I have not had a chance to playtest the Magus directly (probably won't have a chance before the short window is up), however I have playtested and experienced a lot with the other "not-quite-full" melee classes: the bard, the inquisitor, the rogue and the monk.
There are a number of things that become apparent when you compare the classes.
1. All of the 3/4 combat classes have some method of boosting their attack/damage without relying on spell slots. The bard has inspire courage, the inquisitor has judgments, the rogue deals wicked damage in the right situation all day long, and the monk counts as full BAB when "doing his thing."
2. All the 3/4 combat classes have class features that remain level appropriate throughout the game. The bard and inquisitor, despite having 6 spell levels, have level appropriate spells. The rogue's skills are always level appropriate, and the monk has all combat maneuvers level appropriate along with special abilities with properly scaling DCs (depending on your MAD build).
3. While many of the classes can have MAD requirements, they aren't critical secondary stats. The bard and inquisitor can ignore DC-based spells to drop lower on their casting stat, and focus more on physical stats. The rogue does well with a high mental stat (depending on skill choices), but only needs a high stat for very specific builds. The monk may be the only one in the same situation as the Magus, although if he does not intend to go gung ho on the abilities and stunning, he can afford not to have a stellar Wisdom score (or instead he can forgo Dex to be a pure Strength/Wisdom brute).
____
I'm not going to just post a list of things to whine about without giving constructive thoughts, so here's how I think things can be addressed:
1. The best idea I've seen so far for bringing up the attack ability is to have Spell Combat similar to the Monk mechanic for flurry of blows. This gives iteratives faster, and has only a minor penalty (-2) that starts to go away (at least compared to his 3/4 BAB).
This means his attacks are still medium for most combat things (AoO, charge, move + attack, etc), but when he's in his element (interweaving attacking and spellcasting) he starts to excel.
2. Something else to consider is that this class is very likely going to be self-buffing to remain competent in combat. Unlike the bard and inquisitor, his buffing is through spells, so he's stuck acting like a fullcaster trying to buff up.
To counteract this, how about a mechanic for picking a spell (and possibly at later levels, a suite of spells), that have a range of personal or creature touched, that can be brought up as a move action and maintained as a free action per round, for a limited number of rounds per day (similar to bardic music). Spells with duration only, of course (no True Strke).
This is over and above the spell slots, and you prepare the spell to bring up this way when you prepare spells normally (along with arcane weapon).
3. Give early access to some spells that are the point of the class (probably blasting and self buffing).
While on this subject, don't require spell slots to fuel abilities. The class already is missing 3 spell levels (15+ spell slots, not counting high casting stat). Burning spell slots is something full spellcasters do because they have more spell slots than they need, and some of those spells are so far behind in level appropriateness, burning the slot for a level appropriate effect is better. The magus has abilities that are all about casting spells while doing things, meaning he needs all the slots he can get.
This is, of course, unless you intend to change him to a 3/4 BAB + 9 spell level class, which I'm getting the feeling won't happen.
4. On the idea of spells, you can possibly give a bonus to DCs and attack rolls on specific spells, such as touch spells and rays, or all evocation spells, etc.
This would shore up the issue of relying on lower level spells and a MAD stat for boosting DCs. Having a +5 to touch spell DCs (for example) would make even low level spells feel like 9th level spells when facing higher level content.
5. Unless the Magus is going to get some kind of limited free buffing ability to his combat, Spell Strike should be changed to grant bonus damage whenever you channel a touch spell through it.
It really should allow the weapon attack at the time you cast the spell (essentially, you cast the spell through the weapon to start, instead of waiting a round to get the attack in), regardless of what you do.
However, if you are burning spell slots to get this effect, and you are getting no bonus to attacking (like the bard, inquisitor and monk can), then he should be getting +1d6/2 levels extra damage on such an attack, similar to the rogue.
No bonus to attack = higher damage in a limited situation... it's worked for quite a while now.
____
I feel the above ideas would help keep the class in line with other medium combat classes, without needing to go into full BAB or full Spellcasting (in other words, keeping with the theme and intent behind the class).
Overall, I love the mechanical ideas presented in the class, but I feel that unless something is given to boost the class.. he's going to feel like second-fiddle to other 3/4 melee classes, and will feel like playing a gimped full caster when it comes to magic (self buffing for rounds before combat, etc).
Good points on the class comparisons, and good ideas too. I especially like the comparison to flurry of blows.
I completely agree with you at level 1.
At level 4, you get arcane weapon, thus giving you a +1 enhancement bonus every 4 levels. This is scales at roughtly the same rate as a bard's inspire courage but is 1 behind, and it can be used to add 1d6 damage instead. I could see moving this up to 1st level being a good fix.
I thought about Arcane Bond, but dismissed it because it doesn't give a mechanic that stacks. Here's what I mean:
You are stuck limited to a specific amount of pluses based on your level. These are pluses that a person can get by simply buying a weapon.
So while the Magus can go and buy a +2 weapon and add some effects to it, the Bard can get a +2 weapon and add another +2-3 attack on top of that with inspire courage.
