Tooosk's page

Tooosk wrote:

If Healing Bomb is a bomb that is intended to function as the old version of the feat but with the Gliminal rule as sort-of-standard, great, then make the Gliminal rule default/recommended in print.

There is just no way that class feat text is written with the PoV of a random monster's sidebar advice. Even inside the Gliminal, that text only encourages, it's not even a proper mechanic there.

There is also no conceivable way that Healing Bomb was nerfed with the Gliminal in mind. Again, some obscure monster that the table may not even have the book for does not affect class feats like that.

Furthermore, the PFS ruling is also made without thinking about Healing Bomb specifically.

I support GMs who want to use the houserule mechanic, and support buffing Healing Bomb by a degree of success if they so choose.
But it is important to not use erroneous justifications for doing so. Pretending that feat text actually instead is wrong, and is instead one degree of success better because of this obscure monster, would set a really bad precedent.

Specific trumps for a reason. Healing Bomb specifically tells you what happens for the roll result.

In my opinion, that feat is so badly performing that GMs *should* edit it, but that must be done without lying about why.
If remastered Healing Bomb wasn't nerfed, and did heal the full amount on miss, people would not be using Gliminal text to justify another buff to ensure full healing even on crit miss.

It's quite apparent that the gliminal text is not genuinely driving this argument.
It is the bad performance of Healing Bomb that drives folk to seek reasons for buffing. And some aversion to houserules further pushes folk away from that response, and toward making erroneous RaW claims.

If the text only existed for the Gliminal, that's one thing. But PFS uses that description of modified rolls for ALL situations where a player would willing be a target of a roll, not just when fighting a Gliminal. It's in the Paizo FAQ for official organized play.

In other words, altering a degree of success is how Healing Bomb should work in official games, but lacks the RAW to support that for most tables.

The intent of the remaster Healing Bomb nerf may (or may not) have been because the Gliminal rule being applied in pre-remaster organized games made it so that it was guaranteed not to critically fail, so it always (except on an unconscious target who cannot be willing, but was still -6 AC from unconscious/flat-footed) always healed the full amount of the elixir. Which deserved a nerf.

The Gliminal thing does not affect Healing Bomb, which says to make an attack roll, and specifically lists outcomes for the possible results. It's a non-starter to then edit those listed results while claiming to be following the text's instruction.

A GM is fine to houserule an ability similar to the Gliminal text, but that's not a real mechanic RaW. Items like Life Shot explicitly grant a mechanic where willing targets are off-guard. This shows firstly that a full degree of success upgrade is out of line, and secondly that such mechanics need to be inside their respective ability/item text to exist.

Healing Bomb is 100% compatible with Quick Bomber, in my opinion. Still a trap feat that was already kinda bad before the remaster nerfed it an entire degree of success. Don't forget that bombs are supposed to have an item bonus for their attack roll, meaning your +0 Healing Bombs will be even harder to land on your allies, legit should assume 40% at best to hit when MAP 0.

IMO, don't be a coward and pretend the Gliminal thing is RaW, houserule buff Healing Bomb and shift the results up one degree of success outright. Heck, buff it more than that, allow it to work with more items than Elix o Lf.

Well, Pathfinder Society has ruled to adopt exactly the Gliminal text, see https://paizo.com/pathfindersociety/faq :

"Pathfinder Society uses the optional rules published with the liminal on page 143 of Bestiary 3 for this situation, which are reproduced here:

There aren’t default rules for a creature choosing to be hit[...], but you can allow an ally to improve their outcome by one degree of success against a willing target or allow the target to worsen the result of their saving throw by one step."

So it's at least somewhat assumed/intended although a GM can choose to be more lenient (i.e. Healing Bombs just work all the time) or less (i.e. no modifications).

If Healing Bomb is a bomb that is intended to function as the old version of the feat but with the Gliminal rule as sort-of-standard, great, then make the Gliminal rule default/recommended in print. If they want to print a specific rule for Healing Bomb so our best guidance isn't a reference to a specific rule in a pre-remaster bestiary? Also great. Maybe make the healed player use a reaction to change the degree of success? What we have now is variable from table to table.

Whether Healing Bomb is supposed to be an alchemical bomb compatible with Quick Bomber might be obvious, it's only implied. There's wiggle room in the text to let it not be. If it's expected to be allowable with Quick Bomber, make it behave as a bomb in all situations and not just when thrown. Or just add the Bomb trait to it, which conveys nothing mechanically other than that it's a bomb.

I do not allow things like Assurance to trigger things that require rolls, since there is no roll, in my games.

The Fortune effect itself says "A fortune effect beneficially alters how you roll your dice. You can never have more than one fortune effect alter a single roll."

If you argue that "there is no roll" when using Assurance, then the restriction that the Fortune trait imposes-- that only a single roll is altered-- does not take place when using Assurance. The roll is forgone, it never happens.

So you could use Assurance on a skill check and if it fails, use something like Halfling Luck as a fortune effect to "reroll". But you can't "reroll" because there wasn't a first roll, and you're in this weird state of being.

It makes more sense for "roll" to be the common term of the process of determining the Result of an attack roll, skill check, or saving throw.

What constitutes a "roll"? Is it the moment you would typically roll a die, or actually having to roll the die?

One hypothetical is with Devise a Stratagem. Do you need to cast Guidance before the DaS, or before the attack stratagem? DaS says "you must use the result of the d20 roll for your Strike's attack roll instead of rolling".

A second hypothetical where this is applies is with Assurance (Medicine) and Risky Surgery, which it says "if you roll a success, you get a critical success instead". Assurance says "You can forgo rolling a skill check for that skill to instead receive a result of 10 + your proficiency bonus".

In either case the intent may be for the roll replacement mechanic to count as a roll for the purposes of the rule modification.

-------------

Does a Grapple occupy a hand of the grappler? While it is a requirement to perform the Grapple action, strict RAW says that the hand only needs to be free to perform the action but not maintained.

