I disagree that (2) and (3) need to be different things; just broaden the spell list a bit, and the same class can fill both roles.So there are really three (at least) kinds of fighter/magic-users:
generalist casters who can swing a sword as a backup (e.g. standard bard or cleric)
sword-swingers who use magic to do more damage or a different kind of damage (e.g. duskblade)
sword-swingers who use magic to be more well-rounded (e.g. maybe the arcane duelist or a psychic warrior?)
Certainly one class can cover more than one role; that's exactly what I said about the eldritch knight in my post. But a duskblade doesn't do #3 very well, and a hexblade doesn't do #2 very well (to use two 3.5 examples) because of their spell lists (as you point out).
Their spells will define which of these functions they can fill.
I should have used a term more specific than "sword-swinger", then. Maybe "warrior" (although that's a reserved term as well). My criteria for a warrior class is basically: "Are you clearly a better fighter than a spell-less cleric or an expert?"
If the answer is "yes, absolutely", then you're a warrior. If the answer is "yes, but only two times per day" or "how much time do I have to pre-buff?", then you're not really a warrior, you're a caster or a generalist or a lightly-armored whatchamacallit.
An idea for spell combat:
Spell Combat:
Starting at 1st level, a magus can make a full-attack action. When doing so he may make his standard number of attacks with a melee one handed weapon at a -2 penalty. In addition to these attacks he may cast a spell with a casting time no longer than a standard action. He must cast this spell defensively, and if he fails the concentration check the spell is lost and the attacks still take a -2 penalty. He may choose to either cast the spell or make his attacks first but he can not interupt one action with the other (he can't make his first attack cast the spell and then make his second attack for example). For the purpose of this attack, the magus's base attack bonus is equal to his magus level. For all other purposes, such as qualifying for a feat or a prestige class, the magus uses his normal base attack bonus.
I'll playtest this tonight and post up the results.
|
Playing this class is REALLY AWESOME. It's almost like bard, because you can fight decently and cast spells, but there are several things I REALLY like about it:
1) It's a prepared spell class. After all the spontaneous spellcasters in the APG, I thought we needed another prepared class.
2) I have more ways to do HP damage than a bard does, because I've got melee combat and more ranged evocation spells than the bard.
3) This class is really easy to customize (archetypes aside) because you can focus on one or the other kinds of combat.
4) If I wanted to, I could take Eldritch Knight without having to multiclass first. It's also a good alternative to the standard sorcerer/barbarian that a lot of people use to create a dragon disciple.
As a blasting class, I'm loving this. With a rapier and Shocking Grasp, I'm doing more DPR than our party's ranger. The other players think this is overpowered, but they have not yet realized how few times per day I can get in such a good hit.
In addition, I've got a great armor class (with Shield, I have 25 at level 6).
This makes me feel like I'm playing gestalt, which I always loved in principle and hated in mechanics.
I can't wait to see the new touch spells in Ultimate Magic--you guys ARE going to add more spells to the Magus list, right? Right?
It's also a good alternative to the standard sorcerer/barbarian that a lot of people use to create a dragon disciple.
As it's a prepared-casting class, no, it isn't. Check the Dragon Disciple spellcasting requirement.
I have made a 1st level Magus that I will be playing this Sunday, we will see how it goes. :)
Off the bat it looks like Spellstrike needs to be a little more useful at 1st level. I suggest making it more like Cleave. Basically you declare you will be making a Spellstrike, which is a standard action. Then you make a standard weapon attack. If you hit you can cast a touch spell as a swift action. Declaring a Spellstrike gives you a -2 to AC and you need to make a Concentration check as if casting defensively with a -2 penalty to cast the touch spell.
Also, long ago I came up with this progression for a prepared 3/4 caster. It maxes out at 4 spells per level, one below a specialist wizard, but gets spells one level earlier than the spontaneous bard. How about this for a spell progression?
xx 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
01 3 1
02 3 2
03 4 2 1
04 4 3 1
05 4 3 2
06 4 4 2 1
07 4 4 3 1
08 4 4 3 2
09 4 4 4 2 1
10 4 4 4 3 1
11 4 4 4 3 2
12 4 4 4 4 2 1
13 4 4 4 4 3 1
14 4 4 4 4 3 2
15 4 4 4 4 4 2 1
16 4 4 4 4 4 3 1
17 4 4 4 4 4 3 2
18 4 4 4 4 4 4 2
19 4 4 4 4 4 4 3
20 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
You will note that this progress has less casting than the bard, but gets higher level spells 1 level earlier.
