I see how I parsed you wrong--you weren't trying to say the Magus was merely competent with the bonuses added on, you were saying it was incompetent at Spell Combat at level 2 without any trait or feat assistance. At that, you are certainly correct.That means your statement shows that the Magus is heavily taxed to even be a modicum of competent at its own abilities - and 65% is barely a modicum for one of the two class defining features.
Ah, I interpreted you correctly the first time. In that case we merely disagree as to acceptable levels of success. I know your experience doesn't match mine on Colour Spray, but assume you're in my shoes for the moment and it does. You're looking at a Wizard who casts Colour Spray with at most 80% chance of making the Concentration (higher Int and not using Spell Combat, so 15% more assuming he invests in it as heavily as the Magus did, probably an overassumption for the Wizard but I want to be as fair as possible) vs the Magus with 65%. In exchange for 15% of a spell vs the Wizard, the Magus gets an attack at a -4. My sample Magus had a +3 to hit after the Spell Combat penalty, and vs AC ~15 enemies at level 2, that's 45% chance to hit with an attack. If we compare to herself not using Spell Combat, the Magus in two rounds gets 1.3 spells and .9 successful melee hits for Spell Combat vs .75 spell (1 spell if she can avoid melee entirely) and .65 successful melee hits.
Is there anything stopping a Magus from Casting OUT of Threat, 5`Stepping, and then delivering the attack? Since you can 5`Step within a Full Attack action (whose attacks are all part of the same action), I don`t see why you couldn`t in this case.
Melee Combat is ALREADY about maneuvering, because you AREN`T always in melee combat, you either have to get there first, adjust to the enemy`s own maneuvers (and/or reach advantage), and so forth. Sure, you can`t pull off a Cast - 5`Step - Attack Combo ALL the time, but it seems roughly equivalent to a Rogue`s need for a Flanking Set-Up to get their Sneak Attack damage.
Besides, what other options does a Magus have?
What about 1-handed Reach Weapons, like a Scorpion Whip (Dagger Whip?) or Bladed Scarf, etc, etc. Those seem like potentially VERY POPULAR weapons with Magus` for just this mechanical reason, but seem to lend them a certain style as well, which seems a good thing.
What other sort of Magus Arcana could also alleviate this issue?
5`steps are sort of restrictive, but what if they could Cast outside of threat as part of (before) a Move Action, before delivering the attack with a separate Attack Action? Even when the Magus DOESN`T need to maneuver, that now allows delivering the attack via an ATTACK ACTION, i.e. benefitting from Vital Strike (though I think it`d need to be written so the spell effect also isn`t doubled/tripled/etc via Vital Strike). It also might allow that if the Magus has Spring Attack (paying for the Feats) for them to do a Spring Attack combo attack, Casting outside of threat, moving to attack + deliver spell effect, before moving outside of threat again. WOW, that might actually be an effective usage of Spring Attack!!!
I just think there`s ways to use the Cast + Attack ability while not needing to provoke from Casting OR using the option which imposes attack/Concentration penalties... Certainly that`s an option, but at low levels where those penalties are very harsh, it only needs to be a LAST DITCH option. (Of course, I was raised on 2nd Edition where squishy Casters only tried Casting while Threatened if they didn`t have any other options or had defensive buffs up to the gills).
As I see it, the worst case at low levels is that the Magus is in an equivalent situation to a character who took 1 or 2 levels of Fighter and 1 or 2 levels or Sorceror (who has NO special ability to Cast in Combat, besides no ability to combine a Spellcasting with an attack)... Which I think is still a very viable build, given the advantages from the Caster levels (say, Shield and Enlarge Person) are nice enough to balance the marginal difference in BAB and HP (which at low levels isn`t that much, i.e. a 1st level Fighter only has +1 BAB vs. a Wizard). The Magus has access to those nice spells that can make up the difference (i.e. Enlarge Person can deal with Threat Area issues, Invisiblity/Grt. Invis with provoking AoO`s to begin with, etc).
Is there anything stopping a Magus from Casting OUT of Threat, 5`Stepping, and then delivering the attack? Since you can 5`Step within a Full Attack action (whose attacks are all part of the same action), I don`t see why you couldn`t in this case.
Melee Combat is ALREADY about maneuvering, because you AREN`T always in melee combat, you either have to get there first, adjust to the enemy`s own maneuvers (and/or reach advantage), and so forth. Sure, you can`t pull off a Cast - 5`Step - Attack Combo ALL the time, but it seems roughly equivalent to a Rogue`s need for a Flanking Set-Up to get their Sneak Attack damage.
Besides, what other options does a Magus have?
What about 1-handed Reach Weapons, like a Scorpion Whip (Dagger Whip?) or Bladed Scarf, etc, etc. Those seem like potentially VERY POPULAR weapons with Magus` for just this mechanical reason, but seem to lend them a certain style as well, which seems a good thing.What other sort of Magus Arcana could also alleviate this issue?