It is uncertain whether the intent of the Grapple is to allow re-gripping weapons by the grappler and to take advantage of the Off-Guard to balance with other actions or if requiring an enemy to Escape is simply strong enough to occupy a Grappler's hand for the entirety of the effect.

-------------

Is the PFS "Gliminal" willing target rule, i.e. "you can allow an ally to improve their outcome by one degree of success against a willing target or allow the target to worsen the result of their saving throw by one step", intended to apply to an Alchemist's Healing Bomb feat?

-------------

Is a Healing Bomb supposed to be a Bomb and usable with Quick Bomber? Or is it worded to purposely require two actions to use Quick Alchemy + throw even if you have the Quick Bomber feat? The language from the remaster distinctly changed from clearly adding the Bomb trait to dancing around it.

-------------

Magus's Analysis: This makes a secret RK check (so you do not know the results), but Spellstrike gets recharged on Success. If you critically fail (and thus get results as if you succeeded), do you know if your Spellstrike is recharged?

CR+4 enemies are usually single bosses, so you will switch to single target attack cantrips.

You would use the AoE blasting more on mook fights or CR equal to lower.

You can do both with only a very small loss of efficiency likely barely noticeable in a coordinated group debuffing and setting up enemies for defeat.

CR19 and CR20 enemies will still assume the legendary casting progression and key ability modifier stats that you won't have. You may still very much have good success, I just imagine your individual contributions will be somewhat less impactful at high levels assuming the rest of the group is constant in their progression.

I'm not criticizing the build so much as I'm saying the math shifts and may play differently.

Yeah, Imaginary Weapon is awkward and I'd swap it and Astral Rain if I could to avoid the poaching (although that probably just leads to Oscillating Wave getting poached by Starlit Span Maguses instead, but). Also, in-class it's really hard to make use of it early on (it really wants Ghostly Carrier in order to be safe to use, but that's a 2nd rank spell). Astral Rain doesn't have any of those usability issues.

Imaginary Weapon could be made a lot more useful if it was, say, d4s or d6s at range and d8 in melee instead of needing Warp Space to substitute its amp and cut its damage in half. Or a three-action cast for range.

Its poachability is much more about the Magus not having its own class option to pick up a Conflux Spell that you can use with Spellstrike. And that can be fixed with just a new Magus feat.

Tooosk wrote:

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Tridus wrote:

The Raven Black wrote:

Why do I feel people always forget that most spells actually have some effect even when the opponent successfully saves ?

I took Expansive Spellstrike for my pre-Remaster Starlit Span Magus MC Cleric simply because it let her reliably inflict vitality damage on undead through Vitality Lash.

Only on a crit success will she deal no Vitality damage. Max INT is...

Because spending what is effectively 3 actions and a spell slot to do very little feels bad. It's *something* if you can exploit a weakness, but it's extremely underwhelming. And if you don't max the casting stat for the spell, it's going to happen a LOT. Its not like Magus has enough spell slots to have that happening all the time.

Vitality Lash is a cantrip that goes against a fort save which can be weak on undead. Hitting certain saving throws can be far more effective than going after AC. Giants and dragons usually have weaker reflex saves than AC.

Since it is not hard to focus on intel and dex as a starlit span magus, you can often have the best of both worlds with expansive spellstrike.

Expansive Spellstrike does discard some of the ways you can game the attack roll with Sure Strike or Hero Points, though.

And your saves really tail off compared to other casters as you miss out on Legendary proficiency and will also likely be behind in modifiers.

You'll still end up doing more damage if you're multi-attacking every hit.

Don't really understand why this some either or in anyone's mind. You build up intel and you build up dex, so you have a great stat in each. You mix up aoe spellstrike and regular spellstrike as needed.

Why do people in these discussion paint this as some absolute? Like the Starlit Span Spellstriker suddenly can't single target attack with Spellstrike? It changes nothing, but allows more AoE attacking and blasting which will be more damage while barely impacting single target...

Just saying there are particular pitfalls here. Your save-based spells might be equal or -1 to a full caster but at level 20 you'll be -4 (two points of proficiency, two points of modifier). All those CR+4 enemies are balanced against the modifiers of a full caster.

Knowing that that dip is coming and preparing for it at the end may be wise.

I also find that limited spell slots can mean you don't have the flexibility to target a weak damage type and a weak save at the same time like other casters with more choices.

Tridus wrote:

The Raven Black wrote:

Why do I feel people always forget that most spells actually have some effect even when the opponent successfully saves ?

I took Expansive Spellstrike for my pre-Remaster Starlit Span Magus MC Cleric simply because it let her reliably inflict vitality damage on undead through Vitality Lash.

Only on a crit success will she deal no Vitality damage. Max INT is...

Because spending what is effectively 3 actions and a spell slot to do very little feels bad. It's *something* if you can exploit a weakness, but it's extremely underwhelming. And if you don't max the casting stat for the spell, it's going to happen a LOT. Its not like Magus has enough spell slots to have that happening all the time.

Vitality Lash is a cantrip that goes against a fort save which can be weak on undead. Hitting certain saving throws can be far more effective than going after AC. Giants and dragons usually have weaker reflex saves than AC.

Since it is not hard to focus on intel and dex as a starlit span magus, you can often have the best of both worlds with expansive spellstrike.

Expansive Spellstrike does discard some of the ways you can game the attack roll with Sure Strike or Hero Points, though.

And your saves really tail off compared to other casters as you miss out on Legendary proficiency and will also likely be behind in modifiers.

One thing that people don't realize is that with a d10/d12 weapon, you may have a better turn by attacking twice than by Spellstriking with a cantrip. This is definitely true at early levels when you should be casting Runic Weapon up until at least level 4 with your Striking rune-- spells typically are only

I didn't find Force Fang to be the best option when I built my II Magus. I'd note that while Thunderous Strike isn't guaranteed damage, it is two opportunities to do damage, with one of those being save-based. The bonus damage from the save is roughly half of your expected Force Fang damage but you also get the Strike in there for free. Combined with the advice above about just two Strikes being a viable turn?