I came up with this by looking at the Sorcerer vs. the Bard and then comparing a Specialized Wizard vs. this progression. There would be no such thing as a "Universalist" Magus, they are all specialized by the nature of their limited spell list.
The issue with your spell progression chart is that the magus uses his spell slots to power his abilities.
I woul rather keep the magus as the cross over class and have a martial ranger progression arcane martialist in complete warrior. Makes more sense that way.
I agree with this.
Okay, I may just be blind, but I've looked through here to see if it's been asked and couldn't see answer, and couldn't find it in the PDF, so...
What's the Magus' starting gold at level one? I'm guessing either 3d6x10 or 4d6x10.
Cheers for the help. I'm hoping to convert my lvl 2 Wizard in my Legacy of Fire campaign on Saturday :)
I used 4d6x10 and the same starting age as the wizard (hopefully Paizo will remember the starting ages in UM as opposed to what happened with the APG).
I woul rather keep the magus as the cross over class and have a martial ranger progression arcane martialist in complete warrior. Makes more sense that way.I agree with this.
Not sure if this is agreement but an Arcane Ranger sub-class/archtype in either Ultimate Magic or Ultimate Combat would plug the "needs full BAB arcane warrior" hole. I also like the half-an-half overall feel of the Magus with its more self-focused powers over a Bards group influence (friends and foes)
So far I like the Magus(except the name, not fond of that but it fits the fluff I guess), even if it may not be the best at lower levels.
As you level the character up you can get the feeling the character is actually learning too. That may just be my thoughts on it though! ;)
Alright, played a human one of these at first level tonight. Where to start.
Um, he's weak. He feels weak anyways. Spellstrike. It's useless, or nearly so as written. Used it the first combat how the board clarified it. that is:
Round 1: cast touch spell, hold charge
Round 2: step into combat, smack, hope to hit, deal moderately increased damage.
Can't hold onto it longer than spell level rounds or whatever either, so no pre-combat casting.
After that first combat, the GM took pitty on me and said I could cast (defensively or not) into the sword then smack with it, burning the spell either way (totally wasted both my first tables on sucky rolls). But this is replaced by a slightly more flexible but worse ability at second level.
Let me be clear that I'm willing to give up more than one attack a round for the chance to channel a touch spell into the weapon and attack with it in the same round. This makes give up the flexibility of spell choice for preparing because I would have to keep only touch spells, but still have fireball for when there's plenty of baddies or buffs too. This is a good choice/trade off.
He's fine prepared. He's seems like he'll be fine burning more spell slots for abilities at higher level.
After spells are all cast and used up (minus cantrips!) he feels like my melee cleric. That is, alright to hit, alright armor, but not horrendously effective.
Not looking forward to Spell Combat. If I were gonna have it, I'd want to reverse the penalties (-2 atk, -4 concentration) because I've got a hard enough time hitting as it is.
I suppose lessening them as time goes on helps... but it's soooooo far away from my perspective.
Arcane Strike is my friend :)
But having to burn swifts for my Arcana later will make me less happy.
I have to take Combat Casting as my second feat too, just like any other caster that might get into melee.
As a character he's fine and fun to play, but that's mostly just good role playing. Beyond that, my initial opinion feels like he is kinda weak, and I'd love to be pumping higher level spells into my sword every round and swinging once hoping to hit for massive damage (and missing enough that my average came out lower than the fighter's or barbarian's.)
Let me again reiterate that I'd be fine at higher levels with losing my extra attacks and the flexibility of Spell Combat to make Spell Strike into a channel-and-whack-in-the-same-turn power. It would make me much more melee oriented as I couldn't cast fireball in the same round I'm flailing at the bad guy, but I think that fits, both stylistically, and my play style.