5`steps are sort of restrictive, but what if they could Cast outside of threat as part of (before) a Move Action, before delivering the attack with a separate Attack Action? Even when the Magus DOESN`T need to maneuver, that now allows delivering the attack via an ATTACK ACTION, i.e. benefitting from Vital Strike (though I think it`d need to be written so the spell effect also isn`t doubled/tripled/etc via Vital Strike). It also might allow that if the Magus has Spring Attack (paying for the Feats) for them to do a Spring Attack combo attack, Casting outside of threat, moving to attack + deliver spell effect, before moving outside of threat again. WOW, that might actually be an effective usage of Spring Attack!!!I just think there`s ways to use the Cast + Attack ability while not needing to provoke from Casting OR using the option which imposes attack/Concentration penalties... Certainly that`s an option, but at low levels where those penalties are very harsh, it only needs to be a LAST DITCH option. (Of...
I think they have to make the Concentration check even if they aren't threatened by any enemies, just due to the difficulty of juggling attacks and spells. But hmm, I see your point here--I think they should at least get a solid bonus on the check if they are not in fact threatened by a foe.
Armor? Weapons? D8 HD?
Cleric? Druid?
Write up a Wizard and a Magus and have them get in to a slap fight. Who won?
Have a Magus and a Fighter get in to a spell duel. Wait fighter don't have spells.
Magus has problems competing with the wizard isn't one of them.
Are you purposefully missing my point or are you just not seeing it?
One more thing what is the Will save of your orcs? A Magus with a 14 Int has a DC 13 on color spray [65% chance of failure without a bonus to Will.]
A Magic with 14 Int also has a 70% chance to fail casting Color Spray defensively during Spell Combat or a 60% chance in general.
A Wizard with 18 Int decreases that failure chance to 50%. The Wizard is better at what the Magus specializes in than the Magus.
So the Wizard's focus on Int rather than broader interest in combat wins the day--except that if the Magus's focus on casting in combat causes her to choose the trait and the feat both, where the Wizard does not, she's actually better at casting defensively.
Except "she's" not. A Wizard with the same feat and trait is still better than the Magus. If the Magus takes that feat and trait, then it is giving up another feat and trait.
|
In my experience, that is wrong, but that's immaterial. A Wizard is still more qualified to cast defensively than a Magus where a dual wielding Rogue could kill individual monsters faster than the Magus.
This is a class that is supposed to be decent at wizard stuff and fighter stuff. It should be a "jack of all (two) trades, master of none" situation, which is exactly what it looks like to me.
One of the biggest problems that people have complained of on the forums is that a multiclass Wizard/Fighter type character is like having a low level wizard with a bunch of extra HP one turn, and a low level fighter with some extra HP on the next turn. There's no crossover between the abilities. The Magus provides the capacity for that crossover, but it's understandably difficult.
Fact of the matter is that the Spell Combat ability gives the Magus an edge in the Action Economy, which is one of the most difficult things to gain an advantage of in the game.
It should be very difficult at lower levels. If a Magus could reliably use it (i.e. do it without penalties), you've got a major power creep problem with a class that can reliably perform two turns worth of activities as a single full round action.
So the Wizard's focus on Int rather than broader interest in combat wins the day--except that if the Magus's focus on casting in combat causes her to choose the trait and the feat both, where the Wizard does not, she's actually better at casting defensively.Except "she's" not. A Wizard with the same feat and trait is still better than the Magus. If the Magus takes that feat and trait, then it is giving up another feat and trait.
I said that the Magus took the trait and feat and the Wizard didn't take both, then she would be ahead of the Wizard. It's a matter of focus and limited resources. You agree with me that the Wizard will probably have a higher Int because the Magus has to put her focus elsewhere. This is where the Wizard gets his edge in casting defensively, which I'm willing to grant you. However, the Wizard has a lot of other things going on, and he isn't the Magus, so he isn't as keen on constantly casting on the front lines, plus he has other places to spend his feats, so he probably won't take both the feat and the trait and will focus elsewhere. Thus, the Magus can catch up for what she lost for her lack of focus on Int due to her greater focus on front-line casting.
If we don't care about focus and are looking at the hypothetical Wizard who is going to match the Magus completely, then we can just as easily claim that the Magus has matched the Wizard's Int, and they are back to being equal again except when the Magus uses a special ability to gain extra actions.
I think they have to make the Concentration check even if they aren't threatened by any enemies, just due to the difficulty of juggling attacks and spells. But hmm, I see your point here--I think they should at least get a solid bonus on the check if they are not in fact threatened by a foe.
