Creative Director
|
@Paizo Lords: I'm glad to see this thread getting attention from you, but would you mind addressing the post topic once in a while? ;)
Actually... no. That's not really our job. I'm more interested in making sure that the playtest provides a forum for you, the playtesters, to give us your feedback in a way that doesn't involve shouting matches or trolling or hurt feelings. That's the only reason I popped in here—to make sure people were playing nice, because I was getting a vibe that things were getting ready to get uncomfortable or awkward or whatever.
I generally try NOT to provide playtest feedback while a playtest is in progress because I don't want to skew observations by saying something that folks might misinterpret as an official change. So please; post your feedback, observations, comments, and suggestions. Just keep in mind that now is not the appropriate time for me to reply to those posts.
Jason sometimes replies to these posts, but that's up to him. And right now he's scrambling on a last round of stat checking in Bestiary 2, so he'll probably not have a lot of time to post to these threads for a bit.
The Magus is a much lesser spellcaster than, say, a Wizard, on account of his retarded spell progression and limited choice of spells.
This entire thread hurts my head |:
I haven't looked at anything regarding the new class being discussed, but I can say that my players have been rather unsuccessful at applying a melee-oriented arcane caster. The bard, while functional in that role, is dogged by a lack of melee-oriented options throughout its progression. The 3.5 options, like hexblade, always seemed lackluster.
I might try to incorporate this class in my game as an NPC. . .
So there isn't going to be a full-BAB/d10 class that's also a full caster (using the Sor/Wiz list) that gains an extra standard action each round so he can cast as a standard and full-attack in a single turn?
If there is, can we call it "Ninja"?
-Skeld
EDIT: Parts of this thread make me chuckle.
+1
He must also be able to cast Divine spells and have multiple swift actions in a round all while wielding 7 swords and standing on one foot.
I myself won't get a chance to try out the class until february sadly =( which is to bad since the magus seems to be the class i was waiting for.
As to the issues with spell combat i think this class feature woks great if you go for a decent int score and combat casting, put up true strike first then swing your sword. Arcane strike and power attack could be effectively used in conjunction with this to make up for a lower str score.
Spell strike as is currently probably won't see much use during combat unless you start of fairly far away but as a pre combat buff isn't to bad since you most likely aren't going to be using a full attack action for your first swing.
A lot of people seem to feel the class is better able to make use of spell combat as it levels, by the time you get your second attack the penalties drop and while it's unlikely you can get both attacks to hit the spells chance of success should be fairly good and their is always the possibility that everything does work.
The magus does seem to have a lot of decisions it has to make in terms of actions since you can't use many of your arcana in conjunction with arcane strike and you sacrifice efficacy for economy of action, but not having any gimme play styles or feat/arcana selections isn't necessarily bad nor is being a "nova" style character it's just a bit different.
|
As to the issues with spell combat i think this class feature woks great if you go for a decent int score and combat casting, put up true strike first then swing your sword. Arcane strike and power attack could be effectively used in conjunction with this to make up for a lower str score.
I'd expect that you are more likely to succeed at a straight weapon attack with a decent Str than to succeed at the combat casting, in most situations. Given that even your fizzled True Strikes count against your skimpy daily allowance, you will run out of uses in no time at all, unlike the Strength build.
Spell strike as is currently probably won't see much use during combat unless you start of fairly far away but as a pre combat buff isn't to bad since you most likely aren't going to be using a full attack action for your first swing.
It's better to start your combat with a safe casting of a high-level buff that will enhance all following rounds of combat than to suffer a high failure chance on the casting for a low chance to do low damage in the same round. The damage of your single hit is in no way comparable to the extra damage brought about by a successful buff spell.
A lot of people seem to feel the class is better able to make use of spell combat as it levels, by the time you get your second attack the penalties drop and while it's unlikely you can get both attacks to hit the spells chance of success should be fairly good and their is always the possibility that everything does work.
By the time you get your second attack and penalties drop, spending entire rounds in melee means getting full-attacked by enemy melee monsters. You have Mirror Image etc to help with survival, but those work much better when you're not being full-attacked to begin with. Meanwhile, what do you gain over just standing back in the safe zone and casting?
Personally I think the belief that spellcasting with a full base attack must be overpowered is a fallacy.
The cleric, druid, and oracle have a medium base attack bonus combine with full spellcasting, yet no designer is saying they break the game.
Well 3.x Clerics and Druids did break the game but that's a whole other story.
There seems to be a fundamental design choice in pathfinder that a 3/4 BAB progression is the best a bard progression caster can get. Full BAB means that you have to have delayed spell access/a crappy spell list/ and Paladin/Ranger Progression. Going full BAB + Bard Progression even with a horrendously nerfed spell list (Magus has a fairly decent spell selection IMHO)seems to basically say to the Bard, Inquisitor and Summoner that hey guys you're completely redundant.
While I personally think a Full BAB/ Bard Progression Arcane caster would be okay if he was a spontaneous caster instead of a prepared caster and had a limited spell list, I understand wanting to limit progression to not step on the toes of the martial classes.
The Magus is clearly not designed to slug it out with Giants, Dragons and Fighters in close combat. It's a fragile class (d8 hitpoints plus mediocre Con- seriously it's MAD as hell in here), without the AC to tank hits (until 13th level at the earliest and even then), and without the pure DPR to really threaten the opposition.
If you start getting it in your head that the Magus is pretty much a self-buffing mobile fighter(Flight + Invis)and mage killer (Reflection, Counterstrike, Spell Combat,etc). This means that the Magus can seek out the opposition artillery get into position to foil casting and ranged full attacks (defensive casting is a b@~$$ in Pathfinder) with feats like step up.
Ok, I think its important to think about this in a different way. The reason this class will NEVER have a full BAB and a d10 HD is because it doesn't have enough points to do so.