The inquisitor has his judgment if he needs to land a hit (scaling bonus that stacks with pluses on weapons), and the monk simply has a higher BAB for flurry and combat maneuvers. The Rogue will be doing +4d6 damage per attack (allowed to work with TWF or a two-hander too) by the time the Arcane Bond sees +2 bonuses.
Because Arcane Bond is stuck limited in stacking benefits with an actual weapon, he is going to have a hard time boosting his attack roll with it. And he's not going to get the same amount of damage boost that a Rogue will, to compensate.
You can fix it by changing how Arcane Bond boosts things, but honestly... I think the ability is good enough as is.
I'd rather see Spell Strike turn into something nice, instead of hiding his pluses in an ability that requires "working the system". Sure, it can be done... but having Spell Strike grant boosted damage when you use it would make it feel far more like a signature ability, and would be incredibly thematically appropriate.
I thought about Arcane Bond, but dismissed it because it doesn't give a mechanic that stacks. Here's what I mean:
You are stuck limited to a specific amount of pluses based on your level. These are pluses that a person can get by simply buying a weapon.
So while the Magus can go and buy a +2 weapon and add some effects to it, the Bard can get a +2 weapon and add another +2-3 attack on top of that with inspire courage.
The inquisitor has his judgment if he needs to land a hit (scaling bonus that stacks with pluses on weapons), and the monk simply has a higher BAB for flurry and combat maneuvers. The Rogue will be doing +4d6 damage per attack (allowed to work with TWF or a two-hander too) by the time the Arcane Bond sees +2 bonuses.Because Arcane Bond is stuck limited in stacking benefits with an actual weapon, he is going to have a hard time boosting his attack roll with it. And he's not going to get the same amount of damage boost that a Rogue will, to compensate.
You can fix it by changing how Arcane Bond boosts things, but honestly... I think the ability is good enough as is.I'd rather see Spell Strike turn into something nice, instead of hiding his pluses in an ability that requires "working the system". Sure, it can be done... but having Spell Strike grant boosted damage when you use it would make it feel far more like a signature ability, and would be incredibly thematically appropriate.
Why can't the Magus buy a +2 weapon and then add +2 on top of that for a +4 weapon? (this is important to me because I'm pretty sure you can, and I've used that extensively in the Magus I level up from 1 to 20 in this thread).
I thought about Arcane Bond, but dismissed it because it doesn't give a mechanic that stacks. Here's what I mean:
You are stuck limited to a specific amount of pluses based on your level. These are pluses that a person can get by simply buying a weapon.
So while the Magus can go and buy a +2 weapon and add some effects to it, the Bard can get a +2 weapon and add another +2-3 attack on top of that with inspire courage.
The inquisitor has his judgment if he needs to land a hit (scaling bonus that stacks with pluses on weapons), and the monk simply has a higher BAB for flurry and combat maneuvers. The Rogue will be doing +4d6 damage per attack (allowed to work with TWF or a two-hander too) by the time the Arcane Bond sees +2 bonuses.Because Arcane Bond is stuck limited in stacking benefits with an actual weapon, he is going to have a hard time boosting his attack roll with it. And he's not going to get the same amount of damage boost that a Rogue will, to compensate.
You can fix it by changing how Arcane Bond boosts things, but honestly... I think the ability is good enough as is.I'd rather see Spell Strike turn into something nice, instead of hiding his pluses in an ability that requires "working the system". Sure, it can be done... but having Spell Strike grant boosted damage when you use it would make it feel far more like a signature ability, and would be incredibly thematically appropriate.
Out of curriosity, how is the inquisitor adding 2 to his hit or damage through judgement significantly different than the magus add +1 to hit and damage? Is it because you are adding it to a weapon? It adds just as much as inspire courage at level 4, 1 less at level 5, the same at 8-10, one less at 11, the same at 12-15, 1 more at 16, the same at 17-19, and 1 more at 20. And if you cannot att +1 hit and damage, you can generally add 1d6 damage, which is generally considered about equal. The only real issue I see with it is it not stacking with magic weapons to go higher than +10 equivalent, but that is not an issue until at least 15th level in most games, and by that time the class has come into its own.
Why can't the Magus buy a +2 weapon and then add +2 on top of that for a +4 weapon? (this is important to me because I'm pretty sure you can, and I've used that extensively in the Magus I level up from 1 to 20 in this thread).I thought about Arcane Bond, but dismissed it because it doesn't give a mechanic that stacks. Here's what I mean:
You are stuck limited to a specific amount of pluses based on your level. These are pluses that a person can get by simply buying a weapon.
So while the Magus can go and buy a +2 weapon and add some effects to it, the Bard can get a +2 weapon and add another +2-3 attack on top of that with inspire courage.
The inquisitor has his judgment if he needs to land a hit (scaling bonus that stacks with pluses on weapons), and the monk simply has a higher BAB for flurry and combat maneuvers. The Rogue will be doing +4d6 damage per attack (allowed to work with TWF or a two-hander too) by the time the Arcane Bond sees +2 bonuses.Because Arcane Bond is stuck limited in stacking benefits with an actual weapon, he is going to have a hard time boosting his attack roll with it. And he's not going to get the same amount of damage boost that a Rogue will, to compensate.