Hm. If that`s the case, given this is at Playtest stage, it does seems reasonable for that to be CHANGED such that you don`t NEED to make a Concentration check unless otherwise forced to... (or, as you say, a bonus if not threatened/bothered e.g. via vigorous movement)
|
|
So the Wizard's focus on Int rather than broader interest in combat wins the day--except that if the Magus's focus on casting in combat causes her to choose the trait and the feat both, where the Wizard does not, she's actually better at casting defensively.Except "she's" not. A Wizard with the same feat and trait is still better than the Magus. If the Magus takes that feat and trait, then it is giving up another feat and trait.
I think his point was that a Magus has a good reason to take the feat and/or trait, while a Wizard should just be avoiding melee in general.
That aside, the Wizard SHOULD be a better caster, because the Magus gets more hit points, higher BAB, qualifies for fighter bonus feats, can cast in armor, and has an edge against almost every class in the game in the action economy. If that's not enough...god help us GMs in dealing with the power creep that some critics of the class would push for.
In my experience, that is wrong, but that's immaterial. A Wizard is still more qualified to cast defensively than a Magus where a dual wielding Rogue could kill individual monsters faster than the Magus.This is a class that is supposed to be decent at wizard stuff and fighter stuff. It should be a "jack of all (two) trades, master of none" situation, which is exactly what it looks like to me.
That works great for the Bard because in addition to jack-of-all, it has its own thing. The problem is that the Magus' "own thing" is "cast and fight in melee at the same time."
Fact of the matter is that the Spell Combat ability gives the Magus an edge in the Action Economy,
I have already identified and explicitly stated that. It doesn't necessarily make it a good ability as currently written however.
I think his point was that a Magus has a good reason to take the feat and/or trait, while a Wizard should just be avoiding melee in general.
That's great for a point in character building, but not for class balance or comparison.
That aside, the Wizard SHOULD be a better caster, because the Magus gets more hit points, higher BAB, qualifies for fighter bonus feats, can cast in armor, and has an edge against almost every class in the game in the action economy. If that's not enough...god help us GMs in dealing with the power creep that some critics of the class would push for.
*Face palm*
Yes, the Wizard should be and IS a better caster. However, the Magus should be better at CASTING IN MELEE. Which it is not.I said that the Magus took the trait and feat and the Wizard didn't take both, then she would be ahead of the Wizard.
Yes and if the Wizard bought a Ring of Evasion and had 30 Dex, he could better Evade Fireballs than a Rogue with 25 Dex. What's your point?
*Face palm*
Yes, the Wizard should be and IS a better caster. However, the Magus should be better at CASTING IN MELEE. Which it is not.Yes and if the Wizard bought a Ring of Evasion and had 30 Dex, he could better Evade Fireballs than a Rogue with 25 Dex. What's your point?
The magus can wear armor. Armor increases AC which reduces an opponnents ability to hit you. More HP which helps to survive a hit. Also the Magus only gets a penalty to concentration if he uses a extra action ability.
So yes he IS better at casting in melee than a wizard.
If the Wizard bought a Ring of Evasion and had 30 Dex, he could better Evade Fireballs than a Rogue with 25 Dex.What's your point?
The rogue has a higher base reflex save. Yours?
The magus can wear armor. Armor increases AC which reduces an opponnents ability to hit you. More HP which helps to survive a hit.
You don't provoke an AoO when casting defensively.
Also the Magus only gets a penalty to concentration if he uses a extra action ability.
So yes he IS better at casting in melee than a wizard.
No, he isn't. you have only shown he is better at fighting in melee than a Wizard, which was never in dispute. The Wizard will always have a higher casting stat making it always better at casting defensively - ie, in melee.
The rogue has a higher base reflex save. Yours?
That you aren't worth arguing with any more.
|
|
Yes, the Wizard should be and IS a better caster. However, the Magus should be better at CASTING IN MELEE. Which it is not.
The only difference between the two classes' ability to cast in melee is their Intelligence score for Concentration checks. I think we all knew that Magi would be MAD so that's kind of a given.
There are other factors involved, however. Like Mr. Fishy said, higher AC and HP make him more survivable in melee range. Overall, he is better at "casting while in melee" but marginally worse at the concentration check, which is only a portion of that.
Nobody is holding the Magus at gunpoint and forcing him to do both. It's purely optional and the penalties must be there to preserve balance.
|
So how can a wizard make a full attack and cast a non quickened spell in the same action?
It can't.
The Magus is better at attacking and Casting at the same time.
The Magus has to make a concentration check as it is both fighting and casting at the same time. Spell combat is going to have a concentration check and since its more difficult to cast a spell one handed while waving a weapon around its going to take a penalty to the concentration check and since its more difficult to attack someone while casting a spell its going to take a penalty to hit.
Thats not going to change. The reason why you are casting defensively is to not have to spend time arguing with the gm about if you are threatened or not. It will also save you at higher levels when the monster's attack outpaces your armor class and can make the attacks of oppertunity thus adding thier damage to your concentration check.
