Spellstrike


Round 1: Magus

1 to 50 of 138 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Dark Archive

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Okay so I'm not sure I get how this works. The magus casts a touch spell, intending to make use of the spellstrike ability. Does he then make a regular melee attack against an opponent's AC, adding the effects of the touch spell? Or does he roll a touch attack and, if successful, add the weapon's damage?

Wrapping my head around this is a bit hard as the parameters for using a touch and for using a weapon are different. One merely needs to touch an opponent to succeed while the other needs to penetrate any defenses (armor, etc.) the opponent may have.

Shadow Lodge

Ravenmantle wrote:
Does he then make a regular melee attack against an opponent's AC, adding the effects of the touch spell?

This one.


Ravenmantle wrote:
Does he then make a regular melee attack against an opponent's AC, adding the effects of the touch spell?

This. It's not really hard to understand, since the words "touch attack" do not appear anywhere in the text.


Make an attack against normal ac then adds spell damage.

Edit apparently double ninja'd

Dark Archive

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Chris Kenney wrote:
This. It's not really hard to understand, since the words "touch attack" do not appear anywhere in the text.

Apparently, to at least one person it was. ;)


Another confusing point to me...

He casts a touch spell (standard action), then makes a melee attack which will deal normal damage plus discharge the spell. What action is the melee attack, another standard?

Sovereign Court

There don't seem to be very many touch spells on the Magus spell list to actually make use of with the Spellstrike ability... All I can spot on a quick glance is shocking grasp, even elemental touch has a range of personal.

Kyle Baird wrote:

Another confusing point to me...

He casts a touch spell (standard action), then makes a melee attack which will deal normal damage plus discharge the spell. What action is the melee attack, another standard?

Looks like it. I guess it is intended to be used in conjunction with Spell Combat, or at first level over the course of two rounds.


Calixymenthillian wrote:

There don't seem to be very many touch spells on the Magus spell list to actually make use of with the Spellstrike ability... All I can spot on a quick glance is shocking grasp, even elemental touch has a range of personal.

Kyle Baird wrote:

Another confusing point to me...

He casts a touch spell (standard action), then makes a melee attack which will deal normal damage plus discharge the spell. What action is the melee attack, another standard?

Looks like it. I guess it is intended to be used in conjunction with Spell Combat, or at first level over the course of two rounds.

Wonder how this functions with a weapon that has spell storing... :D


I would think that the melee attack would be made as part of casting the spell, just like making a touch attack can be part of casting the spell.


This is the part that gets me confused:

Quote:
This ability does not grant the magus a free melee attack — such attacks must be made normally.

To me, this says that when the magus casts the spell, he may instead store it in the weapon to be used in a subsequent melee attack ( a standard action of its own). This seems impractical for one (maybe two) reason(s): if cast normally, the spell is a touch attack and is more likely to hit than the weapon, and you have to wait a whole round to do it.

If I understood that right, the only time I can see this being used is at earlier levels when you do not have iterative attacks, and you have to take a double move to reach your target, but stop short to cast the spell, so that on your next turn, you get both effects. Not worthy of a class feature slot. I hope the intent is to allow both the spell and attack to happen simultaneously.


I'd rather see this ability written up as something like:

As a standard action a Magus may cast any spell with a range of touch and a casting time of one standard action or less into a wielded melee weapon. They may immediately then make a single melee attack. If the attack hits, it deals damaage normally and the spell is also discharged, automatically hitting its target. If the Magus does not immediately make a successful melee attack, the spell remains charged in the weapon for 1 round per level.

Or somethin' like that. ;-)


Kyle Baird wrote:

I'd rather see this ability written up as something like:

As a standard action a Magus may cast any spell with a range of touch and a casting time of one standard action or less into a wielded melee weapon. They may immediately then make a single melee attack. If the attack hits, it deals damaage normally and the spell is also discharged, automatically hitting its target. If the Magus does not immediately make a successful melee attack, the spell remains charged in the weapon for 1 round per level.

Or somethin' like that. ;-)

Likewise, and when I run one of these in my campaign as an antagonist NPC, I will treat the ability as such.

Casting a spell into a melee attack isn't that big a deal at 1st level when you only have one or two 1st level spells. It's hit or miss, and no better than Smite Evil.

EDIT: I have another question... what happens with the spell if the attack is a critical hit? I think the official word on my first question would determine whether or not I would allow both sources of damage to multiply, or if it would only be the weapon damage.