You can fix it by changing how Arcane Bond boosts things, but honestly... I think the ability is good enough as is.I'd rather see Spell Strike turn into something nice, instead of hiding his pluses in an ability that requires "working the system". Sure, it can be done... but having Spell Strike grant boosted damage when you use it would make it feel far more like a signature ability, and would be incredibly thematically appropriate.
The Arcane weapon work fine like that for the early levels but once you get a +5 sword you can't increase the to plus to hit and damage. It maxes out a +5. You are stuck adding abilities like Vorpal at high level, nice but you lack the to hit bonus the other classes get. The bard still gets to use inspire courage and the inquisitor has his Judgment. So you have burn spells to get bonus to hit which you could use to buff and both bard and inquisitor are using their spells to buff.
A fix is changing how Magic Arcana works. I saw Jason said he was thinking about Magic Arcana pool. That would fix issue.
Sorry, I probably wasn't clear. Voska66 says exactly what I meant to say about that. You are limited because it's kept within the "weapon enhancement" system, it's the same bonus and can't go over the limits in place for that system.
Inspire Courage, Judgements, simply having a higher BAB, all stack outside of that. You can have more than +5 bonus to attack, which makes Bards, Inquisitors and Monks capable combat fighters at 3/4 BAB.
The Arcane weapon work fine like that for the early levels but once you get a +5 sword you can't increase the to plus to hit and damage. It maxes out a +5. You are stuck adding...
+1 hit and damage ~= 3.5 average damage. You can pick up the bonus 3d6 elemental damage easily. Add keen to remove the feat requirement, which at high levels increases your DPR more than +1 hit and damage. You then have 1 left over which I guess you can throw into a burst.
The Arcane weapon work fine like that for the early levels but once you get a +5 sword you can't increase the to plus to hit and damage. It maxes out a +5. You are stuck adding...Why can't the Magus buy a +2 weapon and then add +2 on top of that for a +4 weapon? (this is important to me because I'm pretty sure you can, and I've used that extensively in the Magus I level up from 1 to 20 in this thread).I thought about Arcane Bond, but dismissed it because it doesn't give a mechanic that stacks. Here's what I mean:
You are stuck limited to a specific amount of pluses based on your level. These are pluses that a person can get by simply buying a weapon.
So while the Magus can go and buy a +2 weapon and add some effects to it, the Bard can get a +2 weapon and add another +2-3 attack on top of that with inspire courage.
The inquisitor has his judgment if he needs to land a hit (scaling bonus that stacks with pluses on weapons), and the monk simply has a higher BAB for flurry and combat maneuvers. The Rogue will be doing +4d6 damage per attack (allowed to work with TWF or a two-hander too) by the time the Arcane Bond sees +2 bonuses.Because Arcane Bond is stuck limited in stacking benefits with an actual weapon, he is going to have a hard time boosting his attack roll with it. And he's not going to get the same amount of damage boost that a Rogue will, to compensate.
You can fix it by changing how Arcane Bond boosts things, but honestly... I think the ability is good enough as is.I'd rather see Spell Strike turn into something nice, instead of hiding his pluses in an ability that requires "working the system". Sure, it can be done... but having Spell Strike grant boosted damage when you use it would make it feel far more like a signature ability, and would be incredibly thematically appropriate.
The early levels are when she needs the to-hit most. Consider the Magus build I presented, attempting to hit the AC of a monster from the Bestiary's average AC chart while using Spell Combat at all levels (this includes Arcane Weapon and everything else that is always on, but no buffs and no flanking or anything like that):
1--75% (she doesn't have Spell Combat so doesn't use it)
2--50%
3--55%
4--50%
5--50%
6--50%
7--50%
8--70%/45%
9--65%/40%
10--65%/40%
11--75%/50%
12--75%/50%
13--70%/45%
14--85%/60%
15--90%/65%/40%
16--95%/70%/45%
17--95%/70%/45%
18--95%/70%/45%
19--95%/80%/55%
20--95%/75%/50%
Sorry, I probably wasn't clear. Voska66 says exactly what I meant to say about that. You are limited because it's kept within the "weapon enhancement" system, it's the same bonus and can't go over the limits in place for that system.
Inspire Courage, Judgements, simply having a higher BAB, all stack outside of that. You can have more than +5 bonus to attack, which makes Bards, Inquisitors and Monks capable combat fighters at 3/4 BAB.
Yes, but for the levels that the class has the most issues, you are no where near the limmits of that system.
The early levels are when she needs the to-hit most. Consider the Magus build I presented, attempting to hit the AC of a monster from the Bestiary's average AC chart while using Spell Combat at all levels (this includes Arcane Weapon and everything else that is always on, but no buffs and no flanking or anything like that):
1--75% (she doesn't have Spell Combat so doesn't use it)
2--50%
3--55%
4--50%
5--50%
6--50%
7--50%
8--70%/45%
9--65%/40%
10--65%/40%
11--75%/50%
12--75%/50%
13--70%/45%
14--85%/60%
15--90%/65%/40%
16--95%/70%/45%
17--95%/70%/45%
18--95%/70%/45%
19--95%/80%/55%
20--95%/75%/50%
My problem with this is that, especially at low levels, the ACs on that table are out of whack with what many GMs throw out there. Its not uncommon to see ACs in the low 20s at level 1 and 2, but the table has the AC at 12. Any GM who gears NPCs like PCs instead of giving them crap armor runs into this.