As you level up you get better at casting while attacking and eventually it becomes a nonissue.
At 8th level your concentration check penalty is gone your check is a whopping 21 dc and you should have a +14 or so not including traits and feats.
At 16th level your concentration check will be at most a 27 and your check should be at least a 22.
When you hit 20th level your concentration check will probably only fail on a nothing unless 1 is autofail....
So how can a wizard make a full attack and cast a non quickened spell in the same action?
It can't.
Judging by the average success rate of a Magus using Spell Combat, neither can it.
|
|
Judging by the average success rate of a Magus using Spell Combat, neither can it.So how can a wizard make a full attack and cast a non quickened spell in the same action?
It can't.
I've already proven you can easily guarantee success if you make a Magus that specializes in it. I've also proven that your chances to suceed only increase as you level to the point where it no longer even matters no matter how badly you roll.
Magus 2nd level 16 int has a +5 concentration check to a 17 tn.
Wizard will have the exact same if the stats are the same.
You can take +2 concentration check trait +4 combat casting making it a +11 to your roll making you need an 8 or better on a d20.
Your arguement is if I don't properly stat and build my character he is going to suck at his primary ability.
I can say the same about a Fighter who decides not to pick up weapon Focus, Power attack and Cleave. (Although cleave is optional)
Your arguement is invalid. There is absolutely nothing stopping a Magus from speccing to be exceptionally good at combat casting.
I've already proven you can easily guarantee success if you make a Magus that specializes in it.
Why, pray tell, should a class have to specialize in something its built around to actually be able to do it?
Your arguement is if I don't properly stat and build my character he is going to suck at his primary ability.
I can say the same about a Fighter who decides not to pick up weapon Focus, Power attack and Cleave. (Although cleave is optional)
Except you don't have to get any of those and you are still perfectly capable at dealing large amounts of damage with very good chance to hit.
|
|
I've already proven you can easily guarantee success if you make a Magus that specializes in it.Why, pray tell, should a class have to specialize in something its built around to actually be able to do it?
Except you don't have to get any of those and you are still perfectly capable at dealing large amounts of damage with very good chance to hit.Your arguement is if I don't properly stat and build my character he is going to suck at his primary ability.
I can say the same about a Fighter who decides not to pick up weapon Focus, Power attack and Cleave. (Although cleave is optional)
A str 16 fighter who at level 2 picked up Toughness Shield Focus Dodge
Will have a +5 BaB do 1d8+3 damage
A Str 16 fighter who at level 2 picked up Weapon Focus Power attack and Cleave will have a +5 Bab and do 1d8+5 damage or 2d6+7 damage along with the chance of having a second attack
There is a significant difference between those fighters and the difference will only grow as they level.
Mr. Fishy is arguing that spell combat is a powerful attack. You are focused of the failure of the that attack. But what about when it hits? You make your concentration roll and color spray a group of orcs. A few save, the rest are in melee blind or stunned or unconscious. [unconscious=hosed] That is a powerful ability for a second level character.
Mr. Fishy thinks that an arcana or feat that gives a bonus to concentration would be helpful. Not a tax. The Magus can still cast out of melee. Without a concentration check.
The penalties are such that a magus is better not using the ability than using it.
Given your color spray example, the magus is much better simply casting the color spray than trying to use his class ability to cast it.
In essence over two rounds he will get one color spray off and one attack to work. Roughly.
Without the feature the magus has burned one color spray, with the feature the magus has burned two. And the magus casts like a bard.
The magus is better off without his class ability.
Write up a Wizard and a Magus and have them get in to a slap fight. Who won?Have a Magus and a Fighter get in to a spell duel. Wait fighter don't have spells.
You're better off comparing a magus to a cleric, or in all honesty to the ftr1/wizard9/EK10 which seems like the build to represent the magus before it came around.
That his class ability lets him try to make concentration checks to cast a spell when making a full attack, doesn't really compare the the EK who can burn much higher slots to quicken a spell (which never provoke thus no concentration check) to do the same thing with no restrictions.
Basically the magus has to pick up things for loosing out on 7th-9th level spells over the EK. That has to come from his class features, and so far doesn't seem to be doing so.
-James
Level 20 is a biased place to check up on our friend the EK, but I agree that the comparison to EK is a good idea--I have a thread that does a level by level breakdown comparison here
I've already proven you can easily guarantee success if you make a Magus that specializes in it.Why, pray tell, should a class have to specialize in something its built around to actually be able to do it?
Except you don't have to get any of those and you are still perfectly capable at dealing large amounts of damage with very good chance to hit.Your arguement is if I don't properly stat and build my character he is going to suck at his primary ability.