As always, this is just my opinion. I think I like the character enough (after agreed upon adjustments) that Tyr the Woaden will continue, and I'll chime in as we go along if the timing works out.
All the abilities are nice but I would like to see some interaction with magic items like wands or staffs.
From another thread suggested by Abraham spalding using Monk flurry for BAB progression in spell combat
When performing Spell combat you'd have this progressing instead
BAB = Magus level -2
level 2 +0
level 3 +1
level 4 +2
Level 5 +3
Level 6 +4
Level 7 +5
level 8 +6/+1
level 9 +7/+2
level 10 +8/+3
level 11 +9/+4
level 12 +10/+5
level 13 +11/+6/+1
level 14 +12/+7+/2
level 15 +13/+8/+3
level 16 +14/+9/+4
level 17 +15/+10/+5
level 18 +16/+11/+6/+2
level 19 +17/+12/+7/+3
level 20 +18/+13/+8/+4
Would make the class feel more meleeish and give you added incentive you use spell combat often just like a monk is encourged to flurry often
close to a full BAB without being full BAB
Alright, played a human one of these at first level tonight. Where to start.
Um, he's weak. He feels weak anyways. Spellstrike. It's useless, or nearly so as written. Used it the first combat how the board clarified it. that is:
Round 1: cast touch spell, hold charge
Round 2: step into combat, smack, hope to hit, deal moderately increased damage.
Can't hold onto it longer than spell level rounds or whatever either, so no pre-combat casting.
Page 216 of the Pathfinder Core Rules states....
Touch Spells and Holding the Charge: In most cases, if you don’t discharge a touch spell on the round you cast it, you can hold the charge (postpone the discharge of the spell) indefinitely. You can make touch attacks round after round until the spell is discharged. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates.
I have a question.
To use
this ability, the magus must have one hand
free, while wielding a light or one-handed
melee weapon in the other hand. As a fullround
action, he can make all of
his attacks with his melee
weapon at a –4 penalty.
Is there any reason why i can't use dagger(light melee weapon)in my main hand,and make my RANGED attacks with said dagger while using this ability?
I have a question.
Is there any reason why i can't use dagger(light melee weapon)in my main hand,and make my RANGED attacks with said dagger while using this ability?To use
this ability, the magus must have one hand
free, while wielding a light or one-handed
melee weapon in the other hand. As a fullround
action, he can make all of
his attacks with his melee
weapon at a –4 penalty.
As in, ending the round without wielding any weapon? It sounds odd indeed, but the whole idea is that you are adept at casting the spell while swinging around.
The -4 penalty is attached to the melee weapon, not a melee attack, so I don't see why you can't cast and then throw the dagger (it's subjected to the -4 penalty).
Spell Combat doesn't say you must have the hand free at all times either, so nothing says that a magus with BAB 6+ can't swing with a sword, use the free hand to draw and throw a dagger (quick draw!) and then cast a spell.
A magus also should be able to hold his 1h weapon with both hands and spell combat as usual.
Honestly,
I'd like this class a whole lot better if it didn't have a spell list.
Just give them access to Wizard/Sorcerer spells 1st thru 6th level. No unique spell list at all, just any wizard/sorcerer spell of a level they can cast.
I've never liked unique spell lists for prepared casters (beyond the divine/arcane type divide). The bard, mixing both types, is ok.
Honestly,
I'd like this class a whole lot better if it didn't have a spell list.Just give them access to Wizard/Sorcerer spells 1st thru 6th level. No unique spell list at all, just any wizard/sorcerer spell of a level they can cast.
I've never liked unique spell lists for prepared casters (beyond the divine/arcane type divide). The bard, mixing both types, is ok.
That was one of my first thoughts, too. He's already got a lot of the classic wizard spells, but he's lacking others that don't really make sense to me (no vampiric touch, false life, hold person, or bestow curse? Really?). His spells per day are already limited by his MAD-based lower-than-the-wizard Intelligence, so giving him charm person or resist energy isn't going to make him crazy overpowered, just slightly more versatile out of combat. Also, the fluff of a character studying arcane lore in the exact same manner as a wizard, but not being able to grasp the same basic spells, doesn't sit right with me.
