Magus seems a little bit top heavy I guess you could call it.
It offer you this wonderful Spell Combat ability at 2nd level and then slaps a large penalty on for trying to use it. It's effectively giving you a free rod of meta magic quicken with some restrictions.
2nd level BAB 1 , STR 18 INT 16 (lets be generous), and you've taken combat casting
So you try to perform spell combat
You make 1 melee attack
+4 STR, -4 peanlty +1 BAB = +1 to attack
You cast a Spell
DC = 15 + 1*2 = DC17 , you roll d20+2+4+3-2= +7
Anyone seeing the problem yet ?
less than 50% chance to cast your spell and your a 50% chance of hitting AC 11 as melee fighter ?!?!
So why would you ever use this ability in the early levels, and if your not using it what's the benefit of having it ?
reminds me of the good ole 3.5 Monk's Flurry of Misses ability ;)
Now I say top heavy because roll forward to mid levels and at the same time the spell combat penalty is being reduced your starting to get enchantment bonuses to any weapon your using so the your bonus to attack starts to increase exponentially.
but imho having to wait for your class to start "working" is never a good thing.
Now I understand this was probably done to prevent the dreaded 2 level dip to grab this neat ability and then multi class into something else but the problem is that its hurting the flavour of the class in the early levels.
What about instead if you remove improved spell combat and greater spell combat and just have 2nd level spell combat with no penalty to concentration or attack rolls. BUT
*If you have more than 1 class and less than 8 magus levels apply a penalty of -4 to attack rolls and -2 to concentration check when using this ability, if more than 8 but less than 14 magus levels apply a -2 to attack rolls*
since the Magus is already a hybrid , multiclassing a hybrid should create additional penalties for trying to do too many things at once. Instead of a penalty to the core class.
This way if you play a straight Magus you are not penalised for using a core ability. AND your combat effectiveness will scale in a more linear fashion with the rest of the group.
Result for pure magus
So you try to perform spell combat
You make 1 melee attack
+4 STR, +1 BAB = +5 to attack
You cast a Spell
DC = 15 + 1*2= DC17 , you roll d20+2+4+3= +9
just over 55% chance to cast spell and 50% chance to hit AC15 as a melee. far from overpowered yet an ability you'd consider using since you normal attack won't suffer but you still might lose your spell.
That's kind of a ham-handed way to handle the problem - nothing else works like that. It's very "gamey"; there isn't any justifiable reason why having class levels in another class would affect your ability to perform your class abilities adversely (aside from the lost opportunity cost of giving up levels in the class in the first place).
I think it's supposed to start out a bit lackluster - even then, if you successfully cast a True Strike, your attack's -4 becomes a +16, which can be very useful if you're trying to hit an enemy with high enough AC that trying to make the concentration check is easier.
Even if the ability is scarcely useful at first, you're still a melee type who can cast spells. You might just have to wait a couple levels to reliably do both at the same time.
Magus seems a little bit top heavy I guess you could call it.
It offer you this wonderful Spell Combat ability at 2nd level and then slaps a large penalty on for trying to use it. It's effectively giving you a free rod of meta magic quicken with some restrictions.
2nd level BAB 1 , STR 18 INT 16 (lets be generous), and you've taken combat casting
So you try to perform spell combat
You make 1 melee attack
+4 STR, -4 peanlty +1 BAB = +1 to attackYou cast a Spell
DC = 15 + 1*2 = DC17 , you roll d20+2+4+3-2= +7Anyone seeing the problem yet ?
less than 50% chance to cast your spell and your a 50% chance of hitting AC 11 as melee fighter ?!?!So why would you ever use this ability in the early levels, and if your not using it what's the benefit of having it ?
reminds me of the good ole 3.5 Monk's Flurry of Misses ability ;)
Now I say top heavy because roll forward to mid levels and at the same time the spell combat penalty is being reduced your starting to get enchantment bonuses to any weapon your using so the your bonus to attack starts to increase exponentially.
but imho having to wait for your class to start "working" is never a good thing.
Now I understand this was probably done to prevent the dreaded 2 level dip to grab this neat ability and then multi class into something else but the problem is that its hurting the flavour of the class in the early levels.
