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"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?
So mostly "That's not how we did it in my day!" syndrome.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Jason I never said you wanted full casting.
You did say "ya guys..." would be asking for it; since I was one of those guys talking about wanting a full BAB arc-ranger, I was included in that group.
In any case, as Richard Fish would say, "Bygones. Moving on... "
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.
Sure you can, in any of two simple ways, one already posted:
1. Allow the magus to choose a wizard school. This grants an arcane SLA (generally a combat one) starting at 1st level.
2. Allow the magus to select a certain number of Sor/Wiz cantrips to use as SLAs starting at level 1-3 (I would disagree with the premise that this fundamentally alters their spell progression, but YMMV).
Now, neither is big magic mojo, for sure. HOWEVER, either of them (or both, really) gives the magus half-caster the FEELING of being a "fighting guy who does arcane magic stuff" right out of the box at 1st level.
And then he gets actual 1st level spells starting at 4th level.
It's not about getting 1st level spells at 1st level. It's about creating a class that feels like a magic dude and a fighter dude at the same time from the word go.
(BTW, you could also add a third option, to create some unique-to-the-class SLA or supernatural ability that they would gain somewhere in the 1st-3rd level zone, but I'm trying to minimize the amount of actual changed work that would be necessary. Either the wizard school SLA idea or a cantrip would/could/should be usable with the Spell Combat/Spellstrike abilities that the magus already gets.)
The -4 attack penalty on the melee attack when using Spell Combat(ex) feels too heavy considering that BAB is already medium. Something akin to TWF (-2/-2) feels right.
I have to disagree. Making a full-round attack + casting a spell is MUCH stronger than TWF. The spell combat'ing magus doesn't have to cast a touch spell, he can cast ANY spell. And if you build a character well, concentration checks are very easy. In essence, the full-round attack is icing on the cake, not the main attraction.
If we let the cleric make a full-round attack AND cast a spell in the same round, do you think that it would be on par with a TWF ranger's full-attack? (hint: the cleric's turn is already better, and he can't make FRA's while casting.)
Also, to those of you who claim that the AC buff from touch to normal makes Spellstrike (Su) unappealing, don't forget that this caster has a medium BAB, as opposed to the wizard / sorcerer low BAB, so you're already at an advantage. Plus you're striking with a magic weapon and getting potential bonuses from weapon focus, so your chance to hit becomes higher than it would have been with a touch attack against a number of creatures. And if this class is anything like the duskblade, it's not about accuracy. It's about critting a touch spell on a roll of 15 with a keen scimitar and exploding all over a creature's face (spells with an attack roll can crit).
I'm in the "arcane ranger" camp, but I'm seeing some problems with it.
Jason, I really like the concept behind giving the Magus a Wizard-style school specialization. However, the way those school bonuses are written now, that makes for an extremely appealing "one level dip." I would see many Fighters take Transmuter, for example. Or any class taking Diviner. (Especially if you can use Spell Combat to combo True Strike with an attack from level 1, like there is in the current Magus. That becomes "too good" not to dip once you get up to 5th level or so. (ie 5th level in some other class.))
It is already the case that the 1:1 BAB classes are the easiest to multiclass back and forth. We need to be careful to not make the PF Magus the 3.0 Ranger.
sigh, I am gonna disagree with you and leave it at that. In any event its kinda wasted space as at this point they are not gonna start over. And no matter what ya say or how ya try and spin it. That is starting over from the ground up.
This is playtest feedback, not redo the whole class and start over feedback. Jason often changes things and how they work, but if they wont change a name what makes you think they are gonna throw out the whole class and start over?
They simply are not gonna start over and that is what your asking them to do.
I'm in the "arcane ranger" camp, but I'm seeing some problems with it.
I would indeed like an arcane ranger archetype that changed out the spells, kinda like the spell less ranger. If all it changes is the spell list it could stack with all other archetypes. That could be very interesting.
