What is the role of the Magus?
Is it supposed to be a front-line combatant, wading into melee using magic to augment its melee effectiveness?
Is it supposed to be a striker, using magic to make occasional high-damage attacks, but generally remaining mobile and elusive?
Is it supposed to be a primary spellcaster with the ability to occasionally go into melee?
Is it supposed to be a balance between secondary spellcaster and secondary melee combatant?
Is it supposed to be a bulwark of defense, acting as a barrier between the front line combatants and rear line artilery?
In a standard 4-person party, is the Magus supposed to fill the role of the cleric, fighter, rogue, or wizard?
Or is the Magus designed to fill niches created in non-standard parties?
Should the Magus be compared to the +1 1d10 type-classes (barbarian, fighter, paladin, ranger, cavalier) or the +3/4 1d8 type-classes (bard, cleric, druid, monk, rogue, alchemist, inquisitor, oracle, summoner)?
Should the spellcasting capacity of the Magus be compared to other spellcasters, or to rage powers and rogue talents of other melee combatants?
Does it matter? People asked the same questions about the Alchemist and Inquisitor, but I see them getting lots of play despite the question never being answered. You play with what you get as allies, not what is ideal, and the standard 4 man party isn't necessarily ideal anyway.
my guess is that he starts as a striker and continiuly turns towards more of a front-line combatant since he gets big armor.
Other possibility is that he is, and stays a melle trickster. He doesn't deal a lot of damage, he can't tank an army but he can mess a bit with everyone. Using clever tactics and manoeuvers he is a bit like a bard who tries to go melee.
Out of combat he seems to be like a ranger, minimal spellcasting, but still better than fighter.
If you have to name it, I think he exists between the fighter and the rogue with a dash of bard thrown in.
The thing he is quite good at is hitting people with shocking grasps stabs. He certainly can´t replace the wizard, can´t heal, can´t remove most traps, the AC is not too bad.
What is the role of the Magus?
Is it supposed to be a front-line combatant, wading into melee using magic to augment its melee effectiveness?
Is it supposed to be a striker, using magic to make occasional high-damage attacks, but generally remaining mobile and elusive?
Is it supposed to be a primary spellcaster with the ability to occasionally go into melee?
Is it supposed to be a balance between secondary spellcaster and secondary melee combatant?
Is it supposed to be a bulwark of defense, acting as a barrier between the front line combatants and rear line artilery?
In a standard 4-person party, is the Magus supposed to fill the role of the cleric, fighter, rogue, or wizard?
Or is the Magus designed to fill niches created in non-standard parties?
Should the Magus be compared to the +1 1d10 type-classes (barbarian, fighter, paladin, ranger, cavalier) or the +3/4 1d8 type-classes (bard, cleric, druid, monk, rogue, alchemist, inquisitor, oracle, summoner)?
Should the spellcasting capacity of the Magus be compared to other spellcasters, or to rage powers and rogue talents of other melee combatants?
In a standard 4 person party the magus is the 5th guy... or he can fill multiple party roles at the same time its a great class just like inquisitor and alchemist. it allows you to somewhat still fill a character role, while assisting in other places. its just like the bard.
What is the role of the Magus?
Is it supposed to be a front-line combatant, wading into melee using magic to augment its melee effectiveness?
I think it is possible to build a magus that does this.
Is it supposed to be a striker, using magic to make occasional high-damage attacks, but generally remaining mobile and elusive?
I believe it is possible to make a build that does this.
Is it supposed to be a primary spellcaster with the ability to occasionally go into melee?
I don't think the magus can fully replace a wizard or sorcerer. They don't have the spell levels or spell list to do this.
Is it supposed to be a balance between secondary spellcaster and secondary melee combatant?
You can run it this way.
Is it supposed to be a bulwark of defense, acting as a barrier between the front line combatants and rear line artilery?
You could run it this way too.
In a standard 4-person party, is the Magus supposed to fill the role of the cleric, fighter, rogue, or wizard?
The magus could fill the same role as a fighter or rogue depending on how you build it.
Or is the Magus designed to fill niches created in non-standard parties?