A thought I had is that it very well might be worth giving the Magus all of his armor proficiencies at first level rather than spreading them out to 7th and 13th or so. I wouldn't give them the ability to cast in the armor without Arcane Spell Failure until higher levels, but it would be nice to have the option of wearing it earlier on. Just some feedback after examining a couple I've built.
|
so got around to playing 15th level magus, and the conclusion is this class needs a rewrite; BADLY.
Spellstike is useless as written, the end. 2 turns to cast a spell I'd just cast normally via spell combat for the touch attack, is not an ability that will see play... EVER. I strongly recommend just giving the magnus the Duskblade's channel ability.
Spellslots: even with a ring of wizardry I was burning spells at an absurd rate to power arcana+crit fishing tactics to boost damage output.
Full BaB: this class needs it, badly. as many pointed out, 4 attribute MAD lowers damage output, which 1 handed gimps further. however, even dumping strength entirely and going the finesse route I was still having trouble hitting anything except for the touch attacks. For a "Blaster" this is unacceptable.
Arcana: as I suspected earlier, the 1/days are useless over a days worth of adventuring, being held till the third fight then blown. and the ones that give up spellslots also run out of gas quickly.
overall I my damage out put was derived in it's entirety from random spells, and crits, causing overall contributions to be unpredictable and sub-standard. I never thought I'd see the day people would make the same mistakes of the warmage (not enough uses of class abilities) and the soulknife (abilities lag behind everyone elses) in one package.
I just thought to gather certain interesting ideas I found in this thread and others for your perusal.
1) To make the Medium Armor and Heavy Armor abilities into passive Magus Arcana.
2) To make Spell Combat similar in design and mechanics to the monk's Flurry of Blows.
Last game gave me a strong impression of the following:
- There is no reason to use Spell Strike. By the time you can cast a touch spell and deliver it in the same round, you can also attack normally and deliver a touch attack, with greater chances of success and no loss of weapon damage. Thus the only situation where you are using spell strike is when you cast the spell and hold the charge, which won't happen more than once a day, tops.
- Spell Combat has little incentive to be used. While action economy is all kinds of win, spell slots are scarce. A Magus will most often use his spell slots on things that are not "Casting in the thick of melee", like battlefield control and personal buffs. The exception, of course, are cantrips, since those can be used every round for no loss.
Rolled up a level 15 Magus to play in place of my Druid in the party. Have to say that at level 15, he performs rather well from time to time. At full power, I was more than keeping up with the fighter on damage, and was able to even outperform him due to tactical advantages like dimension dooring next to the enemy mage, and having an extended overland flight cast on myself each day meant I could take on flying enemies too. However, I burned through my spell slots like crazy doing that. At other times, I had to be content with being a second-rate archer, occassionally helping the fighter and cleric out when they needed support.
I decided to skimp on weapons and relied on arcane weapon instead, which worked rather well since I upgraded my gear rather quickly by picking up captured weapons as I went along. After the second day, my weapon was consistently the strongest in the group. Furthermore, improved invisibility meant that I was often hitting flat-footed ACs, which meant that against some enemies, I could hit reliably even without burning spells on Arcane Accuracy.
About 1/3 of my starting wealth went into pearls of power, another 1/4 went into my armour and defensive items, and the rest into stat-boosting items and scrolls and misc items (including lesser metamagic rods of extend and dazing spell). I ended up being alright for defence, though I say my role more as a tactical striker-I'd charge up a spellstrike (intensified shocking grasps were a favourite), let the wizard and fighter mess things up, then use my better mobility to target the more vulnerable enemy targets. Oh and dazing elemental aura worked beautifully too, and actually helped my defence indirectly whilst increasing my damage as well.
Spell combat worked rather well at this level, although I have to admit that I was mostly using intensified shocking grasps (but with the promise of new touch spells coming out, I'm not too worried about this at the moment). Between arcane accuracy and improved invisibility, hitting was not that much of a problem (although the wizard's heroism spells surely helped-but hey, the fighter was relying on those too, so I don't feel bad about that). And concentration was not hard at all.