Of course, the extra Focus Point is always valuable, but I find a Psychic archetype will often win out as a better use of your feats compared to Force Fang.

Tooosk wrote:

So I'd say you're mechanically encouraged to use a reload 1 ranged weapon

Reload weapon feels kind of devastating given DaS action economy. More or less the same problem the magus has.

Devise, Strike, Reload is an entire turn spent for a single attack and nothing else. That's frighteningly bad, especially given the investigator's class fantasy of being tactically minded and analytical.

Which again sort of helps point to a lot of the problems with the class. The stuff it appears to want to do is at odds with its own mechanics.

It's also a class that talks about using "keen insights" to thwart foes and aid allies, but its central combat mechanic is, again, just weird sneak attack. Like everything else aside that feels creatively really underbaked. Where's the utility? The cleverness? The analytical mind at play? Even Rogues get debilitations on top of their unga. How is it that the Investigator has one of the most tactically barren toolkits in the game?

Tactic: Bring two reload 1 guns. On turns where DaS fails hard, consider whether you want to reload both guns, take cover, RK, draw an item like special ammo or a bomb for next turn, retreat, demoralize, etc.

Tactic: Bring a reload 1 gun and an Air Repeater. Shoot the appropriate gun at the appropriate time. Only reload after you expect to crit.

Tactic: Bring a reload 1 gun and a melee weapon (possibly throwable with a Returning rune). Only reload when you're at long distance or expect to crit.

Tactic: Pick up Risky Reload from a gun-oriented archetype. For an Investigator it isn't actually risky, and you now have your action economy back.

Yeah, you need to know good tactics to use good tactics, but there's no "good tactics" feat.

SuperBidi wrote:

shroudb wrote:

Sorc with psy dedication neither gets access to the higher level Amps/unique cantrips nor can he be made with Int primary, both of which are very important differences.

That's why I said it "would certainly be a more fitting choice" and not it is a more fitting choice. There are still a few reasons outside Unleash Psyche to go for a Psychic, but I think it's the main selling point to it. For me, Unleash Psyche is like Ranger's Edge, you can choose to play a Ranger for something else, but it'll be the main selling point for most players.

As I said earlier, in my playthrough, I did use Unleash, just that it wasn't the real focus of the build. Either unleashing on round 3-4 which was my average to clean up things with EA, or the occasional T2 true strike amp TK too snipe a threat that the rest of the group would struggle.

Unleash imo is only a tool in psychics arsenal, and not something you blindly do on T2. The downside on later turns is significant enough that you want to guestimate in each combat how long it will last and time it with that.

That's very much unlike stuff like Rage where you want to rage as soon as you can reliably maximize damage, which will always be T1/2 without any other considerations.

It's very much down to party role. Sometimes you're there to be the magic barbarian. You may often be better off, as the only AOE character, to Unleash early so the party can pick off a few targets early and then have you sit out the clean-up.

It's often good to delay the Unleash, but the fact that your Psyche abilities like Psi Burst are locked behind the Unleash is particularly annoying.

But outside of the incomplete picture DaS and Strategic Strike paints, nothing really tells you what kind of weapons you're meant to use.

The class absolutely tells you what weapons you're supposed to use, at least at base.

DaS excludes melee/thrown weapons (and unarmed attacks) without finesse or agile traits. That's a whole bunch that are right out. Of what's left, you have a few d8 weapons that are 2-handed or uncommon or Advanced, but you're looking at a 1H d6 weapon most of the time in melee.

Or ranged, which is going to out-damage that 1H d6 weapon all the time. With a feat you can add 1H weapons from the club group, which are also d6 (although the leiomano is a Fatal d10).

The preference for Finesse/Ranged as well as only having Light armor proficiency encourages you to stack DEX rather than STR, which in turn means a small bonus if any to melee attack rolls.

You don't get Shield Block for free like most other martials, so you aren't encouraged to just stand in melee.

DaS working just once per turn and your key modifier being INT gives you a soft disincentive for multiple attacks, although an Agile weapon preference does address that somewhat. You also don't get any MAP reducers on a second hit or multi-action activities to hit twice. So you want to attack with a single action. Your other actions lean on mastery of the base actions of the game and can be movement, a skill check like Feint or Demoralize, taking cover, or whatever.

Your combat style, then, is either that of a skirmisher (move in/attack/move out) or ranged (with ample turns to reload). If you take the hints and go with DEX as your second stat, there is very little reason not to be primarily ranged.

In the category of ranged weapons, knowing your roll in advance is particularly useful with weapons that have the Fatal Aim trait so you can use an extra action to add damage dice.

So I'd say you're mechanically encouraged to use a reload 1 ranged weapon (Sukgung, Arbalest, or firearm). Thrown alchemical bombs may also be a good option even if you're paying gold for them-- you will rarely waste them. A rapier, short sword, or leiomano (with Takedown Expert) are the best common melee options.

But choosing an archetype for a combat style can shift that more drastically than most classes, and it's at least possible to have a good STR melee build with enough stat/feat investment. Taking a caster archetype might leave you at range but preferring a reload 0 bow. Taking Dual Weapon Warrior gives you MAP reduction for the cost of a single feat, making melee interesting with DEX. STR and a Wrestler archetype is fun.

But that's not to say that the ranged archetypes don't have plenty to offer too while leaning into the base class's options, whether that's Ranger, Archer, Eldritch Archer, Gunslinger, Pistol Phenom, Unexpected Sharpshooter, or whatever.

The big problem (or opportunity) with Investigator is that it literally doesn't have a combat style. You could give it a variety of intellect-based attack feats, like Exacting Strike or Clever Gambit or Instructive Strike.