I can say the same about a Fighter who decides not to pick up weapon Focus, Power attack and Cleave. (Although cleave is optional)
A str 16 fighter who at level 2 picked up Toughness Shield Focus Dodge
Will have a +5 BaB do 1d8+3 damage
A Str 16 fighter who at level 2 picked up Weapon Focus Power attack and Cleave will have a +5 Bab and do 1d8+5 damage or 2d6+7 damage along with the chance of having a second attack
There is a significant difference between those fighters and the difference will only grow as they level.
And why, exactly, would he have 16 Str?
"Is there anything stopping a Magus from Casting OUT of Threat, 5`Stepping, and then delivering the attack? Since you can 5`Step within a Full Attack action (whose attacks are all part of the same action), I don`t see why you couldn`t in this case."
I don't think you can take a 5' step mid TWFing so I don't think you could in this case.
On that note however, and since I don't have the pdf handy, is the concentration check to avoid an AoO or to keep the spell (ala casting defensively)?
If it's the former, I don't see any reason why the magus couldn't cast the spell while fighting defensively and boosting AC with combat reflexes and I don't think that's something any wizard can do.
I don't think you can take a 5' step mid TWFing so I don't think you could in this case.
You can, indeed, do so. You can take a 5' step during a full round action, such as a full attack or even a whirlwind attack.
And the forced concentration check is to avoid losing the spell like casting defensively.
-James
There are concentration checks for casting during violent motion, and I would think that casting while making an attack on someone would qualify.
I think the conc check is for casting defensively with a penalty for casting during violent motion.
Level 20 is a biased place to check up on our friend the EK, but I agree that the...I agree with you, but that would be the final outcome. Level by level is still is in the favor of the EK baring the magus getting interesting class abilities to balance out.
And that's after you realize the the EK is viewed as weak and painful with the magus looking to replace it. That it might be underpowered in comparison is a severe problem.
-James
My comparison thread found the Magus with the edge at a good number of levels. The thing to remember is that the whole line of argument involving the EK Quickening things won't even be relevant until 12th level (and then only for 1st level spells, while the Magus has up to 4th and is consistently Spell Combating them). The EK gains a great deal of ground after level 16 because the Magus has stopped adding new spell levels and the EK has not. Up until that point, the Magus can consistently get off free spells with her full attacks 3 levels higher than the best the EK could Quicken.
Also, though it has trouble at some other levels along the way, the EK is really pretty powerful at levels 19 or 20, even compared to a straight Wizard (obviously not a better Wizard than a Wizard, but not terribly disadvantaged even on that front and with a lot to make up for those few extra high level spells). I know, I know, this is where someone says "Sure, that may be true, but that's only for the highest levels that no one really plays much", but it becomes relevant in this case because you are using level 20 as your case study.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Does anyone complain that the ranger takes a penalty to his attacks if he uses his 'class abilites'? (rapid shot/twf)
Or that the Barbarian takes a penalty to his AC when he uses his class abilities?
It seems to me that this is the 'great risk/great reward' type move, like a TWF ranger at 2nd level, or a an 'Ostog the Unslain' type barbarian. If you want to pull this schtick off at lower levels, it's been shown how (through feats and traits).
Frankly, the psychic warrior (and duskblade) shows that for the fighter/mage combo the only other way to do it is to install quickened spells as a class feature, then you're limiting the times per day you can do the ability.
|
|
Some people like having stats other then str for thier fighters so they can be more multipurposed like oh say be capable of getting combat reflexes and Combat Expertise along with a decent con for hp...
The point is there is a significant difference between a build that is designed to optimize specific abilities in your class.
For example I have a tiefling fighter/Hellknight in a Council of Thieves game who alternates from using a tower shield and bastard sword to Heavy Shield and Bastard sword to Two handing with a Bastard sword to using a Ballista depending on my feel on the tactical situation. I also happen to be the only class capable of tanking in the group as its a Fighter/Hellknight, Gun Ranger, Priest, Dragon Bloodlined Sorc,and Rogue.
One of the things your missing is the obvious exploit that the penalty of Combat Casting offsets at low levels.
Daze + Combat Casting.... Every round you can attack and properly built cast Daze on a different opponent and you can do this all day long its not quite as effective as color spray, but like I said you could do it on every action on a different target.
Daze would be a DC 17 concentration check with a dc 13 will save that will stop 1 target from acting for 1 round. You can do it multiple times in each encounter and with the right build your concentration check will be a 6 or higher on a d20.
Dazzle is also an option give your opponent a -1 to hit every round...
or do an extra d3 with acid splash.
Does anyone complain that the ranger takes a penalty to his attacks if he uses his 'class abilites'? (rapid shot/twf)
You mean "feats it gets for free that are actually not class abilities at all?"
Or that the Barbarian takes a penalty to his AC when he uses his class abilities?