Kyle Baird wrote:

I'd rather see this ability written up as something like:

As a standard action a Magus may cast any spell with a range of touch and a casting time of one standard action or less into a wielded melee weapon. They may immediately then make a single melee attack. If the attack hits, it deals damaage normally and the spell is also discharged, automatically hitting its target. If the Magus does not immediately make a successful melee attack, the spell remains charged in the weapon for 1 round per level.

Or somethin' like that. ;-)

Yeah, Spellstrike is a bit of a pain at first level as it is currently. Though interestingly, that wording actually weakens a high level Magus who is in melee with her foe, since she can no longer Spell Combat + Spekk Strike and cast a touch spell and full attack as the same full-round action.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Foghammer wrote:


EDIT: I have another question... what happens with the spell if the attack is a critical hit? I think the official word on my first question would determine whether or not I would allow both sources of damage to multiply, or if it would only be the weapon damage.
Jason Bulmahn wrote:


The spell only gets a x2 crit. I will ensure that this is clarified.

The threat range becomes that of the weapon. There is no other good way to adjudicate that part.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

So, as I'm understanding it, at 1st level if you wanted to use Shocking Grasp through your weapon the sequence goes like so:

Round 1:
Cast Shocking Grasp and let it sit in the weapon.

Round 2:
If you didn't get an attack of opportunity for some reason before now, then you can now deliver that Shocking Grasp via a melee attack with your weapon.

As opposed to just doing it normally:

Round 1:
Cast and deliver Shocking Grasp.

Round 2:
Hit something with your weapon.

So, there are two advantages with this. If you are expecting to have an attack of opportunity, then you can pre-cast a touch spell and wait for the person to provoke an attack. The other option would be using a reach weapon to deliver your touch attacks so that you can stay a bit further out of range.

All of this is moot at level 2 where you can cast and hit in the same standard action.

Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010

The wording doesn't seem clear to me, can you cast shocking grasp and make the free touch attack you get with a touch spell, then if the touch attack misses put the spell in your weapon using spellstrike and hit with it next round?

As a tactic, I suppose you can hold the charge on a spell indefinitely and then run up and belt an enemy with spellstrike.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Matt Goodall wrote:

The wording doesn't seem clear to me, can you cast shocking grasp and make the free touch attack you get with a touch spell, then if the touch attack misses put the spell in your weapon using spellstrike and hit with it next round?

As a tactic, I suppose you can hold the charge on a spell indefinitely and then run up and belt an enemy with spellstrike.

It's an either/or (thus the "Alternatively" it prefaces when it says you can just use a normal touch). You can charge your weapon with it for a touch attack or you can just use it as a normal touch attack that has nothing to do with your weapon, but you can't do both.

When combined with Spell Combat, you can do the touch spell first and put it into the weapon and then do the full-round attack with that first weapon attack being your touch attack. Or you could just do an actual touch attack with the spell and then the full-round attack (or the full-round and then the touch).

I agree it needs to be rewritten, because it's causing confusion for a lot of people.


slicertool wrote:
All of this is moot at level 2 where you can cast and hit in the same round.

Fixed that for you ;). Spell Combat is a full round action, but meh.

Silver Crusade

You guys (Used loosely) keep saying let it sit in the weapon stored. My issue with this is it doesn't say anywhere the spell is actually stored in the weapon.

My point is, you still would retain your spell even if you lost your weapon somehow. A distiction I think should be made.

Liberty's Edge

The way I see it, the Magus' melee attack is part of casting the spell.

So the Magus could make a move action and use spellstrike (melee attack + shocking grasp) as a standard action.

Or the Magus could make a move action, standard action melee attack, and still have a free action Shocking Grasp touch attack.

Is any of this correct?

Sovereign Court

I don't think its that confusing.

The basics:
You can cast a melee touch spell and deliver it through your weapon.

Action:
Normally casting Shocking grasp is a Standard action. You can choose to make a touch attack that round for free (as normal).

If you want to hit with both weapon and spell you must wait till next round and make a normal melee attack. If you hit you do normal weapon damage and discharge the spell adding its effects as well.

The melee attack still requires at least a standard action, not the free touch you get from the spell itself.

--School of Vrock.


King of Vrock wrote:

I don't think its that confusing.