I'm certain that all of the class abilities to include HD and BAB costs some amount of points which is the basis of balancing the classes. I'm also certain that this class has went through the same treatment and wasn't just given its abilities willy-nilly. The only classes that have full BAB, d10 HD and spells only have 4 levels of spells.
So, if you want this class to only basically be a half caster and still be awesome at melee, then I suggest a furious letter writing campaign to ensure this happens.
One more thing, I feel people are underestimating the D8 HD. In recent games I have had a rogue hold his own against NPCs higher than his level and was only only close to death once. One of the issues with using statistics with this kind of project is that it only gives you what is most likely, not what will actually happen.
\
That coupled with the "you have been warned" nonsense at the end of your last post just reminded a lot of us how antagonistic your posts tend to be in general, and there you have it.Which was a joke. Some one got it.
You are the only one laughing.
It should fight using Katanorz(16-20, 2d20) and lazzzzzors(save or die dc 10+users HD+Dex)and wear tench coats(100% mischance).
Oh and they are all lesbian stripper witches. ;)
I'd take a level in that class.
Or at least watch it in a dark room.
-Skeld
Is it not too early for pr0n?
|
I have played a lot of hybrid martial/arcane caster characters using various class combinations through the years.
I tend to play them as MARTIAL CHARACTERS who gain their martial edge through spells...not really 50-50, but more 75-25.
When I make these characters, I'm generally happy with up to 4th level spells. With a few exceptions, like teleport and overland flight, I don't see much in the higher spell levels that appeals to the spellcasting martialist.
I would be very happy with a full BaB magus with only 4th level spells. You could even simplify it by giving them bard spell progression, but anything over 4th level is metamagicked, rather than a new spell level. Give a few key early entry spells (interposing hand, teleport) at 4th level, stay away from all but touch direct damage spells, and go to town.
Allowing a high level spellcasting martialist the ability to cast a 4th level buff spell and attack, even without penalty, seems well within the expected power limits to me. Sure, improved invisibility and *SMACK* is powerful - but when the wizards are throwing out 9th level spells, it shouldn't be unreasonable.
|
My thoughts on Spell Combat:
1) If it's going to invoke visions of TWF, then make it truly more analogous. Reduce the -4 penalty to weapon attacks to -2, with the continueing caveat that the Magus must use a light, one-handed weapon with this ability. A -4 penalty to melee attacks is pretty beefy for a 3/4 BAB melee class.
2) Keep the must make a Concentration check at -2 (the price you pay for making a full attack, plus casting as spell without incurring AO). Also, any attack roll required by the spell takes a -2 penalty (I don't remember if this is implied in the ability or not). 1 & 2 together preserve the -2/-2 penalty structure of TWF.
3) Ditch the requirement that the spell be cast either before or after attacks, but not between. I see the justification for this. Also, using TWF as a template, the off-hand attack doesn't have the before/after main hand attack requirement so I don't see why it's needed here. [As an aside: if there's a good reason for this that I just don't see, by all means, leave it alone.]
-Skeld
|
|
Ok, I think its important to think about this in a different way. The reason this class will NEVER have a full BAB and a d10 HD is because it doesn't have enough points to do so.
You are assuming the current spellcasting allotment is fixed. I am suggesting the spellcasting be reduced to Ranger/Paladin level in order to make room for full BAB, d10, and a nice non-spell arcane side features to replace Favored Enemy and Smite.
So, if you want this class to only basically be a half caster and still be awesome at melee, then I suggest a furious letter writing campaign to ensure this happens.
*furiously writes letter*
One more thing, I feel people are underestimating the D8 HD.
It's less the d8 than the overall combination of d8, mediocre BAB, MAD, weakest fighting style imaginable (free hand), lagging armor proficiency, and few redeeming qualities.
EDIT: Thanks Jess, that's the spirit! :)
Ok, I think its important to think about this in a different way. The reason this class will NEVER have a full BAB and a d10 HD is because it doesn't have enough points to do so.
I'm certain that all of the class abilities to include HD and BAB costs some amount of points which is the basis of balancing the classes. I'm also certain that this class has went through the same treatment and wasn't just given its abilities willy-nilly. The only classes that have full BAB, d10 HD and spells only have 4 levels of spells.
So, if you want this class to only basically be a half caster and still be awesome at melee, then I suggest a furious letter writing campaign to ensure this happens.
One more thing, I feel people are underestimating the D8 HD. In recent games I have had a rogue hold his own against NPCs higher than his level and was only only close to death once. One of the issues with using statistics with this kind of project is that it only gives you what is most likely, not what will actually happen.
I am pretty sure you can end up with medium BAB this way: look at the EK. Walking backwards, we see that if you have full BAB and casting, you only get 2 skill points per level. It's hard to justify more than one good save. That leaves casting itself. Since the EK does not get the bonuses of the base caster as it levels, and gets few features itself, we can gather that this combination is expensive. Further, since the EK ends up at least -2 caster level, the new class must be a worse caster in some way (spell selection springs to mind). Finaly, to make room for new class features, something has to move. Okay, we're out of room, so the BAB goes down.
The problem is that the BAB and casting are used in conjunction. If the fighter-mage cannot both hit with attacks and cast effectively, the concept does not work. Consider that the Magus's class abilities already give it a penalty to hit when working its schtick. Consider further that it only has 3/4 BAB. Consider further that every full BAB class gains at least situation bonuses to hit: fighter weapon training and feats, ranger favored enemy and combat style, paladin smite and perhaps a special weapon. Magus is actually behind on its to-hit twice; first, because it has 3/4 BAB, second, because it has only marginal advantages hitting compared to someone using a regular magical weapon for their level.
The 3.5 psychic warrior is a much, much more credible 3/4 BAB class. Why? Because it could boost itself out the wazoo, execute touch attacks, and use psychic powers credibly. That is despite that the Magus is very close in structure to the PsyW. however, it loses out because of a lack of synergy in its abilities.