I'm in the, I wish it was a full BAB arcane ranger or paladin equivalent also. I see the Paladin as the Divine Holy Warrior, the ranger fills the other side of the divine as a nature warrior, it would be nice to have the Arcane warrior. That being said I doubt it's going to happen but it doesn't hurt to voice your opinion.
As the magus stands now with casting up to level 6, medium BAB is probably right, but some tweaking to his 2 big abilities are in order. I want to say I think spell combat is cool and don't really want to see it go away. I've heard suggestions to remove that ability.
Full BAB arcane ranger type? With spells starting at 4th?
yeah...that's called a multi-class Fighter/Wizard.
I can't believe I'm going to say this but... the Duskblade mechanics for delivering touch spells were better. [Man that hurt so bad!]
Unless you can hit and touch in the same round, round after round, I think we have a problem.
Other than the basic delivery method being clunky I think all the other parts are well constructed and have a good feel to them, at least after reading as I can't comment from a playtest POV.
Nope, definitely not in the "4 spell levels" camp.
If I had to choose between 'Full BAB + 4 spell levels starting at 4th level' and '3/4 BAB + 6 spell levels starting at 1st level' I would go with the latter. I do not want a fighter who after a bit of leveling up gains the ability to buff himself and cast a limited selection of spells, I want a warrior/mage who can blast the enemy before engaging him in melee, even if he is not perfect in both forms of combat or even in one of them. Hell, I do not even want heavy armor for my Magus. :-)
I do not want a fighter who after a bit of leveling up gains the ability to buff himself and cast a limited selection of spells, I want a warrior/mage who can blast the enemy before engaging him in melee, even if he is not perfect in both forms of combat or even in one of them.
Who said anything about removing blast spells? Hell, I mentioned early entry...
why not have a 3/4 BaB and a full 9 levels of arcane casting from a limited spell list - Something akin to "evocation plus tricks"
Because Evokers might not like that so much?
In that vein, why not have a 3/4 BaB and a full 9 levels of arcane casting from a limited spell list - Something akin to "evocation plus tricks", and a reworking of spell combat to make it functional at low levels?
Unless I'm missing something it'd put it somewhere around the cleric power level which isn't terrible.
Are you talking about something essentially like the "Battle Sorcerer" from the 3.5 Miniatures Handbook?
Glad to see some support for the "arcane ranger". I know the chances of that happening right now are minimal, but maybe it will trigger the inception of another base class along this model in Ultimate Combat. One can hope.
There is no need for a new class for an arcsane ranger. Just an arcane archetype for the ranger would work fine.
That might be a tad difficult for a divine class.
|
|
The Magus should not be warrior + magic. The Magus should be a magical warrior.
A Paladin is a divine warrior, not warrior + divine. A Ranger is a nature warrior, not warrior + nature. They feel organic and not duct-taped. The problem is imaginary. Look at the Iron Mage for an excellent example of what a full-BAB magical warrior can feel like.
And such a creature should not have full BAB for reasons of balance.
That is an entirely unfounded conjecture.
sorry but no. A ranger is often a nature warrior but he is not always one. The only thing that makes a Ranger a Divine class is his spell list. The AGP already included an Archetype that took the Divine totally out, having a new one that simply swaps out the spell list is not a hard thing to do.
|
The Magus should not be warrior + magic. The Magus should be a magical warrior.A Paladin is a divine warrior, not warrior + divine. A Ranger is a nature warrior, not warrior + nature. They feel organic and not duct-taped. The problem is imaginary. Look at the Iron Mage for an excellent example of what a full-BAB magical warrior can feel like.
And such a creature should not have full BAB for reasons of balance.That is an entirely unfounded conjecture.
I've never made an unfounded conjecture in my life!
Seriously, though, if Paizo wanted to go the full BAB route + spellcasting starting at 4th level, I wouldn't have much of a problem with it.
But I think the Magus should be more of a blend and have spell-casting from the get-go with a step down in BAB.
Either way would probably work in the long run; it's just a matter of vision.
Full BAB arcane ranger type? With spells starting at 4th?
yeah...that's called a multi-class Fighter/Wizard.