What about instead if you remove improved spell combat and greater spell combat and just have 2nd level spell combat with no penalty to concentration or attack rolls. BUT
*If you have more than 1 class and less than 8 magus levels apply a penalty of -4 to attack rolls and -2 to concentration check when using this ability, if more than 8 but less than 14 magus levels apply a -2 to attack rolls*since the Magus is already a hybrid , multiclassing a hybrid should create additional penalties for trying to do too many things at once. Instead of a penalty to the core class.
This way if you play a straight Magus you...
I did similar math in a spoiler block in my EK vs Magus thread. I actually am rather happy that the math works out like this at low levels because it encourages you to work together with your team to do something truly awesome and epic.
Note that your example on the Concentration (the same math I proposed over there-+7 vs DC 17) does not support your result of less than half chance to cast the spell. In fact it's 55%, and it never gets lower than that for the remainder of your casting career. So using Spell Combat instead of just casting and then attacking, you get slightly more expected value of spells cast for your buck, even at level 2 (.55 spells per round instead of .5). If you would have needed to cast defensively anyway because the enemy had you in a corner, you are doing substantially better (.55 spells per round rather than .325).
The main question is the attack. -4 is a huge penalty, to be sure. Your sample character was missing a masterwork weapon, but with that, she still only has a +2 to hit at level 2. This means that, used alone with no help from allies, you will get a worse expected value for number of hits if the enemy has more than 15 AC. However, throw in a flank and any sort of buff at all (let's say a Bard Inspire Courage +1) and the break-even point is now 18 AC, which in my experience is above average for level 2 encounters.
That's kind of a ham-handed way to handle the problem - nothing else works like that. It's very "gamey"; there isn't any justifiable reason why having class levels in another class would affect your ability to perform your class abilities adversely (aside from the lost opportunity cost of giving up levels in the class in the first place).
Adding a penalty to core class ability which I believe is specifically to stop multi classing abuse is no different.
if you weren't allowed to multi class the Magus would you still need the current -4, -2 penalty ?
That's kind of a ham-handed way to handle the problem - nothing else works like that. It's very "gamey"; there isn't any justifiable reason why having class levels in another class would affect your ability to perform your class abilities adversely (aside from the lost opportunity cost of giving up levels in the class in the first place).
Adding a penalty to core class ability which I believe is specifically to stop multi classing abuse is no different.
if you weren't allowed to multi class the Magus would you still need the current -4, -2 penalty ?
The penalty isn't artificial - being able to attack with one hand while simultaneously casting a spell with the other would be understandably difficult! A mere level 2 magus shouldn't be able to do it reliably.
That's kind of a ham-handed way to handle the problem - nothing else works like that. It's very "gamey"; there isn't any justifiable reason why having class levels in another class would affect your ability to perform your class abilities adversely (aside from the lost opportunity cost of giving up levels in the class in the first place).
Adding a penalty to core class ability which I believe is specifically to stop multi classing abuse is no different.
if you weren't allowed to multi class the Magus would you still need the current -4, -2 penalty ?
I believe it would still be a good idea. At lower levels, before the Fighter and the Wizard really begin to develop their superiority over the Magus in their respective niches, a penaltyless Spell Combat would make the Magus king. Let's look at the level 2 Magus with penaltyless Spell Combat:
She gets off .65 spells per round, the same as a Wizard if the Wizard has to cast defensively. She also has the same accuracy as a TWF Fighter (who took Weapon Focus assuming the Magus couldn't take it yet due to taking Combat Casting), but with only one weapon, so she does somewhat more than half the TWF Fighter's damage at the same time.
This is noticably less than the Fighter in melee damage (and that disparity exists is mostly only because of the limitation to one-handed weapons), but it really isn't all that much behind the Wizard. The Wizard probably would need to cast on the defensive anyway to cast Colour Spray (arguably the most effective spell at this level in many encounters), and the Wizard has only her specialisation spell to give her more per day than the Magus.
Agreed - penalty is needed. I actually quite like how the reduced penalty at 8th actually maintains the total penalty (-4 on one attack, vs. -2 on two attacks (+6/+1)).
I like it the way it is; especially the way it mimicks TWF. It also gives you an additional incentive to gain further levels in the Magus class.
heh maybe its just me but spell combat is kinda like being given a Ferrari on you 10th birthday , yeah you'll enjoy driving that when your older but you'll just have to look at it until then.
and if you take it out before you've got a license you'll either crash or get arrested ;)
It also gives you an additional incentive to gain further levels in the Magus class.