However, I did find that I was burning spells very quickly, and found myself wishing I'd spent more on pearls of power rather than defensive items.
My conclusions from the test:
1. The magus needs more spell slots, or a "spell pool", and this really should be substantial-certainly more than just level+INT modifier that was suggested somewhere on another thread. Do consider a scaling progression of some sort. We have yet to reach the main BBEG, and I'm already finding that in fights where I decide to go all out, I barely have enough high level spell slots to last a single battle. I was truly dependant on my pearls of power for staying power.
2. In terms of combat power, the magus is certainly strong enough at level 15 (with the important caveat that he can't maintain that power for more than 2 fights at the most, and could foreseeably burn all his power in a single large fight). I am not sure, however, how he fares at lower levels, and I might leave the testing to other players who are in games at those levels.
3. Feedback on the arcana: Improved invisibility was extremely useful in keeping me from becoming over reliant on arcane accuracy, and I imagine that at lower levels, hitting reliably might be a genuine problem. I had to use it constantly when I got glitter-dusted. Hasted assault is practically mandatory at level 9. Dispelling strike is recommended for level 12. Reflection is AWESOME. It will not repel an enemy mage's best spells, but it will certainly make you just about immune to quickened spells (of course, it burns up your spells too, but this goes back to the sustainability problem). Use with spellcraft so you know when to use it, and it will be invaluable. Critical strike...I ended up not testing because I was changing weapons based on what I could find (which was not always a weapon with a wide threat range) and because I thought I would be alot more reliant on arcane accuracy then I ended up being. I could see it being useful if one dedicates himself to using a scimitar or rapier, but not before you get improved invisibility.
4. The Magus does also face a problem with swift action usage. When I was fighting the enemy mage, my use of reflection meant that I could not rely on my other arcanas, which was a problem because he also glitter-dusted me. Perhaps a better capstone would be to allow the Magus 2 swift actions per round, with a caveat that he'd still be capped at 1 quickened spell per round.
5. Overall, a fun class to play, but runs out of juice really quickly. I certainly enjoyed him whilst I had spell slots to burn. Pearls of power are HIGHLY recommended.
Last game gave me a strong impression of the following:
- There is no reason to use Spell Strike. By the time you can cast a touch spell and deliver it in the same round, you can also attack normally and deliver a touch attack, with greater chances of success and no loss of weapon damage. Thus the only situation where you are using spell strike is when you cast the spell and hold the charge, which won't happen more than once a day, tops.
- Spell Combat has little incentive to be used. While action economy is all kinds of win, spell slots are scarce. A Magus will most often use his spell slots on things that are not "Casting in the thick of melee", like battlefield control and personal buffs. The exception, of course, are cantrips, since those can be used every round for no loss.
Spell strike is not useless, although it's not the most stellar ability either. When I tested my Magus, if I missed with my touch attack (not often) but found that I had a decent chance of hitting with my weapon, I'd stuff the touch attack into my weapon and use my weapon 2-handed for slightly higher damage and a better hit-rate. Granted it's not actually clear in the ability description if you can do this, but my GM gave the green light and it worked rather well. I only used it this way twice over a full day dungeon-delving gaming session though, and that was when I rolled a 3 and 1 for my touch attack rolls.
Spell strike is not useless, although it's not the most stellar ability either. When I tested my Magus, if I missed with my touch attack (not often) but found that I had a decent chance of hitting with my weapon, I'd stuff the touch attack into my weapon and use my weapon 2-handed for slightly higher damage and a better hit-rate.
Yeah, this is the only use for spellstrike I've found -- if you missed the free touch attack last round (which is rare), it lets you combine the spell with your regular melee attack this round, instead of putting you in an either-or (make the touch attack or attack with your weapon). Which is pretty marginal, but more useful than nothing.
|
Yeah, this is the only use for spellstrike I've found -- if you missed the free touch attack last round (which is rare), it lets you combine the spell with your regular melee attack this round, instead of putting you in an either-or (make the touch attack or attack with your weapon). Which is pretty marginal, but more useful than nothing.
It also combines pretty well with true strike.
i would just like to say that i love the class concept and while i might not use spell casters i would be willing to try this one out.