In return for a definite +4 increase to Str and +2 increase to Will saves?
I don't think you can take a 5' step mid TWFing so I don't think you could in this case.
You can, indeed, do so. You can take a 5' step during a full round action, such as a full attack or even a whirlwind attack.
And the forced concentration check is to avoid losing the spell like casting defensively.
-James
You learn something new everyday.
Does anyone complain that the ranger takes a penalty to his attacks if he uses his 'class abilites'? (rapid shot/twf)You mean "feats it gets for free that are actually not class abilities at all?"
Or that the Barbarian takes a penalty to his AC when he uses his class abilities?In return for a definite +4 increase to Str and +2 increase to Will saves?
The return for the -4 attack -2 concentration is the action economy. How is it being evaluated? Akin to low AC, spell combat is troublesome early on. Both can get you killed. At higher levels the penalties are handwaved.
I am very wary of badmouthing action economy when it was proven one of the nastiest things optimization granted in 3.5
|
Problem is the Magus action economy is very much like the 3.5 Monk action economy (ie on paper being able to get 2 attacks at lvl 1 without feats seemed like a good deal but once you took into account the 3/4 base attack bonus then the extra - 2 for flurrying and the MAD monks suffered from it actually turned into a pretty weak ability)
In fact the more I think about it and look at the class the more certain parts of it remind me of the monk
Does it? It has the basic STR+CON+CASTSTAT of all gishes from what I could grasp. Dex loses value as the magus levels up due to the new armors, cha and wis are complete dumps.
The other side of the monk, the lack of synergy, doesn't seem to be there. All abilities focus around full attacking and help you full attacking. Most arcana are swift or immediate.That question distorts the issue. If the Magus casts defensively like a Wizard.. i.e. not trying to melee at the same time it is no worse at that maneuver than a Wizard would be. What the Magus has is an option that the Wizard and the Fighter do not... spell and strike at the same time, something no other class can do.
To those who suggest that the Magus is supposed to be in melee at the same time. I would ask why then are ranged spells part of the learnable list?
They can be used in melee anyway. I agree with you though. "Cast defensively worse than wizard" is a fallacy since the things being compared are not the same.
The magus "casts defensively like a wizard, given same casting stats". The wizard will only have an advantage if his casting stat is higher. This is a likely situation however.The magus "casts defensively while also attacking in melee using the same action". This specific bit is beyond the wizard's capability.
|
|
Problem is the Magus action economy is very much like the 3.5 Monk action economy (ie on paper being able to get 2 attacks at lvl 1 without feats seemed like a good deal but once you took into account the 3/4 base attack bonus then the extra - 2 for flurrying and the MAD monks suffered from it actually turned into a pretty weak ability)
Except in this case your talking about at high levels tossing off a quickened 1 per day Disintegrate another distengrate and getting 3 or 4 attacks.
Or tossing off a Persistent Phantasmal Killer a 1 day Quickened Persistent Phantasmal killer and those melee attacks...
Forgive me, but you could Spell Perfection Phantasmal Killer or Baleful polymorph and get off quite a few quickened versions of it...
Honestly I'm hoping my DM for Runelords doesn't decide to toss a high level Magus at us as a playtest of the class.
The ability to cast a spell and make a full round attack and toss off a second quickened spell will be really hard to deal with. Oh god Spell Perfection hmm that would be broken in the hands of a Magus...
That question distorts the issue. If the Magus casts defensively like a Wizard.. i.e. not trying to melee at the same time it is no worse at that maneuver than a Wizard would be.
It inherently is because the Magus must focus on multiple abilities where as the Wizard's primary focus is the casting ability.
|
|
Problem is the Magus action economy is very much like the 3.5 Monk action economy (ie on paper being able to get 2 attacks at lvl 1 without feats seemed like a good deal but once you took into account the 3/4 base attack bonus then the extra - 2 for flurrying and the MAD monks suffered from it actually turned into a pretty weak ability)Except in this case your talking about at high levels tossing off a quickened 1 per day Disintegrate another distengrate and getting 3 or 4 attacks.
And therein lies the problem having the ability get good at high lvl's doesn't help because A, you have to get to high lvl and B most games don't go to high lvl
You're absolutely right, and I'm glad you are. I'd be somewhat miffed if the Magus was more qualified than the Wizard to cast defensive Colour SpraysThen there is no reason to have the Magus. Why is there a magic wielding class being forced into melee combat with its ability designed around casting while in combat if it is worse at casting while in combat than a non-combat class?
That question distorts the issue. If the Magus casts defensively like a Wizard.. i.e. not trying to melee at the same time it is no worse at that maneuver than a Wizard would be. What the Magus has is an option that the Wizard and the Fighter do not... spell and strike at the same time, something no other class can do.
To those who suggest that the Magus is supposed to be in melee at the same time. I would ask why then are ranged spells part of the learnable list?