The basics:
You can cast a melee touch spell and deliver it through your weapon.

Action:
Normally casting Shocking grasp is a Standard action. You can choose to make a touch attack that round for free (as normal).

If you want to hit with both weapon and spell you must wait till next round and make a normal melee attack. If you hit you do normal weapon damage and discharge the spell adding its effects as well.

The melee attack still requires at least a standard action, not the free touch you get from the spell itself.

--School of Vrock.

Confirmed in a different thread:

Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Beek Gwenders of Croodle wrote:
Charles Dunwoody wrote:


Casting a spell is a standard action, so the magus wouldn't get secondary attacks. So, as a standard action, he can cast a touch spell or cast the spell and also attack with a weapon with both attacks resolved as one melee attack which does both the damage of the spell and the weapon.

At least, that's the way I'm reading it.

But if you move and cast touch spell in round 1 and then use your full attack on round 2, I understand you can make both attacks, the first one delivering the chill touch. "as part of a melee attack".

Correct reading folks.. that sentence is there just to say that you do not get a free melee attack with a weapon when you cast a touch spell. You can, however, still take the free touch attack that comes with the casting of such spells.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Liberty's Edge

So to use Spellstrike requires two standard actions, one to cast the spell and one to attack?

That seems less than special to me.


This seems like it's meant to be used just before combat is expected to begin, then, because it would be retarded to cast into the weapon while already in combat, when you could just as easily take the touch attack (against a lower AC most of the time). You actually have a smaller chance of hitting on the 2nd round with the weapon because it isn't a touch attack.

I am looking at this as a PC rolling up a 1st level character. This is not appealing at all at first level, nothing like a druid's animal companion, or a rogue's sneak attack, or a barbarian's rage, all of which are reliable class features. The magus has a BAB of 0 at 1st level, and very few spells, which he has to prepare, and he is expected to be casting in melee combat which is going to require some steep concentration checks unless he takes combat casting, otherwise, his one/two-shot ability (bonus spell dependant) is wasted on a failed check, and he's useless. Not to mention that casting a spell provokes AoO, which is going to happen A LOT for the Magus.

I am loathe to bother with this class now that I've realized his spells are going to provoke attacks of opportunity EVERY time he engages in melee while casting with Spell Combat, and I'm sure that's meant to be the bread and butter of the class.

Someone please explain to me how narrow-minded I am and that I don't see the possibilities here. I was so excited about this class, and I'm feeling underwhelmed more and more as I run combat over in my mind. I'm really turned off by provoking attacks of opportunity by using a class feature.

EDIT: Okay, I missed the last bit in Spell Combat that covers Attacks of Opportunity. Nevermind that.


Foghammer wrote:

This seems like it's meant to be used just before combat is expected to begin, then, because it would be retarded to cast into the weapon while already in combat, when you could just as easily take the touch attack (against a lower AC most of the time). You actually have a smaller chance of hitting on the 2nd round with the weapon because it isn't a touch attack.

I am looking at this as a PC rolling up a 1st level character. This is not appealing at all at first level, nothing like a druid's animal companion, or a rogue's sneak attack, or a barbarian's rage, all of which are reliable class features. The magus has a BAB of 0 at 1st level, and very few spells, which he has to prepare, and he is expected to be casting in melee combat which is going to require some steep concentration checks unless he takes combat casting, otherwise, his one/two-shot ability (bonus spell dependant) is wasted on a failed check, and he's useless. Not to mention that casting a spell provokes AoO, which is going to happen A LOT for the Magus.

I am loathe to bother with this class now that I've realized his spells are going to provoke attacks of opportunity EVERY time he engages in melee while casting with Spell Combat, and I'm sure that's meant to be the bread and butter of the class.

Someone please explain to me how narrow-minded I am and that I don't see the possibilities here. I was so excited about this class, and I'm feeling underwhelmed more and more as I run combat over in my mind. I'm really turned off by provoking attacks of opportunity by using a class feature.

Unless your enemies have those crazy high-level Spellbreaker feats or are also high-level Magi, not only will you not be provoking AoOs every time with Spell Combat, you won't even be capable of provoking them even if you wanted to do so (you have to cast defensively).

Granted, as I mentioned in another thread to Benn Roe, I'm seeing Spell Combat as more of the class's "Sneak Attack" than Spellstrike.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
ThornDJL7 wrote:

You guys (Used loosely) keep saying let it sit in the weapon stored. My issue with this is it doesn't say anywhere the spell is actually stored in the weapon.