I think the OP is overreacting. Let's compare Schala, the Magus I built from level 1 to 10 in this thread to Laeniaxis, the kick-ass melee Paladin in my group's Council of Thieves game. Since Laeni is currently level 7 going on 8, we'll do the comparison at 7 and 8. Laeni's stats were rolled and came out much higher than 20 Point Buy, so I'll be nerfing them down (with large hits to Int and Wis and a bit of Dex too) to par with the Magus's 20 PB, but otherwise, she will be as-is from our campaign.
Schala, Human Magus 7
Str 21
Dex 13
Con 14
Int 16
Wis 7
Cha 7
Hit Points: 66
AC 21 (13 touch, 19 flat-footed)
Fort: +9
Ref: +7
Will: +5
Feats: Combat Casting, Toughness, Weapon Focus (Rapier), Dodge, Arcane Strike, Outflank
Traits: Desperate Focus, Heirloom Weapon
Class Abilities: Spellstrike, Spell Combat, Magus Arcana (Familiar--Alfador), Arcane Weapon, Bonus Feat, Magus Arcana (Empowered Magic), Medium Armour
Skills: Climb +8, Craft[Jewelry] +7, Fly +8, Know[Arcana] +13, Know [Dungeoneering] +11, Know [Planes] +13, Perception +0, Ride + 4, Sense Motive +0, Spellcraft +13, Swim +7, Use Magic Device +8
Concentration: +10 (+16 casting defensively, +14 for Spell Combat)
Spells:
1-Colour Spray, Enlarge Person, Expeditious Retreat, Feather Fall, Grease, Mount, Obscuring Mist, Shield, Shocking Grasp, True Strike, Unseen Servant
2-Cat's Grace, Glitterdust, Invisibility, Mirror Image, Scorching Ray, Web
3-Haste, Fly
Spells per Day: 0-5, 1-5, 2-4, 3-2
Attacks:
Heirloom Rapier +13 to hit (+17 flanking w/partner), 1d6+8+1d6 damage
Spell Combat with Heirloom Rapier +9 to hit (+13 flanking w/partner), 1d6+8+1d6 damage
MW MTY Comp Longbow +7 to hit, 1d8+6 damage
Possessions: +1 Shock (or other more useful element for the day) Rapier, +1 Mithral Breastplate, +1 Ring of Protection, +2 Cloak of Resistance, +1 Amulet of Natural Armour, MW MTY Comp Longbow, Belt of Giant Strength +2, random gear, paid to scribe an extra level 1 spell, extra gold to save up
Demonblooded Tiefling Paladin 7
Str 18
Dex 13
Con 14
Int 5
Wis 7
Cha 23
HP: 73
AC: 22 (touch 11, flat-footed 20)
CMB +13
CMD 27
Fort +13
Ref +9
Will +9
Attacks: +1 Greatsword +13/+8 2d6+7
Traits: Attractive, Child of Infamy
Feats: Fiendish Heritage, Power Attack, Weapon Focus (Greatsword), Furious Focus
Specials: Smite Evil 3/day, Lay on Hands 3d6 9/day, Channel Positive Energy, Divine Bond
Mercies:Sickened, Diseased
Spells:3 1sts per day, 2 2nds per day
Notice that Schala and Laeni have the same to-hit (less with Spell Combat, but Schala is about to get a huge gain next level) although Laeni has an iterative. Laeni has no problem hitting monsters at her level, even without smiting, so Schala probably won't either. Laeni hits for slightly less damage unless she Power Attacks. Schala has better spells, but Laeni has Smite and Lay on Hands. Both have a kickass sword, though Schala doesn't need to spend an action to activate it (however she loses flexibility because she has to plan it at the day's start). Laeni's HP is better, and she also has Lay on Hands. Schala holds her own in many ways but is probably not quite as strong as Laeni. However, Laeni is our group's hardest hitter in a group that has been having absolutely no problem with CoT so far. Let's check level 8.
Str 22
Dex 13
Con 14
Int 16
Wis 7
Cha 7
Hit Points: 75
AC 21 (13 touch, 19 flat-footed)
Fort: +10
Ref: +7
Will: +6
Feats: Combat Casting, Toughness, Weapon Focus (Rapier), Dodge, Arcane Strike, Outflank
Traits: Desperate Focus, Heirloom Weapon
Class Abilities: Spellstrike, Spell Combat, Magus Arcana (Familiar--Alfador), Arcane Weapon, Bonus Feat, Magus Arcana (Empowered Magic), Medium Armour, Improved Spell Combat
Skills: Climb +9, Craft[Jewelry] +7, Fly +10, Know[Arcana] +14, Know [Dungeoneering] +11, Know [Planes] +14, Perception +0, Ride + 4, Sense Motive +0, Spellcraft +14, Swim +8, Use Magic Device +9
Concentration: +11 (+17 casting defensively or Spell Combat)
Spells:
1-Colour Spray, Enlarge Person, Expeditious Retreat, Feather Fall, Grease, Mount, Obscuring Mist, Shield, Shocking Grasp, True Strike, Unseen Servant
2-Cat's Grace, Glitterdust, Invisibility, Mirror Image, Scorching Ray, Web
3-Displacement, Haste, Fireball, Fly
Spells per Day: 0-5, 1-5, 2-5, 3-3
Attacks:
Heirloom Rapier +16/+11 to hit (+20/+15 flanking w/partner), 1d6+10+1d6 damage 15-20/x2
Spell Combat with Heirloom Rapier +14/+9 to hit (+18/+13 flanking w/partner), 1d6+10+1d6 damage 15-20/x2
MW MTY Comp Longbow +8 to hit, 1d8+6 damage 20/x3
Possessions: +2 Keen Shock (or other more useful element for the day) Rapier, +2 Mithral Breastplate, +1 Ring of Protection, +2 Cloak of Resistance, +1 Amulet of Natural Armour, MW MTY Comp Longbow, Belt of Giant Strength +2, random gear, paid to scribe an extra level 1 spell, extra gold to save up
Paladin 8
Str 20
Dex 13
Con 14
Int 5
Wis 7
Cha 24
HP: 82
AC: 22 (touch 11, flat-footed 20)
CMB +13
CMD 28
Fort +14
Ref +10
Will +10
Attacks: +1 Holy Greatsword +15/+10 2d6+8+2d6
Traits: Attractive, Child of Infamy
Feats: Fiendish Heritage, Power Attack, Weapon Focus (Greatsword), Furious Focus
Specials: Smite Evil 3/day, Lay on Hands 3d6 9/day, Channel Positive Energy, Divine Bond, Aura of Resolve
Mercies:Sickened, Diseased
Spells:3 1sts per day, 3 2nds per day
Schala with Spell Combat now hits more often than Laeni with Power Attack. And I've been ignoring Schala's Outflank, but if she flanks with a partner who has it, she gets an even bigger advantage. Laeni still has the amazing Smite Evil and Lay on Hands abilities, but I think Schala is a definite contender.