Unseen Servant is part of the class list. Are you suggesting that a Magus is intended to cast that in combat?
Don't be obtuse.|
|
I believe that this entire argument is pointless, as he is not expected to do it more than 2 times per encounter until he is at least 3rd or 4th level, assuming int 16, and 1-2 encounters on days with encounters, as he only has a max of 5 spells above 0th at level 4. Assuming he uses it liberally (half of his spells on each encounter) he only casts 2.5 spells an encounter (5 spells (2 2nd, 3 1st) divided by 2 encounters = 2.5) or 1 2nd and 1 to 2 1st level spells per encounter;
at level 4 that means:
a 2nd level spell concentration DC = 15 + 2*2 = 19
1d20 + caster level (4) + int (3) - penalty (2) = 1d20 + 5 = 35% without combat casting
1d20 + caster level (4) + int (3) + combat casting (4) - penalty (2) = 1d20 + 9 = 55% with combat casting
with combat casting and 1/day concentrate (Magus arcana at 3rd) = 75%
a 1st level spell concentration DC = 15 + 1*2 = 17
1d20 + caster level (4) + int (3) - penalty (2) = 1d20 + 5 = 45% without combat casting
1d20 + caster level (4) + int (3) + combat casting (4) - penalty (2) = 1d20 + 9 = 65% with combat casting
with combat casting and 1/day concentrate (Magus arcana at 3rd) = 85%
and the AC of a Behir (CR 8 suicidal encounter) = 21
// you can ignore the first one as it does not include arcane weapon or bull's strength
1d20 + BAB (3) + STR (1 -> 4) - penalty (4) = 1d20 + (4 -> 8) = 17 -> 13 = 20% -> 40% without magic buff or magic weapon
or
1d20 + BAB (3) + STR (1 -> 4) + buff (1->3) - penalty (4) + magic weapon (1) = 1d20 + (5 -> 9) + (1->3) = 1d20 + 6 -> 12 = 15 -> 9 hits = 25% -> 60% to hit
so at 65% (avg 85+65+45 / 3) for 1st level spells: he successfully casts 2/3 spells per day
so at 55% (avg 75+55+35 / 3) for 2nd level spells: he successfully casts 1 spell per day with a chance of both ( if he uses concentrate on the bad roll he casts both)
his attacks hit the behir (with 18 str) ((40% + 45% + 50 + 55 + 60) /5) 50% of the time he uses it.
given that the behir is a suicidal encounter (100 hp), 4 magus fighting it:
4 hit with scorching ray (4d6 * 4) (12 * 4 = 48)
all hit with longsword (1d8 + 2 ) * (4) = 7*4 = 28
round one -> 28+48 = 70 + dmg
2nd round they all hit it with melee attacks it dies
I think it is either balanced or over powered as it would (ignoring the enemy's abilitys) allows a group to kill (easily) a CR+4 encounter without wasting resources.
using only 1 spell out of 5 this group should be able to kill another behir and then kill several cr 3-5 groups.
Beyond 4th level his chances to do anything rise, until he hits 8th when it becomes almost guarteed, and past that he can do it with a 75%+ on non maxed spells and 60%+ on maxed, so we don't need to talk about 8th and higher.
Finally, all of this hinges on only a few things
1: str 18
2: int 16
3: combat casting
4: Magus Arcana: concentrate
|
|
And therein lies the problem having the ability get good at high lvl's doesn't help because A, you have to get to high lvl and B most games don't go to high lvlProblem is the Magus action economy is very much like the 3.5 Monk action economy (ie on paper being able to get 2 attacks at lvl 1 without feats seemed like a good deal but once you took into account the 3/4 base attack bonus then the extra - 2 for flurrying and the MAD monks suffered from it actually turned into a pretty weak ability)Except in this case your talking about at high levels tossing off a quickened 1 per day Disintegrate another distengrate and getting 3 or 4 attacks.
The issue with reaching high level has nothing to do with this conversation.
Your second point is a nonissue as the class is balanced around people actually reaching high level.
Your opinion on people's gaming choices or your own gaming choices do not alter the fact that it is entirely possible when fighting proper level opponents to successfully attack and cast spells.
Skimming through the latest pathfinder AP most of the monsters varied between ac 12-15 with a few boss encounters at 17 and the last boss at 20. That means there will be some that are difficult to hit and the last boss will be challenging to full attack and cast, but not entirely impossible.
All that means is I'll have to use tactics and teamwork in order to successfully pull off my primary ability.