My point is, you still would retain your spell even if you lost your weapon somehow. A distiction I think should be made.

Let's try this. Here's how I would rewrite it for running in my campaign (the forums ate the first version of this and here's my attempt to recreate it):

Spellstrike (Su): Whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of touch from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of his next melee attack or, alternatively, using a free hand to deliver the free touch attack as per normal. This spell must be used by the end of his next turn or it will be considered lost.

When using a melee weapon to deliver the spell, if the attack is successful it deals its normal damage as well as the effects of the spell. This ability does not grant the magus a free melee attack--such attacks must be made normally. Any critical hits are calculated as per the weapon's threat range and damage, but the spell damage itself uses a x2 multiplier unless specified otherwise.


The class is basicly a ripoff of the duskblade from 3.5's players handbook 2. We can just use the rulings established for that classes spellcasting through a weapon.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Kortz wrote:

So to use Spellstrike requires two standard actions, one to cast the spell and one to attack?

That seems less than special to me.

It only really becomes cool when used in conjunction with Spell Combat at level 2. Then you're only rolling your melee attacks instead of the touch attack separately. This means you don't have to worry about stacking Str, Dex, and Int and instead can just concentrate on Str and Int (or Dex and Int if you're using the Weapon Finesse feat). It also would allow you to calculate off of the weapon's threat range instead of the spell's threat range.


slicertool wrote:
Kortz wrote:

So to use Spellstrike requires two standard actions, one to cast the spell and one to attack?

That seems less than special to me.

It only really becomes cool when used in conjunction with Spell Combat at level 2. Then you're only rolling your melee attacks instead of the touch attack separately. This means you don't have to worry about stacking Str, Dex, and Int and instead can just concentrate on Str and Int (or Dex and Int if you're using the Weapon Finesse feat). It also would allow you to calculate off of the weapon's threat range instead of the spell's threat range.

Yeah, getting a potential 15-20/x2 on your spell is a huge advantage. I' confused though, why would you need Dex with any more regularity if you didn't have Spellstrike?


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Yeah, getting a potential 15-20/x2 on your spell is a huge advantage. I' confused though, why would you need Dex with any more regularity if you didn't have Spellstrike?

Misread and edited: sorry, was thinking that Touch attacks were dex based, but I had Ranged Touch attacks in my head when thinking it.


slicertool wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Yeah, getting a potential 15-20/x2 on your spell is a huge advantage. I' confused though, why would you need Dex with any more regularity if you didn't have Spellstrike?
Not saying you'd need it more, just that those would be the stats you'd be stacking as Weapon Finesse uses Dex instead of Str for weapon attacks.

OK, I reread your other post, and perhaps I am just being obtuse, so my apologies if I'm just reading it wrong, but is it the case that you think that melee touch spells normally use Dexterity rather than Strength so you would therefore need both stats to hit with both kinds of attack?


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
OK, I reread your other post, and perhaps I am just being obtuse, so my apologies if I'm just reading it wrong, but is it the case that you think that melee touch spells normally use Dexterity rather than Strength so you would therefore need both stats to hit with both kinds of attack?

Yeah, sorry about that. I've had ranged touch attacks on the brain lately as I've been playing a character that uses them all the time (it's not my fault my DM lines the bad guys up for a lightning bolt every other fight).

So, yes... Str is more useful with melee touch. I should probably go through the spell list and see how many are ranged vs melee touch attacks.


Chris Parker wrote:
Confirmed in a different thread:

That's not what Jason said (though it's still not clear to me whether he said what he meant to say, I admit). Check it again:

Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Beek Gwenders of Croodle wrote:
Charles Dunwoody wrote:


Casting a spell is a standard action, so the magus wouldn't get secondary attacks. So, as a standard action, he can cast a touch spell or cast the spell and also attack with a weapon with both attacks resolved as one melee attack which does both the damage of the spell and the weapon.

At least, that's the way I'm reading it.

But if you move and cast touch spell in round 1 and then use your full attack on round 2, I understand you can make both attacks, the first one delivering the chill touch. "as part of a melee attack".

Correct reading folks.. that sentence is there just to say that you do not get a free melee attack with a weapon when you cast a touch spell. You can, however, still take the free touch attack that comes with the casting of such spells.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Bold is mine.


