|
Forgive me here. I'm not an old school Paizo freak, and I'm definitely not a despicable min-maxer, but I think I see the problem with the Magus class.
New things, especially in RPGs, have to be better to be considered good. The Magus isn't necessarily better than existing Figher-Wizard or Fighter-Sorcerer options, it just gives different options.
Try to look at it that way, and it's actually a pretty neat class.
+1
And, as a side question, I know the playtest runs through October 4th, but until what time? (11:59pm Eastern perhaps?)
I ask because I plan on utilizing a Magus as an enemy for my high level Monday night game, but I may not be able to get the players to the "end" of where I was thinking he'd be waiting for them. I also don't want to "force" him upon them too early...
So... what time Oct. 4th (for the playtest to end/close)?
Thanks,
Dean
+1
I'd like to see the Magus stacked up against a properly optimized bard, eldritch knight, and arcane archer.
Forgive me here. I'm not an old school Paizo freak, and I'm definitely not a despicable min-maxer, but I think I see the problem with the Magus class.
New things, especially in RPGs, have to be better to be considered good. The Magus isn't necessarily better than existing Figher-Wizard or Fighter-Sorcerer options, it just gives different options.
Try to look at it that way, and it's actually a pretty neat class.
The problem is, no matter how you look at it, it's a neat class that's also really bad at what it tries to do.
It doesn't need to be better then anything, but that doesn't give it the excuse to be bad.
|
|
It is pretty bad at what it tries to do, don't get me wrong. BUT, it gives options.
Any fighter/arcane combo is going to be pretty terrible when you stack it up against a straight fighter or arcane spell slinger. It's like combining fried tomatoes with caramel, they are just incompatible from the basis of game design.
But, far be it for game design to infringe upon the wishes of a player to play a sword wielding arcane caster, no?
The key is making sure it isn't overpowered, and that's what they've done here. The core classes are core for a reason, they are the most "pure" of the choices available to a player.
But there's a reason ice cream stores don't sell just chocolate and vanilla. Every so often, someone comes in and orders butter pecan.
It is pretty bad at what it tries to do, don't get me wrong. BUT, it gives options.
Any fighter/arcane combo is going to be pretty terrible when you stack it up against a straight fighter or arcane spell slinger. It's like combining fried tomatoes with caramel, they are just incompatible from the basis of game design.
But, far be it for game design to infringe upon the wishes of a player to play a sword wielding arcane caster, no?
The key is making sure it isn't overpowered, and that's what they've done here. The core classes are core for a reason, they are the most "pure" of the choices available to a player.
But there's a reason ice cream stores don't sell just chocolate and vanilla. Every so often, someone comes in and orders butter pecan.
But butter pecan is delicious, and magi are not :I
It's the soulknife argument. No matter how cool looking and flavorful a class is - and I love the hell out of soulknives! - people won't play a class that punishes them and is un-fun.
|
It is pretty bad at what it tries to do, don't get me wrong. BUT, it gives options.
Options are irrelevant unless the class has a chance to be playable in a mechanical sense. That doesn't even necessarily mean combat, but the magus is supposed to be a front-line warrior and as currently written kind of blows at it. It's not the 3/4 BAB that hurts him; it's the light armor (instead of light and medium), the inability to use a shield or a two-handed weapon, and that his abilities don't synergize. A class with 3/4 BAB can be competitive and viable as a melee combatant--they just need ability synergy or class abilities to back that up.
Your ice cream analogy is a little off too. Honestly, it's more like the difference between vanilla, chocolate, strawberry, and MACHINE OIL. Yes, machine oil flavored ice cream is an option, but it's not one that succeeds as a flavor of ice cream. =p
ProfessorCirno and I don't really agree all that often, but I have to side with him on this one. The magus needs a serious overhaul. I like the overall framework of the class as it stands, but that framework needs to be filled with different things to make is structurally sound.
Jeremy Puckett
I think one of the problems with the magus is that it doesn't seem to be designed to fill a particular role. Sure, it's a nifty combo of arcanist and melee combatant, but it doesn't seem to fit one of the main party roles. I think it might be good for a smaller party, especially since that Spell Combat class feature is a great way to get extra actions in a round (melee attack AND a spell as a full round action? Yes please!!!). I think it just needs a little bit more oomph, since taking that double action comes with so many penalties, it is hard to get off consistently and successfully.
One thing I think magus should be able to do is use magic to fill the tank roll. By this, I mean it should be able to use magic to either boost its AC, its hit points, and its "stickyness" (ability to prevent others from moving past it). I think trading spell slots for brief boosts is the way to do this. It may not be as consistent as the fighter or paladin, but it will have occasional moments of brilliance.