Er, how can you multiclass into wizard and keep a full BaB?
This is a new trick! :)
Yeah, maybe not, but the flip side is a character with a caster level that's several levels behind. No thanks to that either.
Someone else mentioned it a few posts up...if you want something like a Ranger with arcane spells instead of the divine, maybe an archetype would better suit.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I'm in the "arcane ranger" camp, but I'm seeing some problems with it.
Jason, I really like the concept behind giving the Magus a Wizard-style school specialization. However, the way those school bonuses are written now, that makes for an extremely appealing "one level dip." I would see many Fighters take Transmuter, for example. Or any class taking Diviner. (Especially if you can use Spell Combat to combo True Strike with an attack from level 1, like there is in the current Magus. That becomes "too good" not to dip once you get up to 5th level or so. (ie 5th level in some other class.))
It is already the case that the 1:1 BAB classes are the easiest to multiclass back and forth. We need to be careful to not make the PF Magus the 3.0 Ranger.
Sure, but I don't think it's really that attractive a dipping option IF you limit the school ability to the 3+Int per day ability, which is what I had in mind when I was thinking about it.
1. Your number of times per day is determined by your INT. If you are dipping into the class, it is likely your INT is not that great, probably 10 or less.
2. The damage or effect is determined by your magus level. If you dip into it for 1 level, you get a perma-gimped ability. It'll be handy every now and then, but very rarely a better choice (or even as good a choice) as any other standard action.
3. By MCing you are delaying all of the advanced class abilities from your regular class by a level, waiving your favored class bonus for that level (unless you're a half-elf), and forgoing the capstone in your primary class.
The complicating factor, of course, are the school powers that are "always on," many of which affect spells you cast (and so are useless until you get actual spells) (extended illusions, summoner's charm, intense spells - except it works on your force missile).
Other powers are always on and are more generally useful across the board (abj, div, trans, and to a lesser extent ench and nec).
Even with those abilities added in, I'm not sure dipping into the class would be a clear win. Even so, if you're worried about it, the magus ability to get school powers could be written like so:
At 4th level, the magus gains the second 1st-level school power for their chosen school (a magus of the universalist school may instead select one of the above-listed 1st-level powers from any other school).
At 8th level, a magus gains the 8th-level power for her chosen school.
The magus uses his class level in place of wizard level for determining the effects of these abilities.
Again, who knows if anything like this would be adopted, but I think it's reasonable for a 4-level caster.
re: dipping 1 or 2 levels in Magus for Wizard School Powers (if they got that)
The Transmuter bonus is completely superfluous if one purchases a +2 Ioun Stone for each Stat.
Anybody can dip in Wizard or Sorceror already, also getting a Familiar (perma-Aid Another) or Bonded Item.
Heck, Familiars of FighterX/Wizard1 dips have WAY more HPs than Full Wizard Familiars...
-------------------------------------------------------------
But why not just Errata the Eldritch Knigh for entry at Level 3, and write some Feats giving it similar abilities to what we see in the playtest Magus?
A Ranger variant with an Arcane Spell List is certainly do-able, but that isn`t why Ranger was mentioned in the first place, it was because the Magus can be seen as EQUIVALENT to a Ranger OR Paladin, but whose abilities are as distinct from those classes are they are from one another. Not that I think a Bard progression Magus is impossible, but it just overlaps way to much with Eldritch Knight and Arcane Duelist Bard... Anything it could bring to the table could simply be Feats for those classes/variants.
Either way, I really hope that Wizard Schools make it as built into the Class, and I could even see the Bonded Item/Familiar be a standard feature (though maybe that doesn`t kick into until 4th level or something) rather than an option. I`d rather feel like there is more of a relation between Magus and Wizard (and Fighter, e.g. for Feats) like there is between Paladin/Cleric and Ranger/Druid...