Carpy DM wrote:
Chris Parker wrote:
Confirmed in a different thread:

That's not what Jason said (though it's still not clear to me whether he said what he meant to say, I admit). Check it again:

Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Beek Gwenders of Croodle wrote:
Charles Dunwoody wrote:


Casting a spell is a standard action, so the magus wouldn't get secondary attacks. So, as a standard action, he can cast a touch spell or cast the spell and also attack with a weapon with both attacks resolved as one melee attack which does both the damage of the spell and the weapon.

At least, that's the way I'm reading it.

But if you move and cast touch spell in round 1 and then use your full attack on round 2, I understand you can make both attacks, the first one delivering the chill touch. "as part of a melee attack".

Correct reading folks.. that sentence is there just to say that you do not get a free melee attack with a weapon when you cast a touch spell. You can, however, still take the free touch attack that comes with the casting of such spells.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Bold is mine.

Hmm, the part you bolded was from a quote within the quote that Jason was directly quoting when he said there was a correct reading, so when I saw his post, I thought he was not referring to it.


Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Hmm, the part you bolded was from a quote within the quote that Jason was directly quoting when he said there was a correct reading, so when I saw his post, I thought he was not referring to it.

The quote that he replied to didn't address that bit at all, just offered another way to use the ability, so it would seem to stand. That said, as I mentioned before, it's not clear to me that Jason meant to say what he said. We shall have to wait for tomorrow for additional explanation, I think.

Liberty's Edge

I think Spellstrike -- with a different name maybe -- needs to be more explicitly in line with abilities like sneak attack and channel energy.

Maybe 3 times a day +INT modifier you add 1d6 of magical damage to a melee attack. At every odd level it goes up a d6.

At first level the damage is arcane. At every even level you gain the ability to choose to give that arcane damage an elemental form.

For example:

1st -- 1d6 (Arcane)
2nd -- (Fire)
3rd -- 2d6
4th -- (Electricity)
5th -- 3d6
6th -- (Acid)
7th -- 4d6
8th -- (Frost)
9th -- 5d6

Maybe make an Arcana that gives you burst damage on crits.

And if you're still in love with weapons delivering spells, just make a spell-storing Arcana at a certain level.

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

As the playtest goes on, it becomes clear to me that this ability is going to need some revision. For clarity, and probably just for overall utility. Back to the drawing board I go.

This, folks, is why we playtest.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

Kortz wrote:

I think Spellstrike -- with a different name maybe -- needs to be more explicitly in line with abilities like sneak attack and channel energy.

Maybe 3 times a day +INT modifier you add 1d6 of magical damage to a melee attack. At every odd level it goes up a d6.

At first level the damage is arcane. At every even level you gain the ability to choose to give that arcane damage an elemental form.

For example:

1st -- 1d6 (Arcane)
2nd -- (Fire)
3rd -- 2d6
4th -- (Electricity)
5th -- 3d6
6th -- (Acid)
7th -- 4d6
8th -- (Frost)
9th -- 5d6

Maybe make an Arcana that gives you burst damage on crits.

And if you're still in love with weapons delivering spells, just make a spell-storing Arcana at a certain level.

And this.. is an interesting idea. Hmm..

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I'd suggested something mildly similar to what Kortz suggested in the Arcana thread, but I think his idea is much better. It would also allow it to be used with the Conductive ability, which I'd think would be just about made for the Magus, so...I'd really like something of the sort, even if it doesn't end up especially powerful.

The Exchange

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

@Kortz I'm not too sure I like the 1d6/2 levels progression as spellstrike. I think that is just too close to the way a rogue works right now. If I wanted to add 1d6 damage to my attacks I'd play a rogue, not a Magus. I think Spellstrike as it is, casting spells through a weapon, is a very interesting idea and could easily be expanded.

To me spellstrike fills a nice niche in the class, the same niche that Spring Attack fills for a Rogue, or Vital Strike fills for a fighter. It gives the Magus an option to move + attack. Of course this could only be possibly if he gained the ability to attack with the weapon + cast the spell in the same round. Personally, I don't see how it's game-breaking at all to allow this. Simply casting the spell the character gets to make a touch attack which is vastly easier to hit with than a regular attack. What it would let the Magus do is add his weapon damage and weapon abilities to the attack.

So what I would propose is this....