My problem with this is that, especially at low levels, the ACs on that table are out of whack with what many GMs throw out there. Its not uncommon to see ACs in the low 20s at level 1 and 2, but the table has the AC at 12. Any GM who gears NPCs like PCs instead of giving them crap armor runs into this.The early levels are when she needs the to-hit most. Consider the Magus build I presented, attempting to hit the AC of a monster from the Bestiary's average AC chart while using Spell Combat at all levels (this includes Arcane Weapon and everything else that is always on, but no buffs and no flanking or anything like that):
1--75% (she doesn't have Spell Combat so doesn't use it)
2--50%
3--55%
4--50%
5--50%
6--50%
7--50%
8--70%/45%
9--65%/40%
10--65%/40%
11--75%/50%
12--75%/50%
13--70%/45%
14--85%/60%
15--90%/65%/40%
16--95%/70%/45%
17--95%/70%/45%
18--95%/70%/45%
19--95%/80%/55%
20--95%/75%/50%
Agreed. I do this too (OK not the low 20s except for a boss--you can easily TPK a table with AC low 20ish mooks at level 1, even if the mooks suck at hitting, but still more than the table says). So don't use Spell Combat as much at the lowest levels if the GM elites up the lowest levels--I believe Paizo should design for their own expectations though, at least for the most part. If the chart is even out of whack substantially for APs, then we need to scrutinise a bit more.
Out of curriosity, how is the inquisitor adding 2 to his hit or damage through judgement significantly different than the magus add +1 to hit and damage? Is it because you are adding it to a weapon? It adds just as much as inspire courage at level 4, 1 less at level 5, the same at 8-10, one less at 11, the same at 12-15, 1 more at 16, the same at 17-19, and 1 more at 20. And if you cannot att +1 hit and damage, you can generally add 1d6 damage, which is generally considered about equal. The only real issue I see with it is it not stacking with magic weapons to go higher than +10...
By the time this becomes an issue, I'd figure about 15th level using the wealth by level chart of 25% on weapons the Inquisitor has quite a nice bonus. With 2nd judgment that allows for to hit and damage at +4 to hit and +6 damage. Add in Greater Bane for another +2 and +4D6 Damage. So the Inquisitor is +6 to hit and +6 +4D6 damage. All this with swift action leaving some room to apply buff spells like Divine Power and Righteous Might. The Inquisitor is now fighting in the front line like a pro.
The Magus on the other hand has no bonus to hit and no minus to hit by the this level. They are wading into combat buffing as they attack. With sword equivalent to +9 weapon they are increasing the damage then add in a touch spell or two with spell combat and spell strike. Blowing 5th level spell to get +5 to hit per round for 3 maybe 4 rounds.
I think the Inquisitor comes out about the same except the Magus is blowing a lot more resource keeping up with the Inquisitor.
Out of curriosity, how is the inquisitor adding 2 to his hit or damage through judgement significantly different than the magus add +1 to hit and damage? Is it because you are adding it to a weapon? It adds just as much as inspire courage at level 4, 1 less at level 5, the same at 8-10, one less at 11, the same at 12-15, 1 more at 16, the same at 17-19, and 1 more at 20. And if you cannot att +1 hit and damage, you can generally add 1d6 damage, which is generally considered about equal. The only real issue I see with it is it not stacking with magic weapons to go higher than +10...By the time this becomes an issue, I'd figure about 15th level using the wealth by level chart of 25% on weapons the Inquisitor has quite a nice bonus. With 2nd judgment that allows for to hit and damage at +4 to hit and +6 damage. Add in Greater Bane for another +2 and +4D6 Damage. So the Inquisitor is +6 to hit and +6 +4D6 damage. All this with swift action leaving some room to apply buff spells like Divine Power and Righteous Might. The Inquisitor is now fighting in the front line like a pro.
The Magus on the other hand has no bonus to hit and no minus to hit by the this level. They are wading into combat buffing as they attack. With sword equivalent to +9 weapon they are increasing the damage then add in a touch spell or two with spell combat and spell strike. Blowing 5th level spell to get +5 to hit per round for 3 maybe 4 rounds.
I think the Inquisitor comes out about the same except the Magus is blowing a lot more resource keeping up with the Inquisitor.
First, i agree with you. The magus needs something more. His weapon at this level boosted +3, almost +4, comparing nicely to the judgement, but he has nothing like Bane. He also has access to arcane strike for annother +4 damage that the inquisitor does not get, but still nothing like Bane.
But I think the thing you are missing is that while attacking, the magus is throwing out crowd control. The Inquisitor has buffs and divinations, which does nothing to groups. The Magus isn't blowing his 5th level slots on +5 to hit. He is throwing them to cast Wall of Force, or Cloudkill, or Cone of Cold. He has his own buffs like Stoneskin, Haste, and Mirror Image. He wont out-damage the Inquisitor against 1 target, but he can be deadly effective on the field.That being said, I still think he needs something.