Actually, re: it`s relation to Fighter, I`d like to see more correlation between the Magus` Casting in Armor and Fighter Armor Training, e.g. starting with only Casting in Light Armor but when a Fighter gains Armor Training 1 / 2, you could gain Casting in Medium / Heavy Armor... And if you multi-class with Fighter and gain Fighter Armor Training it could stack with your Magus Armor Training, i.e. your Casting and Magus Abilities would be weaker but you would fight harder and be able to wear equal/better armor while Casting as a Full Class Magus.
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.
This isn't our job. There are people at Paizo being paid to do this. Whether or not they do so is another story.
This isn't our job. There are people at Paizo being paid to do this.
Whether or not they do so is another story.
Your job is to chatter about correct subjects?
What are correct subjects? Well, let`s chatter about that...
Director of Games
|
Yeah.. this thread just gives me a headache.
I am glad to see that the snarky tone has calmed a bit, but I am not sure that this thread, with its foundation and current correction are really very productive right now.
Couple of points,
Scrapping the class is always an option, but a very unlikely one. The thought of going full BAB with 4-level casting, while interesting, is not really what I want this class to do. The delay in getting spells is pretty antithetical to the concept. I will keep the thought in mind, but right now, I am not going to consider it further.
I am going to leave this open a bit longer, to see if it has any value, but might shut it down if it continues to meander...
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Sorry for the headache. But we do it for love of your game. Seriously.
Scrapping the class is always an option, but a very unlikely one. The thought of going full BAB with 4-level casting, while interesting, is not really what I want this class to do. The delay in getting spells is pretty antithetical to the concept. I will keep the thought in mind, but right now, I am not going to consider it further.
emphasis mine
Is it possible to have two base classes in Ultimate Magic? I think both niches are valuable.
Or did I just meander way too much?
|
|
Sorry for the headache. But we do it for love of your game. Seriously.
Scrapping the class is always an option, but a very unlikely one. The thought of going full BAB with 4-level casting, while interesting, is not really what I want this class to do. The delay in getting spells is pretty antithetical to the concept. I will keep the thought in mind, but right now, I am not going to consider it further.emphasis mine
Is it possible to have two base classes in Ultimate Magic? I think both niches are valuable.
Or did I just meander way too much?
You might've just found the Holy Grail.
Mr. Bulmahn, is it possible to have 2 classes?
Why not give it the Monk thing where they get full BAb while doing their stick?
So while using Spell combat they have full BAB (same way Monks have full BAB when flurrying).
This adds a few bonuses to hit that make it somewhat decent as a warrior type (although since Spell combat has a penalty it isn't a huge benefit).
|
Sorry for the headache. But we do it for love of your game. Seriously.
Scrapping the class is always an option, but a very unlikely one. The thought of going full BAB with 4-level casting, while interesting, is not really what I want this class to do. The delay in getting spells is pretty antithetical to the concept. I will keep the thought in mind, but right now, I am not going to consider it further.emphasis mine
Is it possible to have two base classes in Ultimate Magic? I think both niches are valuable.
Or did I just meander way too much?
You might've just found the Holy Grail.
Mr. Bulmahn, is it possible to have 2 classes?
I bet there is another class. It's not just a gish. Something different like warlock was different.
This isn't our job. There are people at Paizo being paid to do this. Whether or not they do so is another story.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.
Who says the request didn't include the people at Paizo?
|
|
[
Mr. Bulmahn, is it possible to have 2 classes?
My first reaction to this was something like, give it up already.
But then I thought about it, and why not a prepared caster and a spontaneous caster?
Full BAB class becomes a prepared caster at 4th level, gets Spell Combat at 5th.
Spontaneous caster has a step down in BAB but gets spells from the start. He also gets something like the elemental d6 damage progression I suggested in the Spellstrike thread.