Spellstrike (Su): Whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of touch from the magus spell list, he can choose to deliver the spell normally through a touch attack or through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack. If successful, this attack deals its normal damage as well as the effects of the spell.
At 5th level the Magus is able to hold a spell in his weapon for an extended period of time. He is able to cast a spell into his weapon and discharge it later at his choice as a free action. The spell is held in the weapon until the Magus prepares spells for the day. This is limited to 1st level spells only. At 10th level the Magus is able to hold a 2nd level spell. At 15th he can hold a 3rd level spell, and finally at 20th level he can hold a 4th level spell.
While the Magus may only hold one spell at a time he may still use his Spellstrike ability to cast a spell immediately through his weapon at any time, although only one spell may be discharged in any single attack.

What this gives the Magus is the ability to use Spellstrike as a "vital strike" filler at any level for a move+attack combo in the same round. In addition it would give the Magus the ability to keep a spell in his weapon for later use without worrying about: Silence, Grapple (well if he has a light weapon), blindness, lack of material component, casting time, casting defensively, or just as important, the spell action. It also scales with level and fills an important hole in the class at 10th level (at least partially fills).


Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Kortz wrote:
Spellstrike stuff

And this.. is an interesting idea. Hmm..

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

The problem I have with this is not the idea in itself, but that limiting it on a per-day basis seems nonsensical in comparison to, say, the rogue. I would much rather see an ability that dealt 1d4 energy damage per two levels, with energy options determined by your level, that functioned all-day. Perhaps you can turn it on or off with a swift action.

I use d4s so that the rogue's d6's are still worthwhile in comparison (and because I like caltrops :P), though the ability to add 7d4 cold damage to your 1d8+5 longsword against a fire elemental would certainly give it a little more oomph.

The other option I would like to see for Spellstrike would instead be like this:

Quote:

Spellstrike (Su): A magus may attempt to deliver a spell with a melee attack. The spell must have a range of touch, must come from the magus spell list, and must have a casting time of one standard action or less.

As a standard action, the magus makes a single attack at his full base attack bonus. If he strikes his opponent, the delivered spell automatically affects the foe as well. If the spell carries a saving throw, his opponent may make one to reduce or negate the spell's effect; regardless, the weapon attack is unaffected by the saving throw. Using this ability does not provoke an attack of opportunity.

...essentially subsuming the melee attack into the spell and replacing the spell's touch attack with it.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16, 2012 Top 32

Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Kortz wrote:

I think Spellstrike -- with a different name maybe -- needs to be more explicitly in line with abilities like sneak attack and channel energy.

Maybe 3 times a day +INT modifier you add 1d6 of magical damage to a melee attack. At every odd level it goes up a d6.

At first level the damage is arcane. At every even level you gain the ability to choose to give that arcane damage an elemental form...

And this.. is an interesting idea. Hmm..

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

I was just going to post playtest results suggesting the magus needs a 1st-level ability usable 3+Int times per day.

If you go with this one, I'd suggest making the damage type for the bonus damage depend upon your prepared spells. The default damage type is arcane, but if you have one or more prepared spells that have energy descriptors, you can change the bonus damage to an energy type that matches any one of those descriptors. (That would tie the bonus melee damage to your spellcasting ability, which is thematically-appropriate for the magus.)

I would also suggest allowing the bonus damage to apply to all melee attacks made with a given weapon for one full round, bringing it in line with the damage output of a rogue's sneak attack.

Kortz wrote:
And if you're still in love with weapons delivering spells, just make a spell-storing Arcana at a certain level.

Or add spell storing to the list of properties you can add to your bonded weapon.


I like the current flavor of spellstrike but I can also see how you would want to make it different than the duskblades ability. I see this ability as a guy who casts touch spells into his sword giving it magical properties then goes to town on his foes. Or loads his arrows with shocking properties and rains electricity on his foes and that is how he casts his spells. The effects would have to be long lasting or the action economy would have to be better for it to make sense though. Casting shocking grasp on your sword then wading into melée with every strike electrocuting your foes is a cool visual but I'm sure it's unbalanced. I wonder if there is a way to balance. I'll try to come up with something.

Dark Archive

Fax Celestis wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Kortz wrote:
Spellstrike stuff

And this.. is an interesting idea. Hmm..