Yes, but for the levels that the class has the most issues, you are no where near the limmits of that system.Sorry, I probably wasn't clear. Voska66 says exactly what I meant to say about that. You are limited because it's kept within the "weapon enhancement" system, it's the same bonus and can't go over the limits in place for that system.
Inspire Courage, Judgements, simply having a higher BAB, all stack outside of that. You can have more than +5 bonus to attack, which makes Bards, Inquisitors and Monks capable combat fighters at 3/4 BAB.
You also don't get Arcane Bond until 4th level. The first few levels are really tough, and you have a penalty to using your preferred method of combat on top of all that.
If you are going to be forced into having penalties for a primary ability, then getting a +1 ahead of the game for a few levels is not going to cut it.
By contrast, bards and inquisitors can be very effective at ranged combat (not needing strength so much, nor needing concentration as much as they won't be in melee as much). To use his class given abilities, the Magus MUST be in melee.
If the melee restriction were removed (or rather you didn't need an offhand free), then I could see the numbers being very different. But, that kills the whole "TWF with a spell" feel that having the offhand free gives.
I like the idea of keeping things closer to a Duelist in nature (weapon in one hand, and a free offhand).
The option for a throwing weapon, or a gun/handcrossbow would be nice though (not restricting it to melee weapons, but weapons held in one hand).
Oh, another thing I've been thinking about. Starting off with Medium Armor casting would help the class a lot on the MAD side of things (less Dex needed).
It also makes him a step closer to a true melee combatant compared to the Bard in the arcane field of things.
Oh, another thing I've been thinking about. Starting off with Medium Armor casting would help the class a lot on the MAD side of things (less Dex needed).
It also makes him a step closer to a true melee combatant compared to the Bard in the arcane field of things.
I agree, but it should only be for spells on memorized as a Magus. I don't want to see wizards taking a 1 level dip for the ability, which I could see.
I agree, but it should only be for spells on memorized as a Magus. I don't want to see wizards taking a 1 level dip for the ability, which I could see.Oh, another thing I've been thinking about. Starting off with Medium Armor casting would help the class a lot on the MAD side of things (less Dex needed).
It also makes him a step closer to a true melee combatant compared to the Bard in the arcane field of things.
I think that's already covered--even with Broad Study, you don't get to avoid the ASF for non-Magus spells (frankly if someone is going to spend 6 levels in Magus and multiclass with Wizard or Sorcerer, they deserve to ignore the ASF at that point, but that's another story).
This is only regarding comparisons to the Bard:
1: You are not factoring in the offensive nature of the Magus's spell list. These spells compliment the damage dealing and capability of the class.
2&3: Gotta run, fight club! ....Ok, quickly - a Bard needs to focus on charisma if they are to cast spells competitively and their 'class appropriate' spells suffer from lower DCs as a result of being gained as lower level spells.
Now, a Bard doesn't have to focus on casting spells but, if they're to be viable in melee or at range, they too have to focus on the 'essential' stats related to their chosen role.
Actually, the point you make about the spell lists is exactly what I mean about the differences between Bard and Magus. The Magus has more enemy-focused spells that require having a high DC. Conversely, the Bard can focus on pure utility and buffing (good hope doesn't require anything but minimum Cha to cast, etc).
Plus, the Bard gains early access to a number of great spells: Heroism (greater), Break Enchantment, Dominate Person, Mislead, Shadow Walk, Irresistible Dance, Scrying (greater).***
On top of a bunch of unique Bard only spells, he's getting spells that are appropriate for the levels he's getting them, as opposed to keeping them at the standard levels a wizard or sorcerer would get.
Between those two things, you don't need to focus on your casting stat to be completely effective at spellcasting as a Bard.
For the Magus, it's a somewhat different story... the only spells that don't need a DC are the buffing spells. Otherwise, he's damage and crowd control. These demand being level appropriate, in DCs as well as the spells themselves.
.
Actually, the point you make about the spell lists is exactly what I mean about the differences between Bard and Magus. The Magus has more enemy-focused spells that require having a high DC. Conversely, the Bard can focus on pure utility and buffing (good hope doesn't require anything but minimum Cha to cast, etc).
Plus, the Bard gains early access to a number of great spells: Heroism (greater), Break Enchantment, Dominate Person, Mislead, Shadow Walk, Irresistible Dance, Scrying (greater).***
On top of a bunch of unique Bard only spells, he's getting spells that are appropriate for the levels he's getting them, as opposed to keeping them at the standard levels a wizard or sorcerer would get.Between those two things, you don't need to focus on your casting stat to be completely effective at spellcasting as a Bard.
For the Magus, it's a somewhat different story... the only spells that don't need a DC are the buffing spells. Otherwise, he's damage and crowd control. These demand being level appropriate, in DCs as well as the spells themselves.
.
It remains to be seen what spells Magi will get in the book (spells which, I might add, would also make interesting additions to an Eldritch Knight's arsenal).
Lets run the numbers on some DPS over 3 rounds for a realistic attack on a lich
Really? Round one response from the Lich: Globe of Invulnerability. I'm not really sure he's the best creature to be facing as a pure caster.