Just a suggestion :)
I feel like it would be mucking the game up to have a 4-Spell Level Arcane Fighter alongside the 6-level Magus. An Arcane variant Ranger is still a Ranger, and would have unique abilities still `Ranger like` and connected to Nature if not `Nature Magic` (I`d welcome that variant in addition to either 4/6-Spell Level Magus as well as Eldritch Knight), but I just can`t see much flavor difference between the `Arcane Combat` 4-Spell Level class I`m wanting and a 6-Spell Level Magus. Not enough that you would choose one or the other based off of FLAVOR, rather than mechanics... Which seems to be Paizo`s standard for these things.
Anyhow, it seems like people can`t avoid hyperbolizing (`scrapping the class` though most pro-Half Casters seem happy retaining most class features + flavor/role) and ultimately it`s not clear to me HOW this discussion CAN proceed productively. I mean, if Jason said `I`m swayed by X arguments of pro-Half Casters, but not so much by Y arguments... if if I was convinced that A and B outweighed Y and Z, and that problems with Q and T could be dealt with simply, I might lean towards a change in Casting Progression but ideally would want to decide this within a week.´ that gives a frame-work for productive debate... potentially ;-)
As of now, both `sìdes` seem to agree that it`s unlikely to change, so if nobody BELIEVES it`s possible I don`t see how the discussion CAN be productive.
I guess I WOULD like to know Jason`s opinion on the as yet unfulfilled Full BAB/Half Arcane Caster role, equivalent to Rangers and Paladins (without BEING a Ranger or Paladin). What do you think of this role, which seems an obvious unfilled slot when looking at Core Classes? How does it compare with where you`re going with the Bard progression Magus - what would be the flavor difference? What IS the flavor difference between Magus and Eldritch Knight (whose entry requirements could be lowered via Errata like Paladin Smite was altered)? I feel like if we knew what your / Paizo`s view of such things was, that it would provide a basis for what could be a constructive discussion. Or else... just lock the thread?
I considered several minutes ago suggesting a second Magus (two versions of the same class with slightly different focuses). I quickly talked myself out of it because even with "quick changes" (which I am certain are not quick at all because spells will be handpicked) that there are still limitations on the size of the book and the time it will take to get two classes playtested fully.
I don't know much about publishing, but I'm sure that just adding one page devoted to the variation of this class would rack up costs in printing over the quantities that it will be ordered. And I'm sure there are budgets allotted for each book, etc etc.
We should all be doing our best to give our objective assessment on the playtest information given to us, not complaining that it isn't what we want. What we want is for the class to be balanced and playable, and regardless of how it ends up I'm sure the folks at Paizo will get it where it needs to be based on our input (helpful or otherwise) and we'll have a blast using it in our games.
For the record I like the 3/4 BAB 6 level casting. I made a 1st level Magus character that I will be playing this Sunday. I would like to see this thread still open on Monday so I can give the results.
My first impression is that the abilities are cool, but they really should be useful the moment you get them. I also really like the whole flavor of the Magus two-weapon fighting with a sword in one hand and a spell in the other, but again the abilities don't seem to encourage this, at least not right away.
With spellstrike you cast a spell with one hand, but you don't deliver it with that hand, you deliver it with your sword, so you are really not two-weapon fighting. Spell combat is the ability that gives the two-weapon fighting flavor, but I think the negatives are so large at the beginning that no one will actually use it unless they are really desperate. At later levels when you can reliably throw a fireball with one hand and attack with the other, that is awesome! But it doesn't come until much later.
Here is the character I made. I didn't include his gear, but I assumed money equal to a Fighter.
Human Magus 1
NG Medium Humanoid (Human)
Init: +1
Senses: Perception +1
DEFENSE
AC: 15 (+4 armor +1 Dex)
Touch: 11
Flat-footed: 14
HP: 11 (1d8+3)
Fort: +4
Ref: +1
Will: +2
Defensive Abilities:
OFFENSE
Speed: 30 ft.