Then there is no reason for the ability to be given at the 2nd level if its basic role would be to provide the incentive to gain further Magus levels. The incentive should be the class itself being an interesting and worthwhile one, not giving an abilty at a low level, but making that ability a viable enough option 6 levels down the road.
I agree that penalties are needed, but I believe the -4 to attack for a medium-BAB-progressing, MAD 2nd level Magus is a bit too much, especially when we are talking about the signature, possibly bread-and-butter, ability of said class. Why risk doing absolutely nothing (since there is a pretty good chance to both lose the spell and miss with the attack) in one round and not just do something (a spell in one round, an attack in the following round) over the course of two rounds?
Note that your example on the Concentration (the same math I proposed over there-+7 vs DC 17) does not support your result of less than half chance to cast the spell. In fact it's 55%, and it never gets lower than that for the remainder of your casting career.
The problem is that that is god awful for a class where a class-defining ability is built around it. It's like the Fatespinner or Wild Mage PrCs in 3.5, except the Magus doesn't actually tell you your entire class feature is a gamble.
The penalty isn't artificial - being able to attack with one hand while simultaneously casting a spell with the other would be understandably difficult! A mere level 2 magus shouldn't be able to do it reliably.
But at no point do you get significantly better at it because of the redesign to Concentration to keep it on a fairly even level throughout the game.
Sure, you might get a 100% chance to cast 1st level spells at level 13 (assuming 16 Int), which is fine and dandy for a Wizard, but one of his major class features is not "cast in melee combat."
Any spellcaster can indeed cast a spell defensively, but none does so, certainly not as often as a Magus might need to, seeing as he is supposed to be in the thick of combat more often than not.
Furthermore, the Magus can IN THEORY cast a spell and perform melee attacks at the same time, but the penalties make it almost a pointless endeavor at low levels. And one could argue that, again at low levels (which is the whole point, seeing as the ability is granted at the 2nd level), there is no situation I can think of at least that would make trying to cast a spell defensively at a -2 penalty and trying to hit something at a -4 penalty in one round a better choice than actually casting a spell in one round and actually hitting something in the following round.
I of course believe penalties are needed and in fact have no problem with the -2 to concentration checks; spellcasting is supposed to be a precise art and it should be difficult to do so when also trying to attack at the same time. Hey, I could even think a -4 penalty to concentration to be relatively expected, although it would make Combat Casting a 'must' feat, if not given for free by the class itself. A -4 to attack rolls, however, I find too much. The Magus is supposed to fight in the front lines more often than not, so he should be given a chance to have his signature ability actually work once in a while as soon as he has access to it.
Since neither the BAB progression nor the HD are going to change according to Jason (and I am in agreement actually, since this class is supposed to be a bit more like the Bard or Inquisitor, rather than the Paladin or Ranger), the need to somehow balance the penalty out a little is, in my mind at least, a given.
The Magus can cast a spell and attack in the same round. That is a very powerful ability. The penalty is a balance issue. A wizard can cast a spell or attack, a fighter can attack or use a magic item. The Magus takes a penalty to attack and cast a spell and the Magus get his extra attacks for high BAB. So at 8th level he has a reduced penalty and a second attack.
That is a power abuse waiting to happen.
The Magus can cast a spell and attack in the same round. That is a very powerful ability. The penalty is a balance issue. A wizard can cast a spell or attack, a fighter can attack or use a magic item. The Magus takes a penalty to attack and cast a spell and the Magus get his extra attacks for high BAB. So at 8th level he has a reduced penalty and a second attack.
That is a power abuse waiting to happen.
I'd agree, but I have actually looked at the changes to Concentration. Were this 3.5, this would be off the board in power - even if you had a reason to cast a spell during a full attack, which you don't. But this isn't 3.5.
Giving concentration to the Magus for free would negate the penalty and give a bonus to a powerful ability. FOR FREE! That is the opposite of balance.
TWF is not a great option at low levels either, but many people play dual wielding rogues.
Then there is really no reason for the ability to be granted at 2nd level. Just give the Improved version at 8th and the Greater at 14th and give something else at 2nd that is a reasonable ability for that level and one that will see some use from the get-go.