But that only hints at the problem, which is that Investigator class doesn't interact with any of the combat systems which other classes and archetypes use. No multi-action activities. No action-granting feats before level 10. No activity that does extra damage. No activity that allows multiple Strikes in a single action. No activity that reduces MAP. No common reaction-granting feats before level 10. No Focus-based abilities or other per-encounter mechanics. No spells. No stances. No movement feats. A restricted weapon list and light armor only. No Shield Block.

All of this stuff is easily available via Archetype, which makes Free Archetype rules amazingly transformative for an Investigator and honestly all archetype feats a viable option. Whether that's Rogue or Ranger or Dual-Weapon Warrior or Wrestler or Martial Artist.

And so what you really are given in the base class is a need to use all those skill feats to be really good at the "common" stuff in the game. You want to accumulate relatively mundane bonuses when you need them to take advantage of your one combat mechanic, which is knowing what your roll is in advance-- and thus knowing what options you can take to enhance it. Stack up Demoralize, Feint, Create a Diversion, move into flanking, use a specific consumable, and so on.

This could still be extremely playable... Except you're extremely MAD already, wanting STR for melee/thrown damage, DEX (or feats) for second attacks or second targets and armor, CON to stay alive, WIS for perception, INT for Devise A Stratagem, and CHA to maximize a bunch of those skill actions that you're left with.

And even THAT could be playable, if you could switch your key ability modifier (and DAS modifier roll) to WIS or CHA like some of the subclasses would seem to recommend-- Interrogator has no reason not to be CHA-based, and Empiricist has no reason not to be WIS-based.

Or, have a way to bypass using AC from STR/DEX so you can focus CON/WIS/INT/CHA. Which you actually can already do with an Investigator feat... but unforunately not until level 12 with Foresee Danger, using a reaction to use your Perception DC instead of your AC. Making this available early (or as part of the class) would be huge in making the class less MAD.

With all that said? As-is, the class is still very playable in combat if you take a few feats for combat style (whether that's Fighter/Rogue/Dual-Weapon Warrior/Ranger/Wrestler/Martial Artist/etc for better Strikes, or Psychic/Wizard/Witch/Magus/etc for save-based spells when your DAS misses).

Free Archetype adds so, so much here.

But then you're not playing a pure Investigator anymore.

We now officially know Shocking Grasp is still a legal pick, even in PFS.

What we don't know is if it (and other spells) are Foundry-legal (or legal to your other VTT of choice), Pathbuilder-legal, AON-searchable, and your-GM-legal. We don't know if it will remain legal once we get out of the transition phase of the Remaster and all character-specific erratas are published. We don't know how many hoops we need to jump through to make this "legal pick", or the others that didn't get re-published.

But, we do know a few things.

We know that that content can go away on official channels as soon as WotC sends a cease-and-desist on OGL-licensed material, as it will be more affordable for Paizo to comply.

Foundry will have a separate legacy module and they have made judgment calls on individual spells which both changed names and have different effects. We'll see what judgments they made on these spells that are no longer spell attack rolls. There will be an ability to load a module with legacy content, but it was left out because of system resource concerns while running Foundry, so there's multiple reasons why including omitted content may still be difficult to use.

Pathbuilder is branching into "legacy" and "remaster" app versions, so there may not be the capability to build/play a "remaster" character with "legacy" spells with any degree of ease. We'll see.

And if you're playing IRL off of dead trees, you'll need copies of both the old books and the new books for reference.

"Just use the old version" has obstacles in every medium.

Whenever the topic of the magus and Shocking Grasp comes up I tend to always run the same couple of questions in my head, which I feel can also apply to a few more similar situations:

1. Will the changes to this one mechanic make X too weak?

If yes, then X is too dependent on this mechanic anyway and ought to receive direct buffs, which wouldn't be allowed under the mechanic's current implementation.

If no, then nothing needs to be done about X's power.

2. Will the changes to this one mechanic make X not as fun to play as it should be?

If yes, then X is too dependent on this mechanic to feel good and would benefit from gameplay improvements irrespective of said mechanic.

If no, then nothing needs to be done about X's gameplay feel.

Really, Shocking Grasp I feel is a red herring here, because if the magus really needs this one spell to be implemented in a certain way to be or feel strong, then the problem isn't with Shocking Grasp, so much as the magus, who'd need changes. Personally, I don't believe the magus needs Shocking Grasp to be good, and in fact I think the net result of all these changes is likely to both buff the magus's power and unshackle them from a single, hyper-synergistic option. Even if I'm wrong, though, I don't think the solution is to keep Shocking Grasp as-is in the remaster, so much as tweak the magus as needed to improve their power and feel.

Honestly the Magus needs a Focus Spell-based Spellstrike to feel strong and sustainable. Shocking Grasp is just the next best option available without taking an archetype-- it makes you feel strong but not sustainable.

That's because they do, which is the weird part. By the very nature of Spellstrike you will use cantrips and focus spells most of the time. The Magus never has enough spell slots to do otherwise, even if you prepare only attack spells. So why exactly do these feats exist and why are they so weak? The Magus' design has always been inconsistent in that point, even in the playtest.

The complain is because their "solution" highlights all the issues that spell attacks had and they kept ignoring, which they might potentially. Even removed spell attacks as an option in the first place....

OK, but let's select for turns that "matter".

Against trivial, low, or moderate threats, cantrip or Focus spell Spellstrikes are plenty to carry you through the encounter. At lower levels you may not even need the damage from a slotted spell. But then, you shouldn't use your spell slots on utility spells in these fights either. You should be able to serve your role just fine without using spell slots at all.

If you face one or two severe/extreme fights per day, and those are the fights where your chosen style actually matters? That's 8-10 rounds of fighting (at most) in which you get to cast 4-6 spells. (More with a caster archetype.)

And the Focus changes don't really matter here-- for the trivial to moderate encounters, you'll just be able to finish those quicker, while against the enemies that actually matter, you'll have effectively the same resources.

The issue is melee spell attacks in the CRB were not balanced to be used at top level by a martial with good HPs, good accuracy and good armor.