Melee:
Longsword +3 (1d8+3/19-20)
Dagger +3 (1d4+3/19-20)
Ranged:
Dagger +1 (1d4+3/19-20)
Spells Prepared (CL 1st)
Concentration: +4 (+8 casting defensively)
1st – Color Spray(DC 14), Shocking Grasp(1d6)
0 – Dancing Lights, Detect Magic, Prestidigitation
STATISTICS
Str: 16 +3 (16 base)
Dex: 12 +1 (12 base)
Con: 14 +2 (14 base)
Int: 16 +3 (14 base +2 racial)
Wis: 10 +0 (10 base)
Cha: 8 -1 (8 base)
BAB: +0; CMB: +3; CMD: 14
Feats: Arcane Strike, Combat Casting
Skills: Acrobatics +2, Knowledge (arcana) +7, Knowledge (planes) +7, Perception +1, Ride +5, Spellcraft +7
Languages: Common, Celestial, Draconic, Elven
SQ: Spellstrike
Spells Known
1st – Color Spray, Enlarge Person, Obscuring Mist, Shield, Shocking Grasp, True Strike
0 – All Magus Cantrips
This isn't our job. There are people at Paizo being paid to do this.
Whether or not they do so is another story.Your job is to chatter about correct subjects?
What are correct subjects? Well, let`s chatter about that...
This post confuses me. He was saying that we need to think outside the box in terms of developing this class. I'm saying its not our job to develop the class but to playtest it and give feedback. If this is not what we are supposed to do, then what are we supposed to do?
Who says the request didn't include the people at Paizo?This isn't our job. There are people at Paizo being paid to do this. Whether or not they do so is another story.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.
Read above post.
Okay, just had a thought.
How about if Spellstrike is similar to Cleave? You declare you are making a Spellstrike which takes a standard action. You get -2 to your AC and make a standard attack with your melee weapon. If you hit with your weapon you can immediately cast a touch spell at either the same target or a different target as a swift action. Casting this spell requires you make a Concentration check as if casting on the defensive with a -2 penalty.
With this ability you immediately get the feeling of fighting with one hand and casting with the other.
Edit: Just realized I was in the wrong thread! Oops! I am looking for the Magus Playtest thread.
I feel like it would be mucking the game up to have a 4-Spell Level Arcane Fighter alongside the 6-level Magus. An Arcane variant Ranger is still a Ranger, and would have unique abilities still `Ranger like` and connected to Nature if not `Nature Magic` (I`d welcome that variant in addition to either 4/6-Spell Level Magus as well as Eldritch Knight), but I just can`t see much flavor difference between the `Arcane Combat` 4-Spell Level class I`m wanting and a 6-Spell Level Magus. Not enough that you would choose one or the other based off of FLAVOR, rather than mechanics... Which seems to be Paizo`s standard for these things.
Briliant, +1 to arcane ranger archetype/sub-class. Replace spell list and favored enemy with something more arcane. Pick up an arcane bond/familiar like a Wizard instate of companion (maybe boosted improved familiar). Make sure it can play nice with the APG alternate weapon styles. Maybe even add new ranger weapon style that let's both Divine/Nature and Arcane use heavy armor in some way.
Would that not satisfy the nich of an Arcane Warrior?
|
Scrapping the class is always an option, but a very unlikely one. The thought of going full BAB with 4-level casting, while interesting, is not really what I want this class to do. The delay in getting spells is pretty antithetical to the concept. I will keep the thought in mind, but right now, I am not going to consider it further.
There are a couple options. Favored enemy, Smite and Rage all begin at first level. Can a similar power, arcane in flavor, be enough at first level for an arcane warrior? Are the first level school powers enough, coupled with the ability to have full use of weapons as paladins, rangers and barbarians have? How about granting only access to cantrips until 4th level - at will cantrips given their "extended apprenticeship"? Arcane abilities can be as simple technically being a spellcaster to have access to arcane strike, having cantrips, having school abilities, or having other special abilities that grant a small shield bonus or movement abilities or elemental damage that the other martial classes don't have.
|
|
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>
Hmmm... Jason may actually have a point there. It's true that there's no full BAB/4 level caster in PF RPG, and that way magus would stand out from bard archetypes and fighter/wizards.
