who is old enough to have read more paper books than digital ones, who dreads moving because packed boxes of books are heavy, and who worked in a book store for several years:
If you are holding a book in one hand and you try to parry with it, your BEST case scenario is that you aren't going to be holding on the that book any more. And it likely isn't going to be in much shape to ever be read again afterwards either.
Yeah, Capture Spell was my favorite too!
I don't think the action economy is much of a problem at all; the other feats and features contain a lot of action economy hacks that smooth that out really well (and for some builds, trying to Strike Spell with your own spells might be a bit of a trap option).
And "harmfull spells" is a really big bucket. Harm isn't just damage.
Shifter on the other hand gives things that are more unique. So they have a higher chance of being a full class.
I don't know what it would mean for Shifter in relation to the prior edition, but in PF2 this feels very in line with other "feat chain" style archetypes (Mauler, Martial Artist, etc).
I'd expect the Dedication to give the Wildshape focus spell, and then access to the appropriate Druid feats at min level +2. Add in a couple of archetype exclusive feats as gravy and call it a day.
I mentioned that for the ape later in the same post. :)
Sorry I missed that, forum browsing while distracted!
Anyway, there are ground dwelling upright bipedal birds that would make great Animal Companions- they're just not well characterized by the basic "Bird" entry.
They'd be more aptly described by the Dromaoesaur rules really.
Bear is kind of debatable, but the the rest of those examples are solid.
Some of those support abilities that key off of reach could be pretty useful if the character also has a way to reliably Strike multiple targets- but it would be very hard to fit the feats to do that into an Animal Companion build. And I'm still skeptical it's worth missing 7 AC for.
Reach is amazing, but at the moment there's no inherent way for Animal Companions to get it, since there's no Specialization or other option to make them Huge. They potentially go up to Large size with Savage or Indomitable even if they didn't start with it...but that's as far as they go.
There are a couple of Animal Companions who walk upright, and would get 10ft reach at Large per CRB Table 9-1. Ape and Arboreal Sapling come to mind specifically.
That said, I can't think of a combination that leverages that reach bonus to be as good as +7 AC.
I'm not up for modelling the math myself at the moment, but in order to avoid some MAP the stack introduces an extra dice roll. I'm not sure the end result is really that much more reliable than just having your teammate make their last attack at full MAP on the enemy target.
Especially at the opportunity cost of an action, a reaction, and multiple feats. As has been pointed out, there are already better ways to achieve similar that are clearly within the design intent of the game (Marshal archetype Target of Opportunity).
I'd say leave it as it is- it's genuinely more amusing that it is practical. The only vaguely practical application of it I can think of would be if the monk has line-of-sight on a target that their teammate does not.
Gray Warden wrote:
attack is synonymous to Strike, but not to an action with the Attack trait (since spell attacks are not Strikes, and would not benefit from, nor trigger, the feat).
This reminds me of my general confusion regarding attacks from Polymorph spell effects, and whether the wording "which are the only attacks you can use" allows you to socket those attacks into Strikes provided by feats.
The whole Strike/Attack/attack nomenclature needs to be clarified as to when these terms are synonymous and when they are not.
I don't see anything wrong with going that route- would make a good elf or gnome build describing how they've spent a ridiculously long lifespan dabbling in stuff.
But it's not especially strong either. Gives up a lot of opportunity cost skipping strong combat feats or specializing in specific skill sets.
It also has some unfortunate wording; a GM might rule that magical fog such as Obscuring Mist isn't 'weather'. Tempest Oracle is much more direct.
I don't think anybody would have too hard of a time arguing that fog is weather. And if magical fire is 'fire', then magical weather is 'weather' (or insert a score of similar equivalencies).
But yeah, I don't see a way for a base Druid to quite reach that same lofty end damage without Disintegrate.
Stay Out of My Personal Space
This is a pure gimmick build designed to stack Shoving Sweeps/Shove Down/The Harder They Fall/Boundless Reprisals to fling to the ground anything trying to move within reach of your weapon. Use a reach/shove or reach/trip weapon for maximum effect. It also stacks Improved Knockdown/Sneak Attacker/The Harder They Fall as the main offensive action on its own turn. (Though there's almost certainly a better build for that second feat stack just going Rogue(Ruffian)/Mauler).
1) Power Attack
Could probably do psychics entirely separate from the "magic" systems in the game. Make every power a feat, lesser powers balanced on pure action economy. Stronger stuff balanced on "once per minute" or "once per day".
There's some temptation to also implement psychic focus spells- but with all the magic classes already in the game why keep rehashing the same mechanics?
That seems accurate.
Only other downside I can think about it would be the opportunity cost of not doing some other big Strike with that action.
Well, that and not necessarily knowing the "level" of your opponent I guess. Makes for a very easy way to get some quick metagame knowledge though.
The more I stare at the feat the more I think it needs a rewrite.
Far as I can tell, incapacitation per the rules only applies on saving throws. So just the fort save has the incap effect
Sidebar on CRB page 157, note the mention of attack roll:
"Incapacitation: An ability with this trait can take a
Wildshape Druids have a hefty load of high priority class feats to take, but there's JUST enough room to pick up Acrobat Dedication and Dodge Away at levels 2 and 6 respectively. Acrobatic Dedication gives the Druid some much welcomed "free" skill advances while ensuring access to the clutch skill feat Aerobatics Mastery at level 7, while Dodge Away is an all-star reaction whenever you're attacked in melee, regardless of what form you're in.
1) Wild Shape
It's always better to have an "official" option, but if you have a GM who's willing to work with you, you could probably cobble together a respectable "Gnoll" by borrowing from the ancestries of the already published races.
I don't think you'd create any balance issues mish-mashing together feats and heritages from the Catfolk and Orc ancestries, for example.