Perhaps give Fighter Training at 2nd and something else at 11th? I do not know... :-)
As far as Two-Weapon Fighting is concerned, I do not like it, thematically/flavor-wise at least. He is, after all, explicitly stated to use a single weapon and keep his other hand free. And casting a spell would not be as simple as whacking something with a sword, I should think. Maybe a new feat that is directed at the weapon-and-spell style of the Magus? This way, it would be a sort of middle ground between Combat Casting and Two-Weapon Fighting or some such.
|
Honestly I think the penalty needs to stay for Combat Casting, Its essentially the same as two weapon fighting except a bit more powerful. At second level you could Make a physical attack at decent damage and then follow up with Colorspray or Colorspray first then make a physical attack. You are casting while swinging a sword, scimitar, rapier, falcatta, bastard sword etc so yes its going to be harder for you to concentrate on that spell your casting one handed which is also going to make it harder for you to hit your opponent with that weapon in your other hand.
Giving concentration to the Magus for free would negate the penalty and give a bonus to a powerful ability. FOR FREE! That is the opposite of balance.
I have no idea what you mean by "giving concentration to the Magus for free."
TWF is not a great option at low levels either, but many people play dual wielding rogues.
And who else plays Dual Wielders? No one, because it's a terrible choice at all levels for anyone except the Rogue because they can do an extra +Xd6 per hit and therefore it behooves them to get as many attacks as possible.
If Sneak Attack at range didn't suck, there would be alot more than just TWF Rogues as they take advantage of the feats that give them extra bow attacks.
Honestly I think the penalty needs to stay for Combat Casting, Its essentially the same as two weapon fighting except a bit more powerful. At second level you could Make a physical attack at decent damage and then follow up with Colorspray or Colorspray first then make a physical attack.
Yes, you could. But given, let's say, 18 Str and 18 Int for whatever reason at 2nd level, that leaves you with a 60% chance of losing the spell (DC 17 + 2 for Spell Combat, +6 to d20 roll) - not having it saved against or resisted buy losing it, and a 55% chance of missing a run-of-the-mill Orc.
A Rogue with 18 Str and TWF only has a 45% chance to miss the Orc - with either attack.
|
I'm with Mr Fishy and Decorus on this one. It's effectively 2 actions for the price of one. OK maybe that makes it about 50/50 success on each action but when you are throwing True Strikes, Magic Missiles and Color Sprays out there it makes a heck of a difference.
Also a magus doesn't have to use this ability- it is optional. He can choose to wade into combat as a pure warrior or sit back casting offensive spells at his opposition. The fact that he can do both at the same time is impressive.
Plus if he really needs to pass that concentration roll then there's always the concentrate arcana...
|
|
Sniper goggles
The wearer of these goggles can make sneak attacks from any distance.
Dual wielding isn't a bad option....
If you are dual wielding two light weapons like rapiers you suffer from the exact same penalties to hit as someone using rapid shot. Many shot doesn't give much of an advantage as while it is two arrow attacks you are limited to applying critical damage once. The reason why people don't dual wield has to do with your strength and power attack being reduced in effectiveness by 50%. Although you will tend to find a lot of two weapon fighters who use a shield as thier off hand weapon.
A Magus while suffering a -4 penalty to hit can fully use Power Attack and still cast spells. Thier additional attack is a spell that is far more likely to hit then not.
Color spray a enemy and then hit his blind, stunned, unconscious, it get nasty quick.
As for the combat casting for free another poster suggested that the Magus should get combat casting as a bonus feat. Because it would be a "feat tax" otherwise.
I'm with Mr Fishy and Decorus on this one. It's effectively 2 actions for the price of one. OK maybe that makes it about 50/50 success on each action but when you are throwing True Strikes, Magic Missiles and Color Sprays out there it makes a heck of a difference.
Except it doesn't. Offensive attacks like Color Spray will have a chance to fail to go off and once they go off they still have saving throws or spell resistance. If you make the 40% chance of successfully casting Color Spray, the Orc still has a 15% of succeeding on the Saving Throw. Some one do the proper calculations to show the probability of the Color Spray affecting the Orc.
Also a magus doesn't have to use this ability- it is optional.
As are Wizard Spells, Ranger Favored Enemies, Fighter Weapon Training, Druid Wildshape, etc etc.
He can choose to wade into combat as a pure warrior or sit back casting offensive spells at his opposition.
Except the class is designed to be in melee combat at all times. Sure, you can forgo all of your class abilities to fight at range. You can also pick up a sword as a Wizard and use none of your Wizard spells, even.
Plus if he really needs to pass that concentration roll then there's always the concentrate arcana...
Thank you for proving my point about the class being feat and ability taxed.
Color spray a enemy and then hit his blind, stunned, unconscious, it get nasty quick.