With 14 str and 18 Int at 2nd level when you first gain access to spell combat the dc to cast true strike defensively is 17, you get a minus 2 penalty from spell combat this is offset by your caster level you get +4 from combat casting and +4 from your int score so averaging a roll of 11 with a bonus of +8 your average becomes 19 so slightly more than half the time. not exaclty a great option when you get it no but while the dc stays the same your bonus increases every level you can also take the focused mind trait to add another +2 to your concentration checks so at 2nd level your average is 21 if you want to focus on using spell combat early. With str bonus arcane strike and and power attack thats +5 to damage +6 if you go str heavy (assuming 20 point buy).
Assuming you get true strike to go off thats +18 or +19 to hit, compare this to a bard with the similar stats (14 or 16 str and 18 cha) the bard can deal 1 additional damage due to inspire courage (assuming no bard for magus) with possible max +4 to hit.
I agree spell combat is not hugely exciting when you get it but by 4th level the concentration check shouldn't be to hard to beat and you can go with the concentration arcana for a boost and retry once a day if your precasting spells outside of combat then you won't be using spell combat a great deal anyway though early on.
At the moment enlarge person and magic weapon are your 2 out of combat early level buffs with both lasting minutes per level if you cast them both you should still be able to cast a touch spell into your weapon without time concerns at which point your out of spells. If your fighting a lot of encounters per day you won't get as much use out of spell strike as your likely saving your spells for multiple casting of the same buff just like any other caster. and if you get ambushed your in the same boat as the rogue or caster either get into combat and while the enemy is busy with the fighter or stay back and cast or waste your time beefing yourself.
You should never put yourself in a position to be full attacked unless your prepared to be hit your right, so don't put yourself in that position out think the enemy. at 9th level 1 level after you get your second attack you have access to hasted assault and invisibility if you know your opponents can't detect invisibility haste yourself cast invisibility and run up to it next turn get your full attack and invisible yourself again burn another spell through your arcana if you think you need to.
A magus has a slew of options unfortunately they have limited resources i think this class isn't as bad as your making out to be its just very much thought and action intensive, yes a lot of its abilities are lack lustre the first level you get them but they scale, could it use a bit of tweaking yes that's why it's a playtest but i don't think it needs to be radically redone.
The problem is that the BAB and casting are used in conjunction. If the fighter-mage cannot both hit with attacks and cast effectively, the concept does not work. Consider that the Magus's class abilities already give it a penalty to hit when working its schtick. Consider further that it only has 3/4 BAB. Consider further that every full BAB class gains at least situation bonuses to hit: fighter weapon training and feats, ranger favored enemy and combat style, paladin smite and perhaps a special weapon. Magus is actually behind on its to-hit twice; first, because it has 3/4 BAB, second, because it has only marginal advantages hitting compared to someone using a regular magical weapon for their level.
The 3.5 psychic warrior is a much, much more credible 3/4 BAB class. Why? Because it could boost itself out the wazoo, execute touch attacks, and use psychic powers credibly. That is despite that the Magus is very close in structure to the PsyW. however, it loses out because of a lack of synergy in its abilities.
Ok, I'll agree that it needs better synergy with its abilities but the class is no worse off than an unfeated two weapon fighter, of course that isn't saying much. I think the issue isn't in the BAB/HD but in the penalty to hit from the ability. As several people have mentioned a touch attack should be considered a light off-hand weapon making the penalty -2.
|
|
@ Rogue Eidolon: Thanks for putting things in numbers a bit. You are assuming way larger numbers than I'm used to (15 pt buy and no power-dumping), as well as giving the Magus several sneaky advantages over the Paladin (such as the Heirloom Weapon trait, more Str over the casting stat; paladin doesn't power attack; looking at a level where the Magus' starting weaknesses are fading), but you are certainly making a good case for the Magus principally being able to make his attacks relevant under favorable circumstances. Arcane Strike and the bonded weapon certainly help.
@ Redliska: You're saying True Strike is turning a less-than-half chance of hitting into about a half chance of guaranteed hitting at 2nd level. Given that you'll run out of True Strikes almost instantly (remember, half of them fail), that doesn't sound like a tactic to build on. Later maybe...
@ Rogue Eidolon: Thanks for putting things in numbers a bit. You are assuming way larger numbers than I'm used to (15 pt buy and no power-dumping), as well as giving the Magus several sneaky advantages over the Paladin (such as the Heirloom Weapon trait, more Str over the casting stat; paladin doesn't power attack; looking at a level where the Magus' starting weaknesses are fading), but you are certainly making a good case for the Magus principally being able to make his attacks relevant under favorable circumstances. Arcane Strike and the bonded weapon certainly help.