They didn't stop making melee-range spells that were stronger than their counterparts with the CRB-- Gouging Claw was in Secrets of Magic and Imaginary Weapon was in Dark Archive, as was the Produce Flame psi cantrip upgrade. And Ignition getting a melee upgrade in the remaster.

It isn't as if Shocking Grasp is a massive upgrade over ranged alternatives. It's certainly less damage over Horizon Thunder Sphere than a d12 weapon is over a d6 or d8.

Cantrips will not be using stat modifier to damage anymore.

And I believe attack spells will not be balanced for being melee by having extra high damage anymore, since this is what made Shocking Grasp the unbalanced goto spell for the Magus. Ignition is likely a good hint of things to come on that side.

If they errata Gouging Claw (which is from Secrets of Magic and thus not on the Remaster schedule) to have another damage die instead of modifier, it will be identical in damage to Ignition. Whether it changes or not, Ignition is no significant improvement.

Shocking Grasp by itself isn't unbalanced. It's very clearly balanced for melee-range single-target damage. There's nothing wrong with melee-range damage spells in the same way that there's nothing wrong with melee martials doing more damage than ranged martials.

The only issue of it being overpowered is Starlit Span's "You can deliver the spell even if its range is shorter than the range increment of your ranged attack", but even that is barely stronger than Reach Spell.

For the "great" cost of a second level feat (Psychic Dedication), I get a focus spell that does almost the same damage as a highest level SG plus a pushback for shenanigans/damage mitigation on top.

Actually it's two feats to get Imaginary Weapon, at 2nd and 6th level, which now competes with Attack of Opportunity on a class with no built-in reactions unless you take reaction spells. And you don't get it until 6th level, a quarter or possibly just half of the game you're playing, after the levels which Shocking Grasp is best at-- it is obsoleted by Disintegrate and Polar Ray at higher levels. (But with the Focus Point changes, getting as many Focus Points in your pool as possible is now pretty much a build requirement.)

But that's beside the point. The point is that the designer is implying that it's okay to replace a favorite Magus spell with one that Wizards will like more, because Magi use cantrips anyway. Except no, that's not clearly the design-- if not then they have some feats to rewrite. When you give a class 4 to 6 spell slots to use, they care about what's in those slots!

Temperans wrote:

PF2 Magus waw designed with using max level spells for spellstrike. Its why invented wavecasting instead of just giving them "Warpriest" casting (which support buffs a lot more).

* P.S. Just in case, note that I don't like the fact Magus is so focused on just spellstrikes. But it is still a fact that is what they do in this edition.

What was said was:

Michael Sayre wrote:

One thing to keep in mind is that magi have extremely limited slots and are more reliant on their cantrips and focus spells. Ignition is a significant buff for the magus with how it boosts their basic routine compared to produce flame, while thunderstrike is much better for classes like the wizard, who are significantly more reliant on their slotted spells.

Giving too micro a look at a specific interaction can lead to missing a broader macro picture where each kind of class and character got buffs in the places they most needed it.

Which is what I brought up. Slotted spells are meant to be used to do damage sometimes. You ought to remember that if you're using a staff for true strike, staff of divination, you aren't using it for damage spells and your actual slots are extremely limited. They do go all the way to 9 as a compromise. So they can cast spells and be a blend of magic and martial and so that they can slot in some spells to get near max damage with them. It's just that you'll probably do this 2 times a day, you can do it 4 times but then leaning perhaps too hard into being a one trick pony. The magus can use spells like wall of stone as well as any full caster and it would be a shame to not take advantage of that

I mean, that Sayre quote is just factually incorrect about the Magus. Ignition is at best a very minor buff to a Magus with Gouging Claw-- pretty much only a significant one if the Magus is dumping INT, which is rarely recommended.

And then the "too micro" quote when there simply isn't another single-target touch attack roll spell in the game? The micro is important when you're talking about replacing the "only one" of something, especially when it's the rank 1 option.

Now, perhaps another slotted spell "replaces" the single-target touch spell nature of Shocking Grasp but does a different type of damage. In which case everything we're discussing is insignificant. But given there aren't other options

For your other points, I've found that I generally have enough Hero Points and casts of True Strike from other means (low level archetype slots, Studious Spells, Ring of Wizardry, Endless Grimoire) that it's not necessary to use the staff charges for more, although it's an efficient source of them if you don't choose the other options. That said, it's hard for a lot of the archetypes to even use a staff in that manner, since Fused Staff doesn't let you cast True Strike without shifting the weapon into staff form, RAW. (If your GM rules you can, or your Spellstriker Staff can cast True Strike while it's shifted into weapon form which is unclear, or you're Twisting Tree, or you'll just suffer with a lower weapon damage die, then maybe that's the best plan.)

As for Wall of Stone, it depends on party composition and role. If you already have an Arcane or Primal caster who can cast that Wall of Stone, you are very possibly better off doing damage instead of crowd control. And Wall of Stone is very much a multi-target encounter winner-- but in the general case, those fights are easier than single-target encounters and may not be when a Magus should be using their limited slots for the day.

Picking full-caster utility spells on a Magus is just taking away the thing they're best at and uniquely suited to do-- magical burst damage with melee proficiency. You'd be much better off being a full caster if you want to cast things like Wall of Stone on your most significant turns. (Although getting a Spellstrike-capable Focus Spell is enough to allow utility spell slots, though that marginalizes Conflux Spells.)

I do rely on my cantrips for spellstrike. After level 5 I'll generally only prepare 1 attack roll spell

Well, as you level, other options open up. You can get Imaginary Weapon at 6 from Psychic dedication. You can get Fused Staff at 8 to power Spellstrikes with staff charges, or Standby Spell at 8 to not slot a Spellstrike at all.

And when you're preparing 1 attack roll spell, that's 25% of your spell slots.