Hmmm... Jason may actually have a point there. It's true that there's no full BAB/4 level caster in PF RPG, and that way magus would stand out from bard archetypes and fighter/wizards.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>
the only problem is such a class wouldn't work as a blaster which is what the Magus spell lists suggest it should be.
a full BAB caster like a paladin or ranger has a CL of -3 which means if they had blast spells thier DC would be waay too low to ever work as offensive spells.
in a nut shell such a Magus would only use whatever spells could buff themselves or that don't give saves or allow SR.
Such a Magus for example at 10th Level
would be able to cast 1 fireball of 7d6 with a DC of maybe 16 which means almost every monster would make its save resulting in a 12dmg attack o.O
and area control spell would fail with similarly low DC's making them completely ineffectual.
...Hm, assuming the class needs to be a blaster (that`s not what I first thought when I heard of the class... ), I think there`s quite a few other options...
For one, they don`t have to use the spells for blasting, they could have (Su) attacks...
If they do use spells there`s many many ways to make them punch harder: Caster Level boosts for one (CL=Level?), free Metamagic (either for effects or free Heighten to boost DCs), or even `Anti Evasion` for their Spell Effects which reduces the benefit of a Passed Save or forces 2 Saves, etc... Assuming early entry to thematic spells, they are certainly going to have a better choice of spells which don`t require Saves or still work well when the save is passed.
the only problem is such a class wouldn't work as a blaster which is what the Magus spell lists suggest it should be.a full BAB caster like a paladin or ranger has a CL of -3 which means if they had blast spells thier DC would be waay too low to ever work as offensive spells.
in a nut shell such a Magus would only use whatever spells could buff themselves or that don't give saves or allow SR.
Um, that is easy to fix. Give them Class level boost to DC. Maybe +1 and + per 3 Magus class levels.
So at level 20 (assuming no Prc) a 1st level spell has DC 10 + 7 class + 5 (int 20)= 22. This helps with the MAD.Since they (1/2 casting type Magus) are a limited spells/day/spell level this boost wouldn't make them overpowered.
They could totally be a blaster.
Just give them cantrips at level 1 (meaning must wait till 4th to get 1st levels).
...Hm, assuming the class needs to be a blaster (that`s not what I first thought when I heard of the class... ), I think there`s quite a few other options...
For one, they don`t have to use the spells for blasting, they could have (Su) attacks...
then your now talking about a whole different class concept that no longer uses spellbooks and INT based casting.
I mean what your suggesting could quite easily be a Witch varient called the Magus
with HexStrike and Hex Combat
can Hex her weapon and strike foe's with it
can Hex and opponent and attack them 1handed as well
always with an eye towards the class focus: melee combat augmented by arcane spell casting.
On the other hand, if the class focus is "arcane spellcaster augmented by melee combat capability", then 3/4 BAB actually fits the bill fairly well.
I think a lot of people (myself included) expected a Duskblade-like class, and were thus disappointed by this class. Having thought about it a bit more, if the intent of the class is as I mentioned above, then the concept actually works for me.
I think the disconnect is a few folks are wanting something the class was never meant to be. That being a melee fighter with a little bit of magic to back him up. That was never the intent of the class.
The ultimate magic books says "The Magus, a brand-new 20-level base class that mixes wizardry with martial skill" which is what ya got here, it is not a martial class with a little magic thrown in.
Well, the Duskblade had full BAB, and it wasn't overpowered at all compared to the other classes. They had a severely limited spell selection, though: weapon buffs, touch spells, small cone spells, ray spells, and very few utility and movement spells. Though, unlike the Magus, it can spontaneously cast spells. The Magus has the drawback of needing to prepare his spells.
Does the Magus have a wider spell selection? Actually, it's being given it's own spell list (I detest unique spell lists, but whatever).
Personally, we have the Eldritch Knight PrC, and that's only losing a couple of BAB and having access to ALL Wizard spells. Whereas the Magus has a specific set of spells.
How about giving the Magus the Wizard spell list up to 6th level and keeping the medium BAB, that should make things even.