As for the combat casting for free another poster suggested that the Magus should get combat casting as a bonus feat. Because it would be a "feat tax" otherwise.
The fact the "Concentrate" arcana exists shows that that idea was brought up and then dismissed.
I'm with Mr Fishy and Decorus on this one. It's effectively 2 actions for the price of one. OK maybe that makes it about 50/50 success on each action but when you are throwing True Strikes, Magic Missiles and Color Sprays out there it makes a heck of a difference.
Also a magus doesn't have to use this ability- it is optional. He can choose to wade into combat as a pure warrior or sit back casting offensive spells at his opposition. The fact that he can do both at the same time is impressive.
Plus if he really needs to pass that concentration roll then there's always the concentrate arcana...
There's also a trait for +2 Concentration. I took it with my sample Magus build from levels 1 to 20, and it proves extremely useful at lower levels for having a high chance at successful Spell Combat.
Wonder why? Mr. Fishy isn't arguing that the spell combat is difficult at low 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.
We tried the Spell Combat with out casting defensively, actually didn't notice you had to. So we had fight where the Magus had a High AC and the chance of getting hit by an attack of opportunity was less than the chance of failing you defensive casting check. Too bad you can't do that but I might not be a good change to allow Spell Combat to provoke an attack of opportunity or cast defensively.
Wonder why? Mr. Fishy isn't arguing that the spell combat is difficult at low 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.
And to add to Mr. Fishy's point, Rogue Eidolon...err I mean I would add that in my experience, Colour Spray is usually cast on the defensive anyway, to make sure the cone can hit a healthy group of foes (unless you're particularly lucky on their arrangement), so Spell Combat should be compared to casting Colour Spray defensively at no penalty, rather than compared to casting normally.
There's also a trait for +2 Concentration. I took it with my sample Magus build from levels 1 to 20, and it proves extremely useful at lower levels for having a high chance at successful Spell Combat.
And? You are thereby being forced into certain choices to be competent at the class' main features.
Wonder why? Mr. Fishy isn't arguing that the spell combat is difficult at low 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.
Yes, they are unconscious for X rounds if the spell works and if they fail their save. However, a Rogue could kill the Orc that the Magus is fighting quicker and a Wizard could Color Spray a group of Orcs more reliably.
The chance that a Magus will have both 18 Str and 18 Int is somewhere between slim and none barring really lucky rolled stats. That means that either your chance to hit the Orc or your chance to both cast the spell and have it effect them drops (because they are both dependent upon your casting stat).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.
Being all but forced to pick either Combat Casting or Concentrate is a tax.
And to add to Mr. Fishy's point, Rogue Eidolon...err I mean I would add that in my experience, Colour Spray is usually cast on the defensive anyway, to make sure the cone can hit a healthy group of foes (unless you're particularly lucky on their arrangement), so Spell Combat should be compared to casting Colour Spray defensively at no penalty, rather than compared to casting normally.
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.
I don't often agree with Mr. Fishy, but I do in this case. I feel that the -4 penalty to attacks is painful but at low levels you are essentially given an extra standard action. Nothing else in Pathfinder gives you this ability. It ought to be difficult to do this and it is.
James, in another thread, was intrigued by the idea that the concentration penalty (or DC bonus) or attack penalty would be determined by the class of weapon wielded (unarmed, light, one-handed). I think this is an amenable solution. Casting while attacking with a bastard sword seems like it ought to be harder than casting while wielding a dagger.
There's also a trait for +2 Concentration. I took it with my sample Magus build from levels 1 to 20, and it proves extremely useful at lower levels for having a high chance at successful Spell Combat.And? You are thereby being forced into certain choices to be competent at the class' main features.
I'd say it's not forcing, but I recognise that it depends on your touchstone for success. I consider starting at 65% success of Concentration (70% assuming you can get that 18 Int in your examples, which I agree with you is too rare) at the very lowest baseline and then rising from there to be pretty great. Assuming the Wizard has carte blanche to avoid having to cast defensively, you're still pulling off alost 2/3 of as many spells as she is, and you get to make some attacks too (and this is at the worst level in the game for the Magus). The numbers are much better if the enemies actually harass the Wizard and make her cast defensively.
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.
And to add to Mr. Fishy's point, Rogue Eidolon...err I mean I would add that in my experience, Colour Spray is usually cast on the defensive anyway, to make sure the cone can hit a healthy group of foes (unless you're particularly lucky on their arrangement), so Spell Combat should be compared to casting Colour Spray defensively at no penalty, rather than compared to casting normally.