I don't think the magus was designed with the intention of using spell slots for spellstrike with much, if any, frequency. Given the comment in this very thread by one of the designers stating they rely on their cantrips more than anything

Cascading Ray, the Spellstriker Staff, Meteoric Spellstrike, Lunging Spellstrike, most uses of Expansive Spellstrike all kind of disagree with that. They are at least designed to give bonuses to, if not explicitly support, Spellstriking with a slotted spell. (Sustaining Steel, too.) While it's certainly not mandatory to use your spell slots on attack-roll spells, it's at least a compelling option.

In other words... You don't use your spell slots in trivial or moderate encounters. You really want to concentrate most/all against the hardest encounter of the adventuring day. In order to actually do that, you need one slot to first-round buff, maybe a reaction spell, and then what? For me, it's at least one slotted spell to kill a single-target enemy as quickly as possible, because that's my role in the party-- it's certainly not to buff myself and others, or inflict status effects, or Demoralize, or use combat maneuvers. It's to make strong attacks, and it's hard to beat a True Strike into a Shocking Grasp Spellstrike (until you get Disintegrate and Polar Ray).

At low levels you might work in a long-duration buff (i.e. Longstrider or False Life). You might stock up on True Strike and Magic Weapon-- both at least as compelling as a slotted damage spell early on. But even then you want those burst turns against CR+2 enemies to just end a fight ASAP.

Karneios wrote:

The Raven Black wrote:

Karneios wrote:

Since shocking grasp is the only spell slot attacking touch spell they've printed at all ever I don't think it's that safe to assume, hell just looking at attack spells available at all in the arcane list kills any belief that there's gonna be some great replacement coming for the magus

I do not think nerfing the Magus was a design goal for Remaster. YMMV.

I don't think it was a goal either, I just think it was an outcome that wasn't really considered because I look at the attack spells on the arcane list and just don't think that magus in general is really considered

Unlikely IMO.

I mean, the evidence that they didn't consider Magus very much in this change is evident in Sayre's post. He first talks about Ignition being a big benefit for Maguses when it's roughly the same damage as Gouging Claw or Telekinetic Projectile. It's only a boost for Maguses in the subrange of targets where fire is preferred to physical. Fire is a common weakness so I don't want to minimize that too much, but is it more common than once a day if I was preparing Shocking Grasp in one spell slot per day?

And THEN, after using what amounts to a micro-example, he says we shouldn't look at micro-examples when considering design. When the entire base Magus spell selection is an investigation of micro-examples because there are so few of them.

Shocking Grasp fills these design niches pretty much exclusively for a Magus:
- Balanced for touch-range damage
- Balanced for damage only
- Based on an attack roll

To be clear, Shocking Grasp wasn't ever overpowered, it was just designed to be used in a niche that the Magus excels in: doing as much damage as possible with the most risk involved.

The reason you could make a claim that Shocking Grasp should be "replaced" by Thunderstrike is that, well, the reward for other mage classes to enter melee range is less than the risk involved, so it's only useful for one class. But Maguses have less risk with martial key ability scores and fill most of the game's niche of casting arcane spells while in melee range, so taking them into account when you "replace" Shocking Grasp is pretty important!

This actually widens the gap between the cheese-the-design leader of taking a Psychic dedication for amped Imaginary Weapon, the only other spell I know that fills the same niche as Shocking Grasp (touch range balance, damage only, attack roll).

Seriously-- when you go to AoN and search all spells for touch spells with the Attack trait, you get Shocking Grasp, Imaginary Weapon, Gouging Claw. (And three uncommon AP-based curses that are actually save-based anyway and probably mislabeled.) Unsurprisingly, these are the most effective spells for the Magus as cantrips, Focus Spells, and slotted spells. This is the core of the optimal Magus in the design space.

The terminology of "replaces" is important here, even if it's a single word in a blog post. It replaces, say, the CRB rank 1 lightning-based spell, but it doesn't replace the design space that Shocking Grasp uniquely filled.

Not that Thunderstrike isn't a valuable addition for ranged casters. Damage-centric single-target save-based spells are also fairly under-represented, at least if Sudden Bolt isn't available as a spell.

The fact that Shocking Grasp is termed as replaced by a ranged, save-based spell really just speaks to the fact that other arcane or primal caster classes aren't particularly viable when casting spells at melee range, and the way that's being addressed is by replacing the non-viable option in their core rules rather than making it viable. Which honestly may be better than leaving it in.

Except it's perfectly viable on the martial class that also casts.

I do agree that all of the comments about the new spells being additive to old CRB stuff is valid for most games, but stuff like PFS that requires you to have original sources to play the game now requires you to purchase an otherwise-obsolete rulebook to access the old spell.

The interesting thing is that Shocking Grasp isn't even the only attack-roll spell removal being previewed here-- Acid Splash is going from an attack-roll to a save, too.

There are already very few options with attack-roll spells-- one reason Shocking Grasp is popular with Magi is because there aren't all that many spell choices for Magi in the first place.

Shocking Grasp itself isn't a huge deal since it's already almost replaced by Horizon Thunder Sphere, just at a slight nerf. Acid Splash OTOH is a cantrip damage coverage problem that almost certainly won't have an easy replacement, other than taking Acid Arrow as a slotted spell to replace it. (Or simply being less capable as a class.)

Magus could need Expansive Spellstrike errata'd into a class feature if Paizo is going to remove all these spell attack rolls.

If you want your spells to hit and do damage every time, use Magic Missile.

If you don't like how your single-target spell has mediocre or short-lived effects on an enemy, take a beat, understand that the enemy is higher level than you and thus SHOULD resist it a good portion of the time, and rename the enemy "Success" save as a "Partial Failure".

Take notice that martials sometimes just miss all their attacks in a round, too.

If you're worried that enemies still damage your allies... Start using summon spells to have more allies. If the enemy kills your minion in one hit, that's still a hit that didn't hit yourself or your fellow party member.