Spell strike is not useless, although it's not the most stellar ability either. When I tested my Magus, if I missed with my touch attack (not often) but found that I had a decent chance of hitting with my weapon, I'd stuff the touch attack into my weapon and use my weapon 2-handed for slightly higher damage and a better hit-rate.Yeah, this is the only use for spellstrike I've found -- if you missed the free touch attack last round (which is rare), it lets you combine the spell with your regular melee attack this round, instead of putting you in an either-or (make the touch attack or attack with your weapon). Which is pretty marginal, but more useful than nothing.
So, summing up the situations where spell strike is useful:
1) The enemy's AC is abysmal and you aren't going to cast a spell next round.2) You cast the spell before reaching Melee combat.
3) For some unexplained reason, the enemy's touch ac is higher than his normal ac.
#1 is going to be, mostly, happening if you can't full attack or there are no useful spells to cast.
#2 is once per combat, and the situations that legitimately call for "not approaching immediately" are limited. Nothing stops you from charging NOW and spell combating later compared to casting the spell and then charging for Strike.
#3 doesn't happen as far as I am aware.
Anything else?
It also gives you more chances to hit, since the spell doesn't get wasted if you miss. You can cast and take your free touch attack, yes, but if you miss, you have to start wasting attacks you'd otherwise be dealing damage with to get more chances to discharge the touch spell. Using spellstrike, though, along with spell combat, you get multiple chances to discharge the spell without losing any weapon damage.
Also, depending on whether or not a spellstriked spell uses the normal spell crit modifiers (20/x2) or the weapon's, which I haven't seen an official answer to, you might have a pretty big advantage there while using 18-20 crit range weapons, or x3-x4 ones (or the 19-20/x3 falcata).
I hate to say this, but this class is VERY close in concept & execution to The Genius Guide to the Vanguard. Main difference is the Vanguard is a spontaneous caster. Class abilities are similar in theme, but a little different in method of use.
It also gives you more chances to hit, since the spell doesn't get wasted if you miss. You can cast and take your free touch attack, yes, but if you miss, you have to start wasting attacks you'd otherwise be dealing damage with to get more chances to discharge the touch spell. Using spellstrike, though, along with spell combat, you get multiple chances to discharge the spell without losing any weapon damage.
Also, depending on whether or not a spellstriked spell uses the normal spell crit modifiers (20/x2) or the weapon's, which I haven't seen an official answer to, you might have a pretty big advantage there while using 18-20 crit range weapons, or x3-x4 ones (or the 19-20/x3 falcata).
That brings situation 4 then
4) You missed.Where does it say the weapon crit range is the spell's crit range? it wasn't like that in 3.5 and I don't recall seeing such change.
That brings situation 4 then
4) You missed.Where does it say the weapon crit range is the spell's crit range? it wasn't like that in 3.5 and I don't recall seeing such change.
It doesn't, but people have been questioning whether that's how it works precisely because it doesn't say. And I know that's now how the duskblade's worked...but this isn't the duskblade, and its abilities are different, so there isn't actually any precedent for how it works.
With regard to crits with spellstrike, Jason posted how it is intended to work here.
To sum up, you use the threat range of the weapon, but the spell effect uses x2 multiplier while the weapon damage uses the weapon's multiplier.
To illustrate, the falcata (19-20/x3) would threaten on 19-20, and the multiplier for the spell would be x2 and the weapon damage would be x3.
Thanks for the link. That makes spellstrike with a rapier, scimitar, kukri, or the like a very nice thing...
|
4. -Spell Combat is pretty useless at low levels. Since it is modeled after two weapon fighting, maybe the penalties should match that. A -4 to attacks is too big of a tax to a low level Magus.
+1
Or at least have it only be -4 when using a normal 1H weapon, reducing to -2 if the weapon is light (following the precedent of TWF).
Hmm... Making the weapon of choice, so to speak, a dagger, short sword or light mace or even a kukri, instead of the rapier or scimitar that seem to be more prevalent among the various posters?