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 Sprays or better at cutting a bloody swathe of doom than the Rogue. Then she would be stepping on their toes.
What about giving 1/2 Magus level as a bonus to Concentration checks, similar to the 1/2 class level skill benefits that rogues, druids, etc. get?
I'd say it's not forcing, but I recognise that it depends on your touchstone for success. I consider starting at 65% success of Concentration (70% assuming you can get that 18 Int in your examples, which I agree with you is too rare) at the very lowest baseline and then rising from there to be pretty great. Assuming the Wizard has carte blanche to avoid having to cast defensively, you're still pulling off alost 2/3 of as many spells as she is, and you get to make some attacks too (and this is at the worst level in the game for the Magus). The numbers are much better if the enemies actually harass the Wizard and make her cast defensively.
65% success? Where?
Casting a 1st level spell is automatically a DC 17 modified caster check. Add 2 for Spell Combat and it becomes DC 19. At second level with 18 Int, you have a +2 for caster level and +4 for ability modifier added on to a d20 meaning to pull off casting a first level spell, you have to roll a 13 or better. You have a 60% failure chance. That doesn't even address the fact you now only have a +1 added on to your attack roll to hit an Orc meaning you fail at a 55% rate.The class is literally designed to fight in melee as a caster, but that was actively made to be an extremely difficult thing to do at nearly all levels of the game and it confounds me that a class was made with a major ability made around trying to pull it off.
|
|
We tried the Spell Combat with out casting defensively, actually didn't notice you had to. So we had fight where the Magus had a High AC and the chance of getting hit by an attack of opportunity was less than the chance of failing you defensive casting check. Too bad you can't do that but I might not be a good change to allow Spell Combat to provoke an attack of opportunity or cast defensively.
At higher levels your going to have Magus Casting a spell, using a quickened spell and letting loose with 3 or 4 attacks a round. The penalty really needs to be there at low levels to prevent the Magus from being too powerful compared to another caster. Its really looking like you can optimize the Magus to be a spellcaster killer.
I just noticed the penalty is a meager -2 while its a -4 to hit hmm that really should be reversed....
A talent could offset that penalty right now and tossing in combat casting
geeze the chances of you really failing is slim even if you didn't max out your int....
A 19 target number that you can easily get a +9 or 10 to compensate for..
+2 Trait
+4 Combat Casting
+3 Stat
+2 level
+11 to concentration checks...
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 Sprays
Then 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?
It is absolutely infuriating that even when citing numbers that show that using this ability penalizes the Magus for doing what it is designed to do that people are sitting here suggesting further nerfs.
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.
And to add to Mr. Fishy's point, Rogue Eidolon...err I mean I would add that in my experience, Colour Spray is usually cast on the defensive anyway, to make sure the cone can hit a healthy group of foes (unless you're particularly lucky on their arrangement), so Spell Combat should be compared to casting Colour Spray defensively at no penalty, rather than compared to casting normally.
So your point is...
That a dedicated caster can cast better than a Magus? Yes.
A guy attacking with two weapons has a better chance of a kill then a single weopon melee combatant. Right, so?
Clerics heal better.
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.
And to add to Mr. Fishy's point, Rogue Eidolon...err I mean I would add that in my experience, Colour Spray is usually cast on the defensive anyway, to make sure the cone can hit a healthy group of foes (unless you're particularly lucky on their arrangement), so Spell Combat should be compared to casting Colour Spray defensively at no penalty, rather than compared to casting normally.So your point is...
That a dedicated caster can cast better than a Magus? Yes.
A guy attacking with two weapons has a better chance of a kill then a single weopon melee combatant. Right, so?
Clerics heal better.
What if Bards could heal better than Clerics?
What if Fighters were better at unarmed combat than Monks?My point is that a dedicated caster is better at casting in melee than a class built around being able to cast while in melee combat.
Yes, a magus can fight and cast spells at the same time, whilst a fighter can only fight and a wizard can only cast spells. The magus, however, can't fight as accurately as a dedicated martial class (medium BAB, MAD), hit as hard as other melee classes, (no rage, smite, weapon spec, sneak attack, bane) can't cast spells as often as a dedicated spellcaster and has access to weaker spells.