@ Redliska: You're saying True Strike is turning a less-than-half chance of hitting into about a half chance of guaranteed hitting at 2nd level. Given that you'll run out of True Strikes almost instantly (remember, half of them fail), that doesn't sound like a tactic to build on. Later maybe...
I didn't build the Paladin for this--the Paladin is an actual character from our group (with her stats lowered to 20 PB because she rolled better than that, with actually about 10 in Int and Wis and 14 Dex). The Magus I constructed for playtest purposes and used 20 PB (I plan to test on PFS modules which assume 20 PB characters). Actually, looking back, the Paladin seems to have gotten more than 20 PB regardless, as I forgot to lower her Charisma by 2, so the Paladin turns out to have been 27 PB. Lowering her Charisma by 2 puts her back at 20 (-1 to saves, lower smiting, fewer lay on hands, no 2nd bonus spell for 2nd level). I chose the level that the Paladin was currently sitting at, since I have that available in our campaign wiki. Is the Magus more twinked than the Paladin? Perhaps, but the Paladin has several insane things in her favour (she rolled on some d100 chart or something and got even more extra Charisma). But the point is that the Paladin is going strong in a Paizo AP, so at least this particular Magus should be able to do so too.
A point I've made in several threads about the Magus is that I think the need for favourable circumstances to really get homeruns with Spell Combat is good design--it means you're working with your party and everyone feels awesome when you do your most awesome stuff.
|
The BAB and a high Concentration check at low levels are the main issues I see so far, and even then it's mainly due to Spell Combat. It's very difficult to get it to work at level 2. The attack roll is probably going to be close to a flat roll vs. AC due to the -4 and + to attacks balancing itself out. Combat Casting seems to be a must early on to ensure the spell is successful.
Spellstrike isn't a huge issue since Spell Combat is at level 2, and then the 2 class features combo, even if not a good combo until later.
I like the spell list. It's got solid utility spells (which is what I want, which is why I never liked the duskblade), and I'm sure the final list will be at least this good.
The class is well-designed in the sense that it's pretty easy to understand, nothing too complicated, most of the abilities have been seen in some form before (like in feats and class features). It is also very safe and underpowered at the moment. This is definitely the safe way to go. In a balanced party, I think I'll be fine, but if there are a lot of optimizers, it might be hard to play this class.
@ Catharsis I agree it isn't spectacular when you get spell combat, you have so few spells to start with anyway as i said your out of spells after pre buffing pretty much, I think once you get a BAB of 4 it isn't bad though since the penalty on power attack goes up and you should have a fairly good chance of success, but it is an option to hit a very high ac opponent without using a turn to get the spell in place doable if you focus on it but not 100% thats for sure. I concede at level 2 it's a bit of a gamble to true strike but not a huge on its still better than 50% if you focus on it at level 3 your pretty much guaranteed success if you go for the concentrate arcana however the once a day limit and the fact that defensive casting at higher levels will almost never fail means the usefulness of the arcana is delegated to early levels when you'd want to use true strike or the such on a boss BBG what ever you wanna call it.
As for spellstrike if you know your going to be fighting opponents in metal armor or using a metal weapon shocking grasp has the added bonus of giving your weapon a +3 bonus to hit. A weapon with a large crit range would benefit you here since the spell crits on the weapons range.
A small bonus to hit or decrease in the penalty might be enough to encourage using the ability more often.
I would really like to test the class out so i may just have to cajole my friends for some extra game sessions when i get back from england until then these are just ideas. While an option may not always be optimal more options is always a good thing otherwise why pick a wizard over a sorcerer.
Thanks for staying civil, you pointed out some issues the class has fulfilling it's role i just disagree with you on the severity of these issues. I will probably be on tomorrow to throw out some more opinions until then i'm off to cook GL with finding a solution or answer (as unlikely as that is >.>.)
|
|
So there isn't going to be a full-BAB/d10 class that's also a full caster (using the Sor/Wiz list) that gains an extra standard action each round so he can cast as a standard and full-attack in a single turn?
If there is, can we call it "Ninja"?
-Skeld
EDIT: Parts of this thread make me chuckle.
It should fight using Katanorz(16-20, 2d20) and lazzzzzors(save or die dc 10+users HD+Dex)and wear tench coats(100% mischance).
Oh and they are all lesbian stripper witches. ;)
Wait, somebody is playing bayonetta?!?
Wait, somebody is playing bayonetta?!?So there isn't going to be a full-BAB/d10 class that's also a full caster (using the Sor/Wiz list) that gains an extra standard action each round so he can cast as a standard and full-attack in a single turn?
If there is, can we call it "Ninja"?
-Skeld
EDIT: Parts of this thread make me chuckle.
It should fight using Katanorz(16-20, 2d20) and lazzzzzors(save or die dc 10+users HD+Dex)and wear tench coats(100% mischance).
Oh and they are all lesbian stripper witches. ;)
Bayonetta is a Noob, the super-magus would kick her unreasonably long legged arse!
Let me just straighten something out here real quick.
There is no way that this class is going to be as good at combat as classes dedicated to combat (fighter/barbarian/etc). Its not going to have a full bab, that is just too good for the other perks of this class. That said, we still want an effective class, so adding powers to give it the right boosts at the right time is all well and good and pretty much exactly what we are working on. Its all about focus. This class, above all others, could be a terrible scene stealer, with an answer to every problem. We want it to shine, just not at the expense of everyone else at the table.
Its a fine line to walk.. but that is why we playtest.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Thank you! I can't say I was very concerned but there is always that little niggling feeling at the back of one's mind that new classes will put undue stress on the viability of the staple classes and it's nice to see this commitment to keeping things on an even keel from a design perspective.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Ok, I think its important to think about this in a different way. The reason this class will NEVER have a full BAB and a d10 HD is because it doesn't have enough points to do so.