Somehow a dagger-wielder is not what I envision as the archetypical image of the Magus. :-)
|
|
Spell Combat doesn't say you must have the hand free at all times either, so nothing says that a magus with BAB 6+ can't swing with a sword, use the free hand to draw and throw a dagger (quick draw!) and then cast a spell.
A magus also should be able to hold his 1h weapon with both hands and spell combat as usual.
Agreed on both counts.
A weapon should be able to be held in one hand while casting, and then changed to a double-hand grip for chopping.
|
|
Hmm... Making the weapon of choice, so to speak, a dagger, short sword or light mace or even a kukri, instead of the rapier or scimitar that seem to be more prevalent among the various posters?
Somehow a dagger-wielder is not what I envision as the archetypical image of the Magus. :-)
Hmmm, you're right, a rapier is not 'light'.
Maybe it could be worded that the -2 applied to 'finesse' weapons, so as to include rapiers, whips, and all light weapons as well?
I am actually partial to other solutions myself, with the one I like the most being one saying that Spell Combat could very well be treated like Flurry of Blows mechanically.
Not really fond of having the penalty differ because of the weapon. The Magus is already 1-handed weapons only more or less, no need to further limit him by giving the player added incentive to go from 1-handed to the even more restricted category of light or finesseable weapons.
Either lower the penalty across the board or find some solution that affects all builds, such as the flurry one mentioned.
Regardless, I will be using a longsword for my elven Magus no matter what the final version is like (yes, even if it stays as is) so... :-)
|
|
3) To have an Arcana Pool to power the Magus Arcana abilities instead of burning spell slot after spell slot.
+1
Especially if the bonuses gained are small, and of limited duration.
EG Shield is a 1st-level spell that gives +4 shield bonus (a type the magus won't be getting from mundane equipment) to AC for 1 minute/caster level.
Using that spell, to instead power Spell Shield, to give +1 shield bonus for one round?
Why would I ever do this?
But spending 1 (of a dozen or more points) from an additional Arcana Pool?
Yeah; I'd do that.
|
|
Not really fond of having the penalty differ because of the weapon. The Magus is already 1-handed weapons only more or less, no need to further limit him by giving the player added incentive to go from 1-handed to the even more restricted category of light or finesseable weapons.
It's the same precedent used in TWF; if your weapon is light, the penalties are reduced.
It's not limiting anyone; it's just another optional tactic for anyone who thinks the penalty is too steep, especially at the lowest levels, when the PC may end up with a negative attack bonus. As he improves, and buys off the penalties with Weapon Focus and Arcane Weapon, he can become more confident and graduate to something larger.
If you're happy to accept the penalty as-is, then carry on with the longsword.
And there's no reason the other ideas can't also be used as well (like the flurry progression).
|
|
Not really fond of having the penalty differ because of the weapon. The Magus is already 1-handed weapons only more or less, no need to further limit him by giving the player added incentive to go from 1-handed to the even more restricted category of light or finesseable weapons.It's the same precedent used in TWF; if your weapon is light, the penalties are reduced.
It's not limiting anyone; it's just another optional tactic for anyone who thinks the penalty is too steep, especially at the lowest levels, when the PC may end up with a negative attack bonus. As he improves, and buys off the penalties with Weapon Focus and Arcane Weapon, he can become more confident and graduate to something larger.
If you're happy to accept the penalty as-is, then carry on with the longsword.
And there's no reason the other ideas can't also be used as well (like the flurry progression).
Except that's not what you said. You want the -2 with whips and rapiers too...which are some of the best weapons to use for a magus. Scimtar beating the rapier if you have access to dervish dance. So I can get behind a lowered penalty for light weapons ONLY. But as soon as you toss in two cherry picked weapon...umm yeah no.
And quite frankly I'd rather see spell combat go period and be replaced by another mechanic entirely. But if it IS kept, I'd rather have it be limited to damage spells. So at level 2, you can spell combat touch spells, at level 8 it's target spells and 14 it's AoE. And at level 20, you can even toss out two damage spell for a nice capstone. And take a -4 to attack. No explicit need for concentration checks...but as your gonna be full attacking in melee, your probably gonna have to. This would limit the abuse this ability can have in the future by a really big margin.