If there is to be a penalty, it should be a lot smaller. I'd prefer to see a -2 to attacks and no penalty to concentration. Hell, why force him to cast defensively? Let him take the chance against attacks of opportunity if he wants to.
And saying that the bagus can choose whether to use spell combat or not is like saying the barbarian has a choice of whether or not to rage. Despite its drawbacks, its class is based around it, and the drawbacks shouldn't outweigh the advantages.
|
|
Well lets see what the difference between them is.
Wizard lower ac lower hp can't attack back.
Magus Higher Ac Higher Hp can make attacks of oppertunity + attack + cast spells.
They are equal when casting defensively.
When attacking the wizard has to choose between casting and attacking.
The Magus has to choose between Attacking, casting or Attacking and Casting...
Lets also not forget the Magus has better Saving throws.
The Magus' class ability is it can cast while making a full attack.
The Rogue's class ability is it can sneak attack in very limited circumstances.
The Paladin's class ability is it can smite evil.
So why not remove all the restrictions on a Paladin's smite evil?
Why not remove all the restrictions on a Rogue's sneak attack?
Game Balance...
The Magus suffers penalties at low levels which I might add we have mechanically proven can be negated completely to balance out its ability to both make a full attack and cast a spell. At later levels this turns into casting two spells and making a full attack....
I'd say it's not forcing, but I recognise that it depends on your touchstone for success. I consider starting at 65% success of Concentration (70% assuming you can get that 18 Int in your examples, which I agree with you is too rare) at the very lowest baseline and then rising from there to be pretty great. Assuming the Wizard has carte blanche to avoid having to cast defensively, you're still pulling off alost 2/3 of as many spells as she is, and you get to make some attacks too (and this is at the worst level in the game for the Magus). The numbers are much better if the enemies actually harass the Wizard and make her cast defensively.65% success? Where?
Casting a 1st level spell is automatically a DC 17 modified caster check. Add 2 for Spell Combat and it becomes DC 19. At second level with 18 Int, you have a +2 for caster level and +4 for ability modifier added on to a d20 meaning to pull off casting a first level spell, you have to roll a 13 or better. You have a 60% failure chance. That doesn't even address the fact you now only have a +1 added on to your attack roll to hit an Orc meaning you fail at a 55% rate.
The class is literally designed to fight in melee as a caster, but that was actively made to be an extremely difficult thing to do at nearly all levels of the game and it confounds me that a class was made with a major ability made around trying to pull it off.
Ah, no worries--I think you mistook me because I mistook you. I was analysing the result of having the trait and feat and was saying that the result of taking both the feat and the trait was more than merely competent--it was in fact extremely solid, as you had said "And? You are thereby being forced into certain choices to be competent at the class' main features."
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.
|
There is no way Spell Combat is broken at low levels.
The magus isn't outdamaging a fighter because a fighter can easily 2H or 2WF and deal WAY more damage. Magus can rely only on 1H damage.
The magus isn't outcasting a wizard because a wizard will have more spells due to higher attribute and possibly bonded item. Wizards also have a bigger spell selection, as well those level 1 abilities which are okay at that level.
A -2 to attack and -2 to Concentration might be enough. I rather it go away completely though. Spell Combat just isn't very powerful early on and abusble for maybe 2 encounters at best.
Well lets see what the difference between them is.
Wizard lower ac lower hp can't attack back.
Magus Higher Ac Higher Hp can make attacks of oppertunity + attack + cast spells.They are equal when casting defensively.
I am going to massage my head. When I am done, I might explain to you why you haven't actually countered my point and in addition made several inherently wrong statements.
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.
Then 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?
Armor? Weapons? D8 HD?
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.
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.]
As to the concentration check DC 17 with a +4-2 for a +2. You need a 15 [25% success.] Not good odds but there are reduced penalties and the concentration improves every level. So the ability does get easier to use. Also the penalty to concentration only applies to the spell combat. Normal defensive casting is unchanged.
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?
It is absolutely infuriating that even when citing numbers that show that using this ability penalizes the Magus for doing what it is designed to do that people are sitting here suggesting further nerfs.
I don't think there should be any further nerfs--I think they have the base level balance right and now need to focus on making cool new arcana and balancing the spell list with new additions (particularly touch spells).
@Casting--I grok you now, you were talking about specifically the chance to cast defensively on the front line. The Magus will only be worse at casting while in melee at these levels because of the Wizard's higher Int (or in the case of Spell Combat because she chose to cast and attack). 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.