The magus is very good at this. If you had a paladin(as fighter/healer), a bard(as a skill monkey/scout/healer) and sorcerer(as heavy arcane support/diplomacy) party, the magus would actually fit in very well.
Should the Magus be compared to the +1 1d10 type-classes (barbarian, fighter, paladin, ranger, cavalier) or the +3/4 1d8 type-classes (bard, cleric, druid, monk, rogue, alchemist, inquisitor, oracle, summoner)?Should the spellcasting capacity of the Magus be compared to other spellcasters, or to rage powers and rogue talents of other melee combatants?
All of thee above.
I compare it to a battle cleric and find I like it a little better. A fully buffed cleric is a beast in melee combat, but the magus has more options when you are caught in a fight with your buffs down.
I find it to be superior to a bard in 1 on 1 combat, but that comes at the loss of group buffs.
The magus will probably out damage a ranger when the ranger is fighting non-favored enemies and paladins when fighting non-evil creatures.
The magus can probably put up damage numbers to compete with a fighter, but the magus can't sustain that damage like a fighter can. The fighter will be lacking in tricks compared to the Magus.
The magus can't compete with a wizard on spell casting(lower level spells, less selection), but the magus isn't entirely reliant on their spells. A wizard who is out of spells is completely useless in a fight, the magus isn't.
In a standard 4 person party the magus is the 5th guy... or he can fill multiple party roles at the same time its a great class just like inquisitor and alchemist. it allows you to somewhat still fill a character role, while assisting in other places. its just like the bard.What is the role of the Magus?
Is it supposed to be a front-line combatant, wading into melee using magic to augment its melee effectiveness?
Is it supposed to be a striker, using magic to make occasional high-damage attacks, but generally remaining mobile and elusive?
Is it supposed to be a primary spellcaster with the ability to occasionally go into melee?
Is it supposed to be a balance between secondary spellcaster and secondary melee combatant?
Is it supposed to be a bulwark of defense, acting as a barrier between the front line combatants and rear line artilery?
In a standard 4-person party, is the Magus supposed to fill the role of the cleric, fighter, rogue, or wizard?
Or is the Magus designed to fill niches created in non-standard parties?
Should the Magus be compared to the +1 1d10 type-classes (barbarian, fighter, paladin, ranger, cavalier) or the +3/4 1d8 type-classes (bard, cleric, druid, monk, rogue, alchemist, inquisitor, oracle, summoner)?
Should the spellcasting capacity of the Magus be compared to other spellcasters, or to rage powers and rogue talents of other melee combatants?
Incidentally, when I get a chance to run the playtest I am planning (and the manpower of other players so I'm not just fighting against myself), I plan to test exactly this question by having a 5 man team of Fighter, Cleric, Rogue, Wizard, Bard and substituting the Magus into the Fighter, Wizard, and Bard slots successively and seeing how the party fares each time.
Incidentally, when I get a chance to run the playtest I am planning (and the manpower of other players so I'm not just fighting against myself), I plan to test exactly this question by having a 5 man team of Fighter, Cleric, Rogue, Wizard, Bard and substituting the Magus into the Fighter, Wizard, and Bard slots successively and seeing how the party fares each time.
You might want to try him as a light striker/flanker(IE rogue) as well.
|
What is the role of the Magus?
This is the key question. I think the role of the Magus should be martial focus. The Magus should be a possible fighter/barbarian/paladin/ranger stand in - not even REMOTELY a wizard/sorceror/bard stand in.
That is the hole I want filled.
The magus in the playtest...isn't this. Isn't something I want at all, as a matter of fact. I prefer an arcane duelist/fighter multiclass to the current magus, hands down.
You might want to try him as a light striker/flanker(IE rogue) as well.
Incidentally, when I get a chance to run the playtest I am planning (and the manpower of other players so I'm not just fighting against myself), I plan to test exactly this question by having a 5 man team of Fighter, Cleric, Rogue, Wizard, Bard and substituting the Magus into the Fighter, Wizard, and Bard slots successively and seeing how the party fares each time.