Remember that you're not there to win the fight by yourself. If your issue is the label of the spell on the box, consider thinking of the spell in less potent terms-- "Spark" instead of "Lightning Bolt", "Spook" instead of "Fear".

I think you can even still use the Intelligence substitution and precision damage. The only thing that the Misfortune effect cancels out is the rolling not-normally.

So to quote with changes:

Misfortune'd Devise wrote:

You assess a foe's weaknesses in combat and use them to formulate a plan of attack against your enemy. Choose a creature you can see and roll a d20. If you Strike the chosen creature later this round, you must use the result of the roll you made to Devise a Stratagem for your Strike's attack roll instead of rolling. You make this substitution only for the first Strike you make against the creature this round, not any subsequent attacks.

When you make this substitution, you can also add your Intelligence modifier to your attack roll instead of your Strength or Dexterity modifier, provided your Strike uses an agile or finesse melee weapon, an agile or finesse unarmed attack, a ranged weapon (which must be agile or finesse if it's a melee weapon with the thrown trait), or a sap.

If you're aware that the creature you choose is the subject of a lead you're pursuing, you can use this ability as a free action.

It is a bit debatable since you aren't substituting the roll you pre-rolled on the attack. But I think that is the best RAI following of the rules. A Misfortune effect should only remove the Fortune part of effect - not completely remove an entire class feature.

I've been trying to figure out how to self-apply a misfortune effect so that I can Strike my main target with no MAP, regardless of dice. One idea is to use a Ceru as a Specific Familiar. You command the Ceru (with one action) to use Turn of Fate (two actions for the Familiar?) to remove your "Fortune" effect on a bad DaS roll.

I was thinking that, yes, your DaS class feature does get invalidated when this occurs and you cannot substitute INT. The entire Devise a Stratagem feature has the Fortune trait, not just the substitution roll.

In situations where you don't want the DaS feature to be invalidated, though, simply get out of the aura. Fire at the reaper with a bow from range.

Note that most of the complains with damage spells come from having a limited resource that is expected to fail and be the same or weaker than an unlimited resource that is expected to succeed and reliably crit succeed.

The overall complain is about failure chance and expectation. Where you are expected to fail and expected to like the fact because "failure still gives you something". But most people absolutely hate to constantly fail even if you get something out of it.

It's really just a naming issue. If they named "Critical Success" just "Success" and named "Success" as "Partial Success" when rolling a Saving Throw, expectations would be more in line with what happens.

And this works on both sides of the save. When I cast and the enemy rolls a Success, my expectations are that my spell is wasted even when it's not. When my enemy casts and I roll a Success, my expectations are that I avoided the effect when actually, the bad stuff hit me, just not the full impact.

I actually want... something more than just Spellstrike as an attack option.

There's simply no accessible options to do anything other than Spellstrike and our own conflux spell, and that feels weird for a martial class with exceptional STR or DEX.

A 2-hand Fighter has choices between Power Attack and Intimidating Strike and Exacting Strike and more, and that's all in the very early game.

Laughing Shadows are supposed to be free-hand combatants but they have nearly nothing designed to leverage the free hand besides a small bump in Arcane Cascade damage and an optional Spell Parry feat.

Sparkling Targes get their Conflux Spell and two class feats related to their Shield (and two Tome-shield feats, which are just awful). Fighters get five shield feats by level 2. One of those is a level 1 feat that's pretty much exactly the Sparkling Targe's level 4 feat.

Starlit Spans don't even get an interesting Conflux Spell or Arcane Cascade. And they don't get the interesting fewer-actions feats of, say, Eldritch Archer.

Even if that's only free admission to a combat style archetype like the Mauler/Duelist/Archer/Bastion/Martial Artist archetypes so that you don't have to wait till level 4 to give yourself a better option.

Give me a reason to use Arcane Cascade to do more than 2 possible damage per round.

So as some of you will know, I've been steadily learning pf2 by making characters, but so far all I've made is spell casters.

I started with a barbarian doing animal path cause I like the stag aesthetic, but I sort of ran out of steam with it. Then I was reading an investigator guide and it struck me it seemed to be about delivering one big attack around, which sort of appeals to me (I always wanted vital strike to be better in pf1)

One big strike lead me towards sniper rifles, and then I thought, why not try doing a Investigator hybrid into a gunslinger, it'd certainly teach me new stuff about the system between archetyping and weapons and leaning more martial and also guns. Given I'm understand they have slightly janky rules.

So without further a doodle, here is Myron West, the uptight Elvish investigator.

Name: Myron West
Ancestry: Seer Elf
Background: Artist
Class: Empiricism Investigator
Languages: Common, Elvish, Gnomish, Dwarfish, Goblin, Halfling, Orcish, Celestial
Stats:
Cha: 12
Int: 22
Wis: 20
Con: 18
Str: 10
Dex: 20
Ability boots:

5) Con/Wis/Dex/Int
10) Con/Wis/Dex/Int
15) Con/Wis/Dex/Int
20) Cha/Wis/Dex/Int

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **...

My main comment is that I feel like this build will be very boring in combat. After you DaS and roll a miss, you don't have a good secondary action sequence other than to target another enemy with a big attack and damage penalty. No bon mots or demoralizes, no maneuvers, no feints or distractions to lower AC. You'll be very sturdy with saves but you're ideally standing at range near cover the whole time.

I would either take DEX higher early to maximize the chance of the retarget hit landing or go the other way and lean into CHA-based skills while taking a pass on DEX or WIS early, letting your proficiencies or Covered Reload make up for those saves.

You'll want to look into Intimidating Prowess and Hurtful on the Intimidate side. You can also look at Pushing Assault if you still want to do damage with an attack instead of just the Knockback.

Raging Vitality and Raging Brutality are good pickups when you can get them, too.

I see now. The fact that a magic weapon has an explicit Activation text is what disables the bonus during polymorph. It's strange how weapons are explicitly different from most other items in that way.

Thanks for helping me see what's going on. It's a shame that True Arcane Bloodrage is near worthless without trading your weapon for an amulet.