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

The problem I have with this is not the idea in itself, but that limiting it on a per-day basis seems nonsensical in comparison to, say, the rogue. I would much rather see an ability that dealt 1d4 energy damage per two levels, with energy options determined by your level, that functioned all-day. Perhaps you can turn it on or off with a swift action.

I use d4s so that the rogue's d6's are still worthwhile in comparison (and because I like caltrops :P), though the ability to add 7d4 cold damage to your 1d8+5 longsword against a fire elemental would certainly give it a little more oomph.
...

If it were limited to d4's I would expect Force and Sonic to also become viable choices.

Also I would hope that if it was limited it would be something like 3+Int mod and not just once a day. I look at once a day abilities as "don't bother unless you know you're done for the day" abilities.

Liberty's Edge

Jason Bulmahn wrote:


And this.. is an interesting idea. Hmm..

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Glad you like it... I think a new base class needs a dependable mechanic that jumps right out at you at first glance. Spellstrike as is seems really circumstantial to me, and Spell Combat, though I haven't thought about it in detail, isn't something in itself that would make me really want to play a Magus right out of the gate.

To answer a couple of other posters, the reason I would make it 3+INT mod based is for balance. A STR-based Magus with the above ability at will would be a bit much in my opinion. Depending on how you come up with stats, a STR-based Magus should take a hit in INT and be able to use the ability fewer times a day. A high INT Magus would have lower STR bonuses but be able to use the ability more times a day. Also, the archetypal elven F/MU with high DEX and INT and Weapon Finesse might be a little overpowered if you didn't limit my suggested ability to x/day.

As for what would make it different from the Rogue... besides flavor, the Magus would be made to bypass different kinds of DR and could use the ability in any kind of combat situation, while the Rogue would be limited to only using his d6 damage progression in sneak attack and flanking circumstances. (Though the rogue would not have a daily hard cap on number or times he could use it.) The two classes would have two different skill sets and the Magus would have access to martial weapons. The Rogue would have his talents and archetypes and the Magus would have his Arcana... the only similarity, really, would be the d6 special-attack damage progression.


Personally, I really like Spellstrike as it is right now. It is a feature that I've been looking for in a class for a long time. Personally, I read it as more of a:

"If you are holding a touch spell (cast in a previous round or through Spell Combat), you may deliver that spell through a weapon attack." This interpretation would mean that if you miss the attack, you still have the spell. Also it states that on subsequent rounds you can either try to Weapon Attack the spell or use a touch attack for the spell. While I may need to brush up on the rules a bit, with the advent of True Strike a level 1 spell that grants a +20 to your next attack roll, you could probably assure that the spell and the weapon will hit.

Personally I kinda like the Smiting Spell feat from 3.5 a tiny bit better as it also allowed you to (for an increased spell slot) place the touch spell into a piece of ammo [Sling + Cure X Wounds Stones. 1d3 damage, xd8+y healing. At a distance no less). That being said, for the class itself, Spellstrike makes sense.

I also don't believe that Spellstrike as it stands should be limited to times per day, only because it does eat both a preparation round (or a penalty to attack rolls) and a penalty to hit on the spell itself (touch VS attack). Aha. Got it!

-- Suggestion
Spellstrike:
When a Magus is holding the charge of a touch spell cast from the Magus Spell List, he may chose to deliver the spell through a Weapon as if delivering it through an Unarmed Strike. The spell shares the Threat Range of the weapon used, but has a Critical Multiplier of x2.

I would also like to see the Magus gain either through Magus Arcana or through a Feat the ability to cast some divine spells (or an arcane version of them.) Mostly Cure X Wounds and Inflict X Wounds. They should not get the Mass forms, and perhapse the Cure X Wounds could be restricted to Harming Undead.


Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Kortz wrote:

I think Spellstrike -- with a different name maybe -- needs to be more explicitly in line with abilities like sneak attack and channel energy.

Maybe 3 times a day +INT modifier you add 1d6 of magical damage to a melee attack. At every odd level it goes up a d6.

At first level the damage is arcane. At every even level you gain the ability to choose to give that arcane damage an elemental form.

For example:

1st -- 1d6 (Arcane)
2nd -- (Fire)
3rd -- 2d6
4th -- (Electricity)
5th -- 3d6
6th -- (Acid)
7th -- 4d6
8th -- (Frost)
9th -- 5d6

Maybe make an Arcana that gives you burst damage on crits.

And if you're still in love with weapons delivering spells, just make a spell-storing Arcana at a certain level.