Also, with an Aura of Fear (DC 18), the non-wisdom based Magus is going to be looking at a 50/50 shot of keeping his bladder under control (shaken, lowering your attack and concentration rolls, call it a 50% shot and make it a -1 penalty).
Also: 10th level is where spell combat starts to work, and it's nearing the end game for a lot of people out there (and closing to the finish line of a lot of APs).
I'd like a mechanic that feels like you are getting something right at first level...
It remains to be seen what spells Magi will get in the book (spells which, I might add, would also make interesting additions to an Eldritch Knight's arsenal).
I was thinking those were going to be fairly Magus centric. I understand that there will be some Magus-only spells (and more spells in general) on their way, but a dearth of early access core spells when other 6 spell level classes get them feels off to me.
I'm looking at things we can compare right now. Greater Invisibility is gained at 10th level, compared to the wizard at 7th. Interposing Hand is gained at 13th level instead of 9th.
Chain Lightning is his highest direct damage spell (gained 5 levels late), and the only spell level he gets to use 20 dice damage. No delayed blast fireballs, or polar rays.
I'm not saying he should be the king of direct damage spellcasting... but something a little more level appropriate would be nice. Wizards get 4 spell levels worth of spells that can use all his caster level dice damage... the Magus gets one. This feels like something that should be improved at least a little bit.
A fear aura is a defense. It equates to an average -1 to the Magus' ability at hitting and getting his spell combat through (since at that level, with stats to do what you are saying, his Will save is closer to 50% on a -2 penalty).
Globe of Invulnerability is a defense, it negates half of the Magus' ability at dealing damage (his spammed scorching rays), reducing damage in rounds 2 and 3.
You are the one that used the word "realistic", not me.
Picking a specific creature isn't good to get a comparison. Creatures come with unique defenses and can cause factors like "Can I stand in melee with that Purple Worm longer than one round to deal my damage I'm supposed to?".
If your goal is to compare two classes or builds, then take out all other factors in the equation: just have a target AC and Saves that is level appropriate. See how well they can damage the same defenses, and you'll have a better idea of how things sit at a baseline.
My suggestion would be to use the Monster Creation chart for your baseline tests.
Well, the chart helps in balancing vs CR. Checking the CR 12 (what the Lich is), I'd be interested in seeing the numbers for the following:
160 hitpoints
AC 27 against physical attacks
Saves of 15 if the class' attack spells are limited
Saves of 11 if the class' attack spells are varied enough to target a weak save (likely for a Magus, being a prepared caster)
The Lich's defenses are poor in comparison to the CR due to his spellcasting and other specials boosting his defensive capability (which are being taken out of your example).
A minor note, the Inquisitor is in an odd situation where he can get teamwork benefits (like +1d6 damage or +2 attack higher than the Magus when flanking), which can make this unfortunate gap even larger (it's unlikely a player will attack a Lich alone).
Well, the chart helps in balancing vs CR. Checking the CR 12 (what the Lich is), I'd be interested in seeing the numbers for the following:
160 hitpoints
AC 27 against physical attacks
Saves of 15 if the class' attack spells are limited
Saves of 11 if the class' attack spells are varied enough to target a weak save (likely for a Magus, being a prepared caster)The Lich's defenses are poor in comparison to the CR due to his spellcasting and other specials boosting his defensive capability (which are being taken out of your example).
A minor note, the Inquisitor is in an odd situation where he can get teamwork benefits (like +1d6 damage or +2 attack higher than the Magus when flanking), which can make this unfortunate gap even larger (it's unlikely a player will attack a Lich alone).
I think a big gain for the Inquisitor comes from the Heroism that he gets in the example on top of what the Magus had (the Magus seems to have only had up a Haste). Since the Magus can Swift-action herself a Haste on that first round of combat, I don't see where the Inquisitor got hers in that scenario.
With the Heroism removed, the Magus would be behind by only 1 to hit and 2 to damage vs the Inquisitor even if she didn't Spell Combat and just two-handed thwacked the lich.
Since the Magus can Swift-action herself a Haste on that first round of combat, I don't see where the Inquisitor got hers in that scenario.Boots of Speed ... he send a Hound Archon out to buy them for him ... which by RAW can be done in a couple of hours in any high magic world (or alternatively lets suppose we have a sane DM which just allows you to buy them).
You've now given the Inquisitor an item that costs nearly 1/5th of her wealth at level 10 that the Magus doesn't need to buy because she has Hasted Assault. The price of the Boots of Speed is equal to the cost of upgrading a +2 Belt of Strength to +4 and more than the cost of upgrading a +2 weapon to +3, which may not even be the best way to spend that extra gold, but are at least another +1 to hit and damage for the Magus.
Heroism can be cheaply extended, with 200 minutes per casting it's pretty safe to say he can keep it up.
Yes, but it isn't a self-only spell. In my home group, if Heroism is available, we try to give it to everyone who could use the attack bonus (in our Council of Thieves group, that is the Paladins, the Summoner's Eidolon, and the Rogue).
With the Heroism removed, the Magus would be behind by only 1 to hit and 2 to damage vs the Inquisitor even if she didn't Spell Combat and just two-handed thwacked the lich.If at level 10 he still has to avoid spell combat that is an even worse indictment of the class ...
