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.
Answering your question: yes, it works. And yes, with other spell triggers. And yes, with spell completions too.
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.
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.Flaming Touch can be used normally with spell combat, since they are normal (touch) attacks.
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.
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.
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.
Mirrel the Marvelous wrote:
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.
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.
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:
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.
Patryn of Elvenshae wrote:
The fact you only have 1 target to choose doesn't change scorching ray's nature as a multi-target spell.
Quantum Steve wrote:
It's a single target ranged touch attack. The ray doesn't change that.
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.
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"
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.
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.
Mirrel the Marvelous wrote:
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).Spell strike is "a full round action that lets you perform a full attack and cast a standard-action spell".
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'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.
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.
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.
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?
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
You must hold the wand to use it, similarly the staff.If you wield a weapon and a wand, you no longer have a hand free to use the Spell Combat action, since Wand Wielder never lets you bypass that requirement. Same deal for staves, unless you want to wield the staff itself(the two statements about double weapons are conflicting on that, too).
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.
You can. Free actions can be done anytime between anything you do in your turn. Take the 5' step for example.
Curiously, it is also not possible to use spell combat with wand wielder.
It breaks down at 7... Sometimes at 1.
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.