I had considered that, but I know a priori that the modules I plan on running are not heavy on the necessity of skills for success (for instance not many traps), so since the Magus is a good sub for a Rogue in combat but is pretty weak comparatively in useful skills, the Magus might have come out looking like a better Rogue replacement in these particular scenarios than it is in general. Does that make sense?
I do intend to have the Magus flank, incidentally, and with the Rogue at that--the Magus build I'm using (from my thread on the matter) has the Outflank feat and so will the Rogue, so there will be some juicy flanking bonuses going around.
You might want to try him as a light striker/flanker(IE rogue) as well.
Incidentally, when I get a chance to run the playtest I am planning (and the manpower of other players so I'm not just fighting against myself), I plan to test exactly this question by having a 5 man team of Fighter, Cleric, Rogue, Wizard, Bard and substituting the Magus into the Fighter, Wizard, and Bard slots successively and seeing how the party fares each time.
I had considered that, but I know a priori that the modules I plan on running are not heavy on the necessity of skills for success (for instance not many traps), so since the Magus is a good sub for a Rogue in combat but is pretty weak comparatively in useful skills, the Magus might have come out looking like a better Rogue replacement in these particular scenarios than it is in general. Does that make sense?
I do intend to have the Magus flank, incidentally, and with the Rogue at that--the Magus build I'm using (from my thread on the matter) has the Outflank feat and so will the Rogue, so there will be some juicy flanking bonuses going around.
If you have a bard skill monkey, then the only thing you are missing is trapfinding. You can get by without trapfinding if you have some extra healing.
The thing that makes me really sad is the lack of vampiric touch on their spell list. With that, they could mimic a paladin's ability to heal themselves at higher levels.
If you have a bard skill monkey, then the only thing you are missing is trapfinding. You can get by without trapfinding if you have some extra healing.You might want to try him as a light striker/flanker(IE rogue) as well.
Incidentally, when I get a chance to run the playtest I am planning (and the manpower of other players so I'm not just fighting against myself), I plan to test exactly this question by having a 5 man team of Fighter, Cleric, Rogue, Wizard, Bard and substituting the Magus into the Fighter, Wizard, and Bard slots successively and seeing how the party fares each time.
I had considered that, but I know a priori that the modules I plan on running are not heavy on the necessity of skills for success (for instance not many traps), so since the Magus is a good sub for a Rogue in combat but is pretty weak comparatively in useful skills, the Magus might have come out looking like a better Rogue replacement in these particular scenarios than it is in general. Does that make sense?
I do intend to have the Magus flank, incidentally, and with the Rogue at that--the Magus build I'm using (from my thread on the matter) has the Outflank feat and so will the Rogue, so there will be some juicy flanking bonuses going around.
Good point! I think I'll try it if I have the time for that many runs. The only issue is the slight inelegancy of needing to add Outflank for the Fighter in that one situation or else not get the use of it for the Magus (I was otherwise going to leave the other 5 characters unchanged regardless of who was missing).
Another thing is the thread on the whip magus.
A magus focuses on using whips MIGHT be able to mimic some degree of battle field control. At level 1 a whip magus can true strike, then trip every other round, +21 trip checks will put just about any CR5 of less creature on the ground. This would be a great damage multiplier for you melee classes(+4 to hit and AoO if they try to get up).
I was wondering this same thing myself. While I'm not a big fan of 4e, I'm not a big detractor either, and I think the best thing they've done is to define the roles and make at least some attempt to make sure a particular class fit some role.
I can see the Alchemist being a viable healer/buffer (ie leader) if you take the Infusion discovery, and they can also manage some battlefield control with bomb discoveries.
The Inquisitor can do some healing and the judgments allow for some quick buffs/excellent damage. I think they could be a viable replacement for the striker or the leader.
Not sure where the Magus falls. I can only picture them in the same role as Bard, which IMO has always been a "fifth man" class. Maybe when they get up to higher levels they could do well as a defender, given the heavy armor, shield spell, and other defensive buffs available.
Yeah, I think it is probably best to come up with what role the Magus will take in the party, and then design its class features to fit that role.
What I'd like is an arcane equivalent to the paladin. But it doesn't look like that's going to happen.