Nice idea instead of ray of cold a touch of cold maybe call it shiver, a touch attack which does 1d3 points of cold damage.
Nice idea instead of ray of cold a touch of cold maybe call it shiver, a touch attack which does 1d3 points of cold damage.
+1
If I had the extra 4000g, it'd be a +2.
Actually I consider 0-level spells good spam on Combat Spell as well at lower levels. Flash and Daze have caught my eye where before they wouldn't have. There is something about the Magus action economy and cantrips that seem interesting and worth investigating.
So yes please to more 0 level spells on the Magus list, Touch or not.
Thanks for posting this playtest!
One thing that strikes me is the need for a 0-level touch attack spell that allows a Magus to "spam" their spellstrike all day, every day for a modest effect.
Just as wizards, sorcerers and the like have gotten buffed a bit so that they can keep doing magical effects throughout an adventuring day, it would be great to see a spell that would make spellstrike be essentially an always-on effect, even if the effect isn't that potent.
Like the 0th level called Touch of Fatigue rgar is on the wizard spell list but not the Magus's?
Yeah, one wonders why they didn't give them it.
would you really spend 1 round not attacking to add a cantrip to your attack the next round ?
Spellstrike let's you replace the normal touch attach of the spell with a smack from your weapon. You cast a touch spell, make a melée attack, if it hits spell discharges and you do weapon damage. No waisted round. You would have likely just hit him with the weapon anyways, why not add an extra effect to it.
would you really spend 1 round not attacking to add a cantrip to your attack the next round ?Well, it's more to get the "spell combat" class ability up and running all the time. It's probably the case that at first level you won't spend two rounds to do one attack, unless it is the opening attack of the fight, but having a suite of cantrips that let you do various types of elemental damage as touch attacks would help bolster the magical nature of the Magus, along with giving the class the versatility that you'd expect from being arcane.
Unless your going with a Whip like a suggested in another thread for reach 15 , you'd be adjacent to the target your attacking and better off making a touch attack instead of adding the touch spell to your weapon and trying to hit AC.
Nice idea instead of ray of cold a touch of cold maybe call it shiver, a touch attack which does 1d3 points of cold damage.
+1
or simply allow range touch spells too count as touch spells for this ability. thus allowing the 0 level cantrips as well as acid arrow scorching ray and a host of others.
I'm trying to remember if there was ever a Metamagic feat that did that, turn ranged touch to touch. I don't think there was because virtually no one wanted to go that way.
I'm still trying to see a situtation where you want to use spellstrike and spell combat together.
you either
use spell combat
attack once vs AC
cast ray of frost vs touch AC
or
attack once with ray of frost on the damage roll
vs AC
would you not almost always be better off making a ranged touch attack vs touch AC instead of a normal attack vs AC ? so even if you could apply ray of frost to your weapon, why would you bother ?
Spellstrike let's you replace the normal touch attach of the spell with a smack from your weapon. You cast a touch spell, make a melée attack, if it hits spell discharges and you do weapon damage. No waisted round. You would have likely just hit him with the weapon anyways, why not add an extra effect to it.
Except that the line in Spell Strike says: "This ability does not grant the magus a free melee attack—such attacks must be made normally."
So, standard action to cast the spell, then standard action to make an attack. Two rounds (normally) to get this effect.
With Spell Combat, you could cast he spell first, and then use it right away with your normal attack.
However, you could have done a touch attack with the spell and then ALSO attacked... sooo... yeah, loss in benefit there.
Honestly, I'm trying to find the situation where Spell Strike is worth it (when you'd rather have it as a rider on a weapon strike over attacking touch AC).
Possibly when you have a high chance to crit (15-20/x2 with Imp Crit), and a better chance to hit with your weapon somehow (target has high Touch AC, and you have lots of +'s on your weapon attack roll anyways).
Other than that.. I fail to see the "amazingness" of spell strike.
Spellstrike let's you replace the normal touch attach of the spell with a smack from your weapon. You cast a touch spell, make a melée attack, if it hits spell discharges and you do weapon damage. No waisted round. You would have likely just hit him with the weapon anyways, why not add an extra effect to it.Except that the line in Spell Strike says: "This ability does not grant the magus a free melee attack—such attacks must be made normally."
So, standard action to cast the spell, then standard action to make an attack. Two rounds (normally) to get this effect.
With Spell Combat, you could cast he spell first, and then use it right away with your normal attack.
However, you could have done a touch attack with the spell and then ALSO attacked... sooo... yeah, loss in benefit there.Honestly, I'm trying to find the situation where Spell Strike is worth it (when you'd rather have it as a rider on a weapon strike over attacking touch AC).
Possibly when you have a high chance to crit (15-20/x2 with Imp Crit), and a better chance to hit with your weapon somehow (target has high Touch AC, and you have lots of +'s on your weapon attack roll anyways).Other than that.. I fail to see the "amazingness" of spell strike.
I agree
and the only solution I've come up with that it would be better would be when using a whip then you can land touch attacks up to 15 feet away