And this.. is an interesting idea. Hmm..

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

I really like the ability to cast touch spells with melee attack ever since the Spellsword and the Duskblade back in the good/bad 3.5 times.

I really hope that the ability survives in some kind or another, what I would really love to see, is allowing it to work on ranged tough spells, a Spellstrike Scorching Ray seems like a fair trade.

Pretty please ? ^^

(Sinister laughter thinking about using scorcing ray through a keen falcatca ;) )


Spellstrike (Su): Whenever a magus casts a spell with a
range of touch from the magus spell list, he can deliver the
spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee
attack. If successful, this attack deals its normal damage as
well as the effects of the spell. This ability does not grant
the magus a free melee attack—such attacks must be
made normally. Alternatively, a magus
can make a free touch attack with his
free hand instead of delivering the
spell through his weapon, as normal.

i think adding the caveat that if you miss but bypass there touch ac the spell still goes off as normal.

I dont think adding a d4 or d6 of damage per 2 levels is a good thing. with spellstrike you can add 5d6 damage at a 1:1 ratio. you can use intensify spell to make it 10d6 at 10th level with a second level spell, possibly empowered with the magus arcana. that doesnt seem to need any buffing.

alternatively i would make

Improved Spell Combat (Ex): At 8th level, the magus’s
ability to cast spells and make melee attacks improves.
When using the spell combat ability, the penalty on
his attack rolls is reduced to –2 and the penalty on his
concentration checks is reduced to 0.

into an ability to make one attack and one spell a standard action allowing for a move action, or even spring attack.

Also just get rid of the penalties for the whole ability all together. the fact that you need to use spell lots mean the ability is already limited at lower levels. unless you can use acid splash/ ray of frost which would increase its over all use but not to a huge effect.

Liberty's Edge

Personally, I'd have Spellstrike be something more akin to:

Spellstrike (Su): As a standard action, you can sacrifice a prepared spell and make a single melee attack at your highest base attack bonus. This attack gains a bonus to the attack roll equal to the level of the spell sacrificed. On a hit, the attack deals +1d6 damage per level of the spell sacrificed. At 6th, 12th and 18th level, add +1d6 to the bonus damage dealt, regardless of the level of the spell used.
If the spell sacrificed has an energy type, the bonus damage is of the same energy type, otherwise it is untyped. If the attack is a critical hit, multiply the weapon's damage as normal, but you only multiply the spell's damage by x2, regardless of the critical multiplier of the weapon used.

This gets rid of two problems: Spellstrike sucking horribly, and giving an occasional accuracy boost to a non-High BAB melee combatant. Without having to spend a class feature to do a worse job of it. It allows for the bonus damage without worrying about possible synergy with powerful secondary effects from certain touch spells (not sure what there might be, but I'm sure there're some).

This also allows for a choice between Spellstrike for a single attack with more accuracy and damage, or Spell Combat* for a spell and attacks, without the accuracy boost or mobility of using your move action. Finally, it allows you to prepare utility spells that may be useful, without having to fill all your slots with touch spells (or, the one touch spell you get, anyway...) to make sure you have attack options.

* Which desperately needs a better name, by the way:
"Armed Casting"? I'd suggest "Blade Magic", but that might be misleading for those that aren't using blades.


Kortz wrote:

I think Spellstrike -- with a different name maybe -- needs to be more explicitly in line with abilities like sneak attack and channel energy.

Maybe 3 times a day +INT modifier you add 1d6 of magical damage to a melee attack. At every odd level it goes up a d6.

At first level the damage is arcane. At every even level you gain the ability to choose to give that arcane damage an elemental form.

For example:

1st -- 1d6 (Arcane)
2nd -- (Fire)
3rd -- 2d6
4th -- (Electricity)
5th -- 3d6
6th -- (Acid)
7th -- 4d6
8th -- (Frost)
9th -- 5d6

Maybe make an Arcana that gives you burst damage on crits.

And if you're still in love with weapons delivering spells, just make a spell-storing Arcana at a certain level.

I've suggested something like this before and I really like it. Perhaps giving up a spell of level X with the [Energy] descriptor to be able to add spell level * 1d6 damage to all melee attacks for Int mod rounds.

1 to 50 of 138 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Ultimate Magic Playtest / Round 1: Magus / Spellstrike All Messageboards