I'm certain that all of the class abilities to include HD and BAB costs some amount of points which is the basis of balancing the classes. I'm also certain that this class has went through the same treatment and wasn't just given its abilities willy-nilly. The only classes that have full BAB, d10 HD and spells only have 4 levels of spells.
So, if you want this class to only basically be a half caster and still be awesome at melee, then I suggest a furious letter writing campaign to ensure this happens.
I would actually prefer to see this class recast in this way: As a full BAB/d10/4-level caster, a paladin/ranger-style guy with arcane spells instead of divine.
Like the ranger, his magic schtick works only in light armor (which expands as he goes up in levels). Like the paladin, he has some more explicitly magical mojo that he gets as class abilities.
I agree with some of the others that having a 3/4 BAB/6-level caster is kind of redundant with the summoner and bard (especially the arcane duelist archetype from the APG) on the arcane side and the inquisitor on the divine side.
True, he's a prepared caster rather than a spontaneous, so that's a point of distinction, but not enough of one. The magus' abilities are interesting (though I'd agree that the penalties at low levels for casting/stabbing, in combination with 3/4 BAB, are a bit much), but mechanically it feels much the same as can already be accomplished.
Here's my point:
I think the full-on arcane hybrid is already covered pretty well. By contrast, the game has no full BAB/arcane partial caster. That, to me, is the empty niche and the one you can fill with the magus.
Nobody is asking for full BAB/full casting. I'm not even suggesting full BAB and 6-level casting a la bard/summoner/inquisitor.
Full BAB/4-level arcane casting. An arcane counterpoint to the paladin and ranger. For me, that's the kind of magus that I would love to see in PF.
I would make the point, though, that the 4 level casting starting at 4th level is an unnecessary hamstringing.
Ok, I think its important to think about this in a different way. The reason this class will NEVER have a full BAB and a d10 HD is because it doesn't have enough points to do so.
I'm certain that all of the class abilities to include HD and BAB costs some amount of points which is the basis of balancing the classes. I'm also certain that this class has went through the same treatment and wasn't just given its abilities willy-nilly. The only classes that have full BAB, d10 HD and spells only have 4 levels of spells.
So, if you want this class to only basically be a half caster and still be awesome at melee, then I suggest a furious letter writing campaign to ensure this happens.
I would actually prefer to see this class recast in this way: As a full BAB/d10/4-level caster, a paladin/ranger-style guy with arcane spells instead of divine.
Like the ranger, his magic schtick works only in light armor (which expands as he goes up in levels). Like the paladin, he has some more explicitly magical mojo that he gets as class abilities.
I agree with some of the others that having a 3/4 BAB/6-level caster is kind of redundant with the summoner and bard (especially the arcane duelist archetype from the APG) on the arcane side and the inquisitor on the divine side.
True, he's a prepared caster rather than a spontaneous, so that's a point of distinction, but not enough of one. The magus' abilities are interesting (though I'd agree that the penalties at low levels for casting/stabbing, in combination with 3/4 BAB, are a bit much), but mechanically it feels much the same as can already be accomplished.
Here's my point:
I think the full-on arcane hybrid is already covered pretty well. By contrast, the game has no full BAB/arcane partial caster. That, to me, is the empty niche and the one you can fill with the magus.
Nobody is asking for full BAB/full casting. I'm not even suggesting full BAB and 6-level casting a la bard/summoner/inquisitor....
Perhaps it will serve as a compromise that satisfies no one, but here's an idea for a Magus archetype that might help fill that niche (and if it's offered like this as a new archetype instead of a replacement for what we have so far, it lets us keep the current Magus as well).
-------------------
Warrior Magus:
The Warrior Magus finds simultaneous magic and blades to be too frenetic and distracting. She prefers to take her time with one or the other and and make sure she gets it right. This allows her exceptional precision with her melee attacks.
Spell Combat: A Warrior Magus does not receive Spell Combat, Improved Spell Combat, or Greater Spell Combat
Warrior Magus's Edge: Starting at 1st level, a Warrior Magus may use her Magus level in place of her base attack bonus to qualify for Combat feats that require a certain base attack bonus. If she has base attack bonus from other classes, she adds her Magus level to her base attack from those classes.
Fighter Training: A Warrior Magus receives Fighter Training at 4th level. Her effective Fighter level is equal to her Magus level - 3, rather than Magus level / 2.
Weapon Training: 5th level, 9th level, and 13th level, and 17th level, the Warrior Magus gains Weapon Training as the Fighter.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I would make the point, though, that the 4 level casting starting at 4th level is an unnecessary hamstringing.
Hamstringing? Perhaps.
Unnecessary? Maybe, maybe not; it may be necessary to keep consistency with the established class structure of full-fighter/part-casters that the game has set as a precedent.
Hey, it beats 1st/2nd Ed when paladins didn't get spells until they were 9th level! :)
I would say that, if you were going to put off actual casting until 4th level, you would presumably build in some type of spell-like/supernatural ability, something like the various wizard school 1st level powers, that the magus would be able to do 3+Int times per day, so that even at 1st level he would have some variety of magical schtick prior to getting his actual spells later.
I get the feeling it is a lost cause (i.e. already decided)
but I agree an Arcane Paladin/Ranger(Full BAB/HD + 4 levels of Casting + Specials) is the way to go.
Before 4th level I don`t think lack of spells is the worst thing in the world, Specials can more than make up for it - In fact, I`d REALLY REALLY like for this class (either 3/4 or 1/2 Caster), to be able to choose specialties from Wizard Schools... which would grant the low level at-will powers and also on-going/scaling abilities perhaps above-par from what one would expect from a half caster). At the least that should be a Feat option to gain a Wizard School.