I believe that this entire argument is pointless, as he is not expected to do it more than 2 times per encounter until he is at least 3rd or 4th level, assuming int 16, and 1-2 encounters on days with encounters,
The game is designed with, and APs written with, the assumption of 4 encounters a day.
|
|
I believe that this entire argument is pointless, as he is not expected to do it more than 2 times per encounter until he is at least 3rd or 4th level, assuming int 16, and 1-2 encounters on days with encounters,The game is designed with, and APs written with, the assumption of 4 encounters a day.
even less likely to matter then as he only can liberally cast 1.25 spells per encounter by 4th level.
The issue with reaching high level has nothing to do with this conversation.
It very much does. The MAIN ABILITY of the class ONLY functions at higher levels which even APs don't go to, and even then only reliably when casting low level spells
If that is the case then it is a BAD CLASS and needs to be sent back to the drawing board.
Your second point is a nonissue as the class is balanced around people actually reaching high level.
It is also possible for a wizard to do more melee damage than a Fighter...I mean if we're assuming astronomically rare statistical possibilities then a wizard can possibly roll all nat 20s with a ftr rolling all nat 1s. That is not a point to balance the classes at however.
Your opinion on people's gaming choices or your own gaming choices do not alter the fact that it is entirely possible when fighting proper level opponents to successfully attack and cast spells.
Skimming through the latest pathfinder AP most of the monsters varied between ac 12-15 with a few boss encounters at 17 and the last boss at 20. That means there will be some that are difficult to hit and the last boss will be challenging to full attack and cast, but not entirely impossible.
All that means is I'll have to use tactics and teamwork in order to successfully pull off my primary ability.
Teamwork is a good thing. Requiring party cooperation for the class to be able to use the most basic of his class abilities is poor design.
even less likely to matter then as he only can liberally cast 1.25 spells per encounter by 4th level.I believe that this entire argument is pointless, as he is not expected to do it more than 2 times per encounter until he is at least 3rd or 4th level, assuming int 16, and 1-2 encounters on days with encounters,The game is designed with, and APs written with, the assumption of 4 encounters a day.
Then it is very important that one spell is able to be cast, no?
Rather than just looking at the magus's chances to succeed in an attack and a casting in one round, let's look at how it averages over two rounds, then compare it to the case in which the magus attacks one round and casts a spell on the next round.
First I'm going to assume Str 18 and Int 16, and that the magus is 2nd level. He has a masterwork weapon and the Combat Casting feat (which I think should be a bonus feat at 1st level, but that's aside). We'll also assume that he's fighting something with AC 15 and casting a 1st level spell.
Using Spell Combat, he has a +2 to hit and a +7 to make his concentration check. That means that he has a 40% chance to his with his weapon (60% chance to miss) and a 55% chance to successfully cast his spell (45% chance to fail). Not great.
But what about over two rounds? He has a 36% chance to miss both attacks and about a 20% chance to fail with both spells. That means that his chance of hitting at least once is 64% (including a 16% chance of hitting twice), and his chance of casting a spell successfully at least once is about 80% (including about a 30% chance of casting two spells).
If he attacks one round, his bonus is +6, giving a 60% chance to hit. That's less than the 64% chance of hitting at least once when using Spell Combat for two rounds.
When it comes to the spell, it can be more tricky. It is not unreasonable to assume that he will still be in melee, so he could still be casting on the defensive. His concentration check will be at +9, giving a 65% chance of success, less than the 80% chance of casting at least one spell using Spell Combat for two round. It's not clear-cut, though, because he may be able to avoid having to cast on the defensive, and using Spell Combat for two rounds leaves open the possibility of two spell slots being wasted.
Nonetheless, I think this gives some better perspective. Spell Combat at low levels has some drawbacks, but not as bad as others have made out, I think. It seems balanced to me. Of course, I began assuming certain numbers, and if those are changed, the results may also change. I'll leave it to someone else to do those calculations.
|
|
Additionally it is entirely possible to create a magus that hates casting in combat, as his spell list has plenty of buffs (Cat’s Grace, bull's strength, etc) movement (Dimension Door, Fly, haste, invisiblity) terrain changers (wall of ____, minor image, major image) and mass spells (bears endurance, enlarge person)
actually, I don't think I personally would ever make a magus whos primary purpose is melee. I think I would make a buffer that waded into combat after casting spells.
|
|
Then it is very important that one spell is able to be cast, no?even less likely to matter then as he only can liberally cast 1.25 spells per encounter by 4th level.I believe that this entire argument is pointless, as he is not expected to do it more than 2 times per encounter until he is at least 3rd or 4th level, assuming int 16, and 1-2 encounters on days with encounters,The game is designed with, and APs written with, the assumption of 4 encounters a day.
yes it is and in all of his encounters he will either cast a spell once or hit with his attack, he has a 50% chance to do both. Which means a liberal caster will hit with what he needs to, and a conservitive caster (3 spells on one battle 1 on 1 other) will hit with all but one.
IE if you use it all the time, expect to fail SOMETIMES, but if you only use it when you need it, only expect to fail when rolling horribly.