Spell Combat will make that even more--I just meant as a baseline drop-dead fallback, turning off Spell Combat and using no expendable resources at all aside from matching whatever buffs the Inquisitor has up will provide numbers just barely below the Inquisitor's. Using Spell Combat wisely should push the envelope further.
I think it can be useful to compare Inquisitor to the Magus as to how the Class in general is built
(I think adding Magical Schools, possibly with additional Magus-only abilities linked to each School is good because it established a connection to Wizards like Inquisitors have with Clerics and Domain Paladin Variants)
But I wouldn´t be surprised that Inquisitor out damages Magus looking at generic weapon combat,
since Inquisitor has a major Paladin Smite-Lite flavor, which is obviously about damage.
If Magus is less damaging, so what... They should have other cool abilities, though.
I think the Monk-like Ki/Arcana Pool is a good idea for this reason, allowing alot of flexible abilities from unique powers to enabling spell combat combos and enhancing their attacks/actions.
As written, I think their ability to get extra action economy is a HUGELY strong feature compared to Inquisitors, and certainly counters any damage difference. (+action economy of their familiar if they get one) They probably won´t want to target BBEG´s with Save Effects if they are focusing on melee stats, but plenty of Full Casters prefer not to gamble with Save Effects either, and choose No Save / prefereably SR immune effects for their spells. Honestly, I think there´s TONS of uses of spell combat while fighting a Lich, that more than make up for any damage difference by getting in spells which change the terms of the battle.
I could see effects like we see in certain other Class Abilities, suchthat if they cast a spell they get an additional benefit for 1 round (or more)... Possibly the benefit depending on the school of magic they cast (possibly with an alternate choice/enhancened benefit if specialized in that school). Maybe that´s the sort of effect that would only kick in if they still have 1 Ki Point remaining (and they´re no reason to limit it to 1 only... additional ´passive´ / reserve effects can apply when they have 3,5,10 Ki Points remaining)
What does Armor Limits (while Casting?) have to do with a Stat Boost Belt?
Likewise ´MAD´? (i.e. having a Casting/Special Ability Stat like Inquisitors, Paladins and Monks).
All those other classes seem likely to use a Belt of STR, why wouldn´t the Magus?
(though given a major part of Magus´ schtick is 1 handed fighting while casting, it´s worthwhile to focus on scimitar and take weapon finesse and the qadiran feat enabling DEX to DMG... then again the Magus CAN attack 2-handed when not casting, so it´s reasonable to go that route as well.)
If the Magus worries about MAD they can avoid offensive spells requiring Saves and just have minimum for Bonus Slots... Monks don´t have that option if they want a Stunning Fist that works and an AC bonus that remotely makes up for the no Armor they have to deal with to use their Class Features.
The Magus seems LESS MAD at least regarding DEX (if they focus on STR) because their spell list (and possibly special abilities) give them all the better ways to avoid getting damaged besides AC (miss chance, invis, DR, etc). At low levels Shield is very solid as well...
The price of the Boots of Speed is equal to the cost of upgrading a +2 Belt of Strength to +4MADness and armour limits makes using belts of giant strength on the Magus pretty unlikely.
How so? Unless the Magus is focusing on Dex over Str, which is not the case here. What else is going to go into that Belt slot?
The price of the Boots of Speed is equal to the cost of upgrading a +2 Belt of Strength to +4MADness and armour limits makes using belts of giant strength on the Magus pretty unlikely.
You mean because she'll have to go for those Physical Perfection Belts or something? It's cheaper to get the Str belt (or Dex belt if Weapon Finesse and Dervish Dance is your style) up high and just Ioun Stone the other two physical stats. That's what my sample Magus did over on this thread where I built her up from level 1 to 20. By level 10 she actually did have the +4 Belt (she bought it at level 9).
Also, if you don't like the Str belt, I also mentioned that you could use part of the money from the Inquisitor's Boots of Speed to get a higher enhancement bonus on the weapon.
Also, if you don't like the Str belt, I also mentioned that you could use part of the money from the Inquisitor's Boots of Speed to get a higher enhancement bonus on the weapon.Fine a +3 weapon and a lesser metamagic rod of maximize ... hell, we'll throw in a heroism as well.
Even with 3 higher AB, PA still won't make sense ...
So for the AC27, touch AC 17 opponent we would now get :
0.7 * 1.05 * 48 + 2 * (0.9 * 0.7 * 1.05 * 48 + (0.65 + 0.65 + 0.4) * 1.1 * (1d8 + 14) = 35.3 + 2 * (31.8 + 34.6) = 168.1 damage.
Completely fair and reasonable. And that looks about right--the enemy we're looking at has the AC of a CR + 2 opponent, so hitting it will be tough on one's own. The Inquisitor uses his top-tier spell (and a nice spell it is--the Magus doesn't have a good self-buff answer to Divine Power at that level) and picks up the damage advantage.