Perhaps a facility with using scrolls/spellbooks such that they could use them before actually having spell slots (getting around the no-spells for first 3 levels). Maybe even so they can start the game with spellbook, but not be able to cast NORMALLY, but are able to `charge` their weapon with spells above what they could normally cast. This would have action requirements (provoking full-round, etc) or per/day limits making it not possible mid-combat on a regular basis, but would allow the Magus a limited capacity to `punch above` their half casting (but only touch spells delivered as attack).
UNLIKE the current playtest Magus whose spells are essentially 1:1 drawn from Wizard list (re: spell level), I would expect that LIKE THE PALADIN AND RANGER there would be signifigant ´early entry´ cases which balance against the slower progression but with matching drawbacks/ benefits resulting from lower spell level... but that would still allow similar effects end-game (vs. 6th level spells) WITHIN CERTAIN `specialized` AREAS OF FOCUS.
What`s silly is assuming Paizo goes ahead with a 3/4 BAB Magus w/ 6th level Casting Progression,
Isn`t the Full BAB + 4 level Casting Arcane Paladin/Ranger role STILL waiting to be done at a later point?
I don`t think the game really needs that situation (ANOTHER arcane partial caster/melee hybrid), and the Arcane Ranger/Paladin role seems the one most in need of filling - obviousy, being the arcane analog to those classes.
Honestly, it seems that in many regards, looking at their progression over levels, the Magus isn`t all that different from the Eldritch Knight beyond a few synergies of their special abilities. Why not re-focus on a 4 Spell level Arcane Ranger as the new Base Class, and issue Errata to the Eldritch Knight so it can be entered at an earlier level (allowing ´magic fighter` from lower levels) and perhaps include some new Eldritch Knight specific Feats in Complete Arcana that maybe grant some of the action economy synergy that seems to be the focus of the current Magus? (or have them designed to be taken by BOTH Eldritch Knights AND Arcane Rangers)
|
|
I would actually prefer to see this class recast in this way: As a full BAB/d10/4-level caster, a paladin/ranger-style guy with arcane spells instead of divine....
...Here's my point:
I think the full-on arcane hybrid is already covered pretty well. By contrast, the game has no full BAB/arcane partial caster. That, to me, is the empty niche and the one you can fill with the magus...
Huzzah! THIS.
<shameless plug>
I have an admittedly flawed but hopefully useful homebrew that might be a reasonable starting point .
</shameless plug>
Guys at this point I really do not think they are gonna scrap the whole class and start over with full BAB and no spells till level 4.
That's not feedback, it's starting over.
Guys at this point I really do not think they are gonna scrap the whole class and start over with full BAB and no spells till level 4.
That's not feedback, it's starting over.
Which they certainly should do, but not to that extent.
|
|
Guys at this point I really do not think they are gonna scrap the whole class and start over with full BAB and no spells till level 4.
That's not feedback, it's starting over.
It's both. :)
Maybe it's not going to change. But I think that if it's worth doing, it's worth doing well. Adding yet another crossover fifth wheel class seems...superfluous to me. The "hole" in the class lineup is an arcane martialist...an arcane "fighter" replacement who has no chance of replacing a wizard, sorceror or witch's role in the party.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Guys at this point I really do not think they are gonna scrap the whole class and start over with full BAB and no spells till level 4.
That's not feedback, it's starting over.
Eh, you're probably right, but this is the playtest feedback forum, so consider my two bits of feedback (re starting over) duly delivered, to be filed in whatever the appropriate receptacle may be.
Guys at this point I really do not think they are gonna scrap the whole class and start over with full BAB and no spells till level 4.
That's not feedback, it's starting over.
It's both. :)
Maybe it's not going to change. But I think that if it's worth doing, it's worth doing well. Adding yet another crossover fifth wheel class seems...superfluous to me. The "hole" in the class lineup is an arcane martialist...an arcane "fighter" replacement who has no chance of replacing a wizard, sorceror or witch's role in the party.
I suggest an aggresive letter writing campaign.
Its not both, its not feedback on this class. Your demanding this class be dropped and a whole new class be created. That simply is not useful feedback. At this point if they are not gonna change the name, they are not gonna start allover again either.
And then if they did start allover, ya guys would want them to make a whole new spell progression so they could be casters at level 1.
Its really not any kind of useful feedback as we have known for months it would be 3/4th BAB and bard casting. They simply aren't gonna start over.
Guys at this point I really do not think they are gonna scrap the whole class and start over with full BAB and no spells till level 4.
Seems that way--that's why I think something like the Warrior Magus archetype I posted above is more likely to be a possibility for those fans looking for something better at smacking and not as good at spell action economy. It doesn't require a reboot of the Magus and allows both styles to be played (and even if they don't publish something like that, at least it will probably be easier to get a GM to accept a homebrew archetype that fiddles with a few abilities than a new base class).
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I would make the point, though, that the 4 level casting starting at 4th level is an unnecessary hamstringing.Hamstringing? Perhaps.
Unnecessary? Maybe, maybe not; it may be necessary to keep consistency with the established class structure of full-fighter/part-casters that the game has set as a precedent.
Hey, it beats 1st/2nd Ed when paladins didn't get spells until they were 9th level! :)
I would say that, if you were going to put off actual casting until 4th level, you would presumably build in some type of spell-like/supernatural ability, something like the various wizard school 1st level powers, that the magus would be able to do 3+Int times per day, so that even at 1st level he would have some variety of magical schtick prior to getting his actual spells later.
Actually, the thought occurred to me that one notion that would even emulate what exists with an existing hybridized class (the inquisitor, which gets the domain powers of 1 domain), would be that a 4-level caster magus would get the school powers (but no other features, like extra spells, etc.) of 1 wizard school.
It's a notion.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Its not both, its not feedback on this class. Your demanding this class be dropped and a whole new class be created. That simply is not useful feedback. At this point if they are not gonna change the name, they are not gonna start allover again either.