Can you use Greater Magic Fang/Permanence to add an enhancement bonus onto your polymorphed form? Does it come back every time you raged into that form?

I would say no. The bonus provided by armor and shield is similar in nature to attack bonus provided by a weapon enhancement.

Similar in many ways, but dissimilar in that a) armor and shield bonuses are specifically called out in the polymorph rules and b) armor and shields have the "Wild" enchantment which lets you use them.

To answer your question quickly... NO. Your sword is essentially non-existent for all intents and purposes while you are in dragon form.

The text doesn't support this. The text of polymorph says that it is melded into my dragon form, and its constant bonuses take effect.

If you are not wielding the sword you do not get the bonus. A weapon enchant isn't a constant bonus, it is only there when wielding it. When you polymorph it melds and is not wieldable, it won't effect your natural attacks at all.

Again, while the sword isn't a sword anymore, it is melded into my current form. If my sword turned into a claw, wouldn't that claw have an enhancement bonus?

No. You are no longer using the sword and can't gain the effects of it.

The following is the Activation for a magic weapon.

"Activation: Usually a character benefits from a magic weapon in the same way a character benefits from a mundane weapon—by wielding (attacking with) it. If a weapon has a special ability that the user needs to activate, then the user usually needs to utter a command word (a standard action). A character can activate the special abilities of 50 pieces of ammunition at the same time, assuming each piece has identical abilities."

If you polymorph you aren't using the weapon anymore. You are attacking with natural attacks (bites, claws etc). If you want Furious while polymorphed you would want a Amulet of Mighty Fists.

The weapon becomes part of your shapeshifted body and a natural attack is an attack with part of your shapeshifted body. The definition of wield in the context above is "attack with". Are you attacking with what the sword turned into? Then yes, you're wielding it.

Does a wielded weapon's enhancement bonus apply to any natural attacks after a polymorph which melds gear into my body?

Say I'm an Arcane bloodrager with a +2 Furious greatsword. At level 16, I get a bloodline power that allows me to apply the effects of Form of the Dragon I to myself. Polymorph says:

When you cast a polymorph spell that changes you into a creature of the animal, dragon, elemental, magical beast, plant, or vermin type, all of your gear melds into your body. Items that provide constant bonuses and do not need to be activated continue to function while melded in this way (with the exception of armor and shield bonuses, which cease to function). Items that require activation cannot be used while you maintain that form.

So, my sword melds into my dragon body. It provides a constant bonus to the sword, which has been melded into my body and is now part of my polymorphed form. Do my natural attacks (bite, claw x2, talon x2) get the enhancement bonus? Does the Furious bonus provide a constant bonus (but only to creatures in a rage), or is it a bonus that is "activated" by the rage?

I do not recommend Crossblooded Arcane Is just fine by itself.

Here is my Bloodrager I just posted for someone else.

** spoiler omitted **...

You need to take Skill Focus (Survival) to take Eldritch Heritage.

Waiting until 6 for Power Attack is a long time.

A reach build doesn't make a ton of sense without Combat Reflexes.

Two feats for 1-5 damage per hit (Arcane Strike + Blooded Arcane Strike) isn't a great investment. I think you'd take Weapon Focus first. It might be more valuable taking it at level 1 when you don't have a magic weapon.

Arcane doesn't fly till 16 w/ FotD I, which is something the OP wanted earlier. Although Spider Climb isn't a bad consolation prize.

-------------------------------

To the OP, Destined is a great Crossblooded bloodline. Destined 4 pretty much negates the will save penalties while increasing your other saves and armor. Cross with Elemental to fly at 8 if that's all that's important to you; elemental 1 and 16 are nice too. Cross with draconic and take the breath attack and wings. If you want only the flight and not much else, you can stick with destined 1 and 16, but if you want to be a dragon, draconic 1 and 16 are just as good. If you do go dragon, make sure to pick up a bite with a trait.

The Ring of Vengeful Blood Magic lets a bloodrager cast a spell as his AoO. Lots of fun options here.

Paired Opportunists (teamwork feat) gives a +4 bonus to attacks if you're adjacent to your teammate and you both threaten the target.

Combat Patrol wasn't mentioned, although it takes a full action. Possibly better for BAB-deficient builds.

But fundamentally, the best thing you can do is increase your dex modifier. Belt, wand of Cat's Grace, whatever you can do.

Sanctified Slayer looks compelling at first, but you lose a lot of combat versatility. The typical case with judgments for Justice and Destruction match up unfavorably to Studied Target and Sneak Attack dice, but you lose the ability to apply armor, damage reduction, energy reduction, saving throws, etc. Studied Target also stacks pretty well, while Judgments of Justice/Destruction are sacred bonuses.

So, it comes down to role. You may want to go SS if:
- You are party face (for the bluff/perception/sense motive buffs)
- Your combat role is purely damage
- You're going to invest in ways to to get your sneak attack off (flanking, invisibility, blinds, cowers, stuns, Shattered Defenses, etc.)

You don't want to go SS if:
- You take on roles other than pure damage (i.e. front-line fighter, healer, utility/buffer/debuffer)
- You are a scout/tracker/other skill monkey instead of party face
- Your party doesn't have great flanking ability or other ways to land sneak attack

Translator. The common definition is for translating one language to another, and it lets an otherwise ordinary (but trusted) person into some very important meetings. But it is also useful for commoners. Specific enough to prevent prying, and most questions will revolve around what you speak and where you learned it. Confidentiality is part of the gig, so you don't have to talk about your work directly.

The alternate meanings ("to change the form, condition, nature, etc., of; transform; convert"; "to bear, carry, or move from one place, position, etc., to another; transfer") effectively translate to "I use magic" and "I deal with contraband", giving you lots truth-detection cover.

Ideally you already have a high int score to know a lot of languages already. Bonus points for being able to use magic to actually carry out your faux job as necessary, even if your int score is low.