Actually, I'm really liking this Inquisitor vs Magus comparison--the Inquisitor is also a 3/4 BAB class that wants to melee with spell support. Granted, I think the Magus has the edge over the Inquisitor in battlefield control, which isn't represented in the raw damage analysis, but we probably want the Inquisitor to come out on top here since she used a 4th level spell to the Magus's 3 2nd (if the price for Pearls of Power are to be believed, 4 2nds makes a 4th).
By the way, what's the critter's Flat-Footed AC? The Magus could try a Greater Invisibility on the round the Inquisitor prebuffs if that helps.
The Inquisitor uses his top-tier spellWas my mistake, divine favor would have sufficed.
True--this suggests that the Magus should have some kind of buff spell she can apply for these hard-to-hit monster scenarios to get some added accuracy. Greater Invisibility, as I edited in above, may help there. Also, the Inquisitor already hits on a 3, so she benefits a lot less from flanking and the like than the Magus would (granted she can happily Power Attack away some of that accuracy for added punch).
All that being said, given the Magus's ability to throw around battlefield control that is unavailable to the Inquisitor, in my mind it's okay for the Inquisitor to be able to top out higher on direct damage against a single higher AC enemy, so each can shine in different places.
I've been thinking for a while that the Magus needs more little powers to use that don't use up her spells, a resource on which she is heavily taxed (the Inquisitor's Judgements do this for her). This analysis is another point in favour of that.
Using Metamagic Rods is resource usage but rounds of Boots of Speed is not?
Anyhow, would anybody be surprised if a Paladin outdamages others while Smiting?
The Inquisitors abilities clearly seem to be a ´mini Smite´ analog with slighlty different but overlapping effects, so I´d expect it to outdamage an equivalent class WITHOUT a ´mini Smite´ focus.
I´d expect Magus´ more broad spell list to give distinct advantages in changing the terms of battles as well as dealing with enemy´s like swarms. The Inquisitor (like Paladin) seems much more limited to the number of opponents it can engage in combat, while the Magus can do Area Effects of multiple types to deal with hordes of enemies appropriately.
I´m just not worried about such comparisons... I´d rather see other abilities be developed for the Magus, who doesn´t really have all that broad a range of other powers as of now. Sure, some new powers could enhance their personal melee combat ability, but that´s not the only show in town. Something as simple as going ethereal but still being able to buff could make the Magus immune to the enemy until they can properly buff or prepare, not to mention better able to combat ethereal enemies.
Using Metamagic Rods is resource usage but rounds of Boots of Speed is not?
I think he's being fair--there's more rounds left on the boots than charges on the meta rod. Also, he's allowed the Magus to use the meta rod without problems during Spell Combat, which is generous (making up for the fact that Maximise is weak compared to other metas).
Oh, Pinky--I just realised something. You're doing an analysis that is heavy in the use of Scorching Ray at the level right before Scorching Ray increases its damage dramatically. Would it be too much of a trouble to shift it up to 11 (or shift down to 8 or so) for this purpose for both Inquisitor and Magus? At 11, you're looking at another +2 to hit for both of them and +1 damage (they both buy up their Strength belt and get a BAB increase). Magus only gets a feat that level, so nothing game changing.
EDIT: OK Math.
For the Magus--(we'll raise the AC to 28, as per the Bestiary, since level went up by 1)
0.7 * 1.05 * 72 + 2 * (0.9 * 0.7 * 1.05 * 72 + (0.7 + 0.7 + 0.45) * 1.1 * (4.5 + 15) = 227.54
For the Inquisitor--2 * ((0.95 + 0.95 + 0.7) * ((1.05 * 31.5) + 7)) = 208.39
So it looks like the last analysis was an edge effect for level 10 when the Scorching Ray is about to increase. Good to see the Magus with the edge here--she's used more to get it.
The big difference is that the Inquisitor uses buffs - which means he doesn't need extraordinary wisdom, though it really helps - while the Magus needs his high intellect.
While the Inquisitor doesn't want to dump wisdom, he can still make it a lesser concern. With the way he does concentration checks, the Magus absolutely requires high int. It doesn't even give him all the bonuses that the Inquisitor gets from wisdom, either.
The big difference is that the Inquisitor uses buffs - which means he doesn't need extraordinary wisdom, though it really helps - while the Magus needs his high intellect.
While the Inquisitor doesn't want to dump wisdom, he can still make it a lesser concern. With the way he does concentration checks, the Magus absolutely requires high int. It doesn't even give him all the bonuses that the Inquisitor gets from wisdom, either.
My Magus build from 1 to 20 starts with a 16 Int, true, but she doesn't ever bother to raise Int until she hits a level where she otherwise wouldn't receive a bonus spell (so for instance, she takes a +2 Int Headband at level 10 and upgrades it to +4 at level 13 and +6 at 16 for a total of 22). I think that's a fair assumption for the Inquisitor too--everyone likes getting bonus spells for their highest level spells. The only thing that the Inquisitor might do is start with a 14 instead of 16 and save herself the points, then buy and upgrade the Headband a little sooner than the Magus to keep that bonus spell coming whenever possible, then just sort of giving up on getting the 6th-level bonus spell short of inherent bonuses. That probably isn't enough to increase Strength to the next highest even number, but it would help the Inquisitor have better Dex and Con, which is always good.