And then if they did start allover, ya guys would want them to make a whole new spell progression so they could be casters at level 1.
Umm, what?
That seems like the exact opposite of what I said. In fact, it is!
Nobody is asking for full BAB/full casting. I'm not even suggesting full BAB and 6-level casting a la bard/summoner/inquisitor.
As to your other point:
Its really not any kind of useful feedback as we have known for months it would be 3/4th BAB and bard casting. They simply aren't gonna start over.
Most likely true.
|
I would make the point, though, that the 4 level casting starting at 4th level is an unnecessary hamstringing.Hamstringing? Perhaps.
Unnecessary? Maybe, maybe not; it may be necessary to keep consistency with the established class structure of full-fighter/part-casters that the game has set as a precedent.
Hey, it beats 1st/2nd Ed when paladins didn't get spells until they were 9th level! :)
I would say that, if you were going to put off actual casting until 4th level, you would presumably build in some type of spell-like/supernatural ability, something like the various wizard school 1st level powers, that the magus would be able to do 3+Int times per day, so that even at 1st level he would have some variety of magical schtick prior to getting his actual spells later.
Actually, the thought occurred to me that one notion that would even emulate what exists with an existing hybridized class (the inquisitor, which gets the domain powers of 1 domain), would be that a 4-level caster magus would get the school powers (but no other features, like extra spells, etc.) of 1 wizard school.
It's a notion.
With the large number of evocation spells on the list, Intense Spells form the evoker list makes a lot of sense to me as an arcana.
Jason I never said you wanted full casting. But every time the full BAB is brought up folks want spells at level 1, under a half caster level 4 be as soon as you would see them. So what folks always end up doing is changing the spell progression to gain some spells at level 1. Which is not a half caster.
Folks wanting full BAB just can not agree on how the casting should work. If your a fighter/Mage ya should gain spells at level 1. But you can not do so as a half caster.
|
|
Its not both, its not feedback on this class. Your demanding this class be dropped and a whole new class be created. That simply is not useful feedback. At this point if they are not gonna change the name, they are not gonna start allover again either.
Yes, it is. It may not be feedback they want, it may not be feedback they will pay any mind to. But it is feedback. I don't know if they will start over. But this class as it is provides only rules bloat, no fundamental new role filled - I mean seriously, a 4th arcane 3/4 bab 6 level casting class? Fourth?!?
The reason the magus' action economy ability is so frustrating to playtest (as I'm sure it was frustrating to design) is it's screwing around with basic mechanics at a low level of the game...I think it's absolutely the wrong path to go down. School power type abilities with minimal casting will not be especially terrible to create, and the road map is already pretty clear from existing classes.
@Seeker: Actually, It seems that quite a few of those advocating Ranger progression ARE content with the fact that there is no `real` spell slots until Level 4, assuming that Special Abilities are available from level one (like Wizard School Powers for one) to give an undeniably `magic` feel from Level 1.
---------------------------------------------------------
And that Wizard School idea certainly can apply just as well to the Bard Progression Magus...
No matter how the progression turns out, it just feels RIGHT that the Magus would be able to specialize just as Wizards do, and the School Abilies (including Hand of Apprentice) seem like they could be well used by Magii (??).
Even though I DO think it`s decided,
I don`t really see the decision `Bard Progression or Ranger Progression` as such an in-depth issue that it CAN`T be revisited at this stage. Certainly the way the class has been promoted `Arcane Fighter` would apply just as much to an Arcane Paladin (Divine Fighter)/Ranger (Nature Fighter), so I don`t think suggesting Half Casting progression is `fundamentally changing the class`. The remaining Class Abilties mostly re: Action synergy could just as easily be applied to a Half Caster progression.
Anyhow, I think Half Casting is a great idea here, and needn`t be dismissed without considering it on it`s merits, but I think people have already made good arguments for it, and don`t need to argue it ad-infinitum as Jason can certainly read the points already made.
But this class as it is provides only rules bloat, no fundamental new role filled - I mean seriously, a 4th arcane 3/4 bab 6 level casting class? Fourth?!?
Exactly. Look at the existing Classes, and what role is un-fulfilled? The Arcane analog to Paladins/Rangers.
The reason the magus' action economy ability is so frustrating to playtest (as I'm sure it was frustrating to design) is it's screwing around with basic mechanics at a low level of the game...I think it's absolutely the wrong path to go down.
I agree, and think that within the 3/4 Caster frame-work, going with something more closely modelled on the Inquisitor would just work alot better... taking out the mini-Smite abilities and focusing on more generally usable buff/attack special effects.
Jason I never said you wanted full casting. But every time the full BAB is brought up folks want spells at level 1, under a half caster level 4 be as soon as you would see them. So what folks always end up doing is changing the spell progression to gain some spells at level 1. Which is not a half caster.
A fully ridiculous assertion. On what grounds would it not be a half caster?
Jason I never said you wanted full casting. But every time the full BAB is brought up folks want spells at level 1, under a half caster level 4 be as soon as you would see them. So what folks always end up doing is changing the spell progression to gain some spells at level 1. Which is not a half caster.A fully ridiculous assertion. On what grounds would it not be a half caster?
On the grounds that if ya do not use the very same progression of a half caster your not a half caster. Gaining even oth level spells at level one is a whole new spell progression. It becomes a "Kinda, sorta, almost like a half caster progression"
The box. Think outside of it.
I don't know why everyone seems to think that the classes we have seen so far are the only frames with which to build classes. I know that Pathfinder was supposedly trying to stick to some sort of formula for building classes that was supposed to bring "balance" to the game, but let's face it, the balance is laughable.
Untether your brains from the Full-BAB classes get A, 3/4 BAB classes get B, and 1/2 BAB classes get C mindset, please.