For example, a Magus Arcana that lets the magus trade a spell slot for temporary hit points as an immediate action (say, 10 per spell level sacrificed) for 1 round might let the magus survive an onslaught of attacks, but only one onslaught of attacks. Or one that gives a burst of speed, or a bonus to AC, or a bonus to Saves, etc. etc.
I think the swift action/immediate action activation and 1 round buff should be the core combat defense of the magus. The magus will then have to be smart enough and lucky enough to choose the right buff in the right situation.
The number of buffs per day can be determined using an Arcane Pool AND expendable spell slots. It could create some really fun and interesting resource management challenges without being TOO bookkeeping intense.
+1
And, as a side question, I know the playtest runs through October 4th, but until what time? (11:59pm Eastern perhaps?)
I ask because I plan on utilizing a Magus as an enemy for my high level Monday night game, but I may not be able to get the players to the "end" of where I was thinking he'd be waiting for them. I also don't want to "force" him upon them too early...
So... what time Oct. 4th (for the playtest to end/close)?
Thanks,
Dean
So... maybe I missed it somewhere... but, once again I'm asking... when does the playtest close (I know it's Oct. 4th... but what time is my question).
Thanks,
Dean (TMW)
I think it would be safe to assume 8 am PST, or whenever Paizo staff gets in in the morning for them. More likely 12:00 am PST if you want to be safe.
Why does a class have to be pigeon holed into tank, healer, arcanist, thief?
You will excuse my going into rant mode, but this is something that really grinds me the wrong way.
Seconded.
I think one of the problems with the magus is that it doesn't seem to be designed to fill a particular role. Sure, it's a nifty combo of arcanist and melee combatant, but it doesn't seem to fit one of the main party roles.Why does a class have to be pigeon holed into tank, healer, arcanist, thief? I am no fan of the scared cows of alignment or Vancian casting, but I would rather keep both if it means these restrictive class roles get confined to a firey pit forever. This is one of the things I detest most about MMOs. I tend to take it personally when I am playing my character the way I want to and am told I am "doing it wrong" because I am not playing the class "to role".
You will excuse my going into rant mode, but this is something that really grinds me the wrong way.
It's not that a class has to only be able to to fir into one role it's that there should be something that the class is good at. I'm going to be the last person to say "you're playing class x wrong" and I'd think most people here wouldn't be likely to say so either but if your class doesn't have a role in mind when it's designed it's harder for someone to play well mechanically. Roleplay has nothing to do with it since I can make the same character from an rp standpoint and be any number of classes.
[/threadjack]|
|
I think it might be good for a smaller party, especially since that Spell Combat class feature is a great way to get extra actions in a round (melee attack AND a spell as a full round action? Yes please!!!).
Unfortunately, I think the opposite; that the class will only see use as 'fifth wheel' to plug gaps in an emergency.
The spell list is so tightly focussed that most parties will insist on a 'proper' arcane caster to provide the essential utility spells that make the difference between success and failure (at least these are essential in most adventures I've read or written).That, unfortunately for the magus, still means a wizard with an extended spellbook, or failing that, they can bumble through with a sorcerer and a bag of scrolls and wands. The latter isn't perfect, and blows more cash on things the wizard prepares for free, but at least it sort of works since those essential utility spells are on the sorcerer's spell list.
If every party is still going to be bringing a wizard or sorcerer, then the magus is going to suffer by comparison.
|
|
I think the swift action/immediate action activation and 1 round buff should be the core combat defense of the magus. The magus will then have to be smart enough and lucky enough to choose the right buff in the right situation.
The number of buffs per day can be determined using an Arcane Pool AND expendable spell slots. It could create some really fun and interesting resource management challenges without being TOO bookkeeping intense.
This is my thinking; there needs to be a pool of points for those minor, short-term buffs.
If you're going to sacrifice actual spells, many of which provide large bonuses and durations of at least 1 round/level (some being 1 minute/level or even 1 hour/level), then the rewards need to be at least as strong and as long-lasting as the spells being sacrificed. Otherwise, what's the point?
I think one of the problems with the magus is that it doesn't seem to be designed to fill a particular role. Sure, it's a nifty combo of arcanist and melee combatant, but it doesn't seem to fit one of the main party roles.Why does a class have to be pigeon holed into tank, healer, arcanist, thief? I am no fan of the scared cows of alignment or Vancian casting, but I would rather keep both if it means these restrictive class roles get confined to a firey pit forever. This is one of the things I detest most about MMOs. I tend to take it personally when I am playing my character the way I want to and am told I am "doing it wrong" because I am not playing the class "to role".
You will excuse my going into rant mode, but this is something that really grinds me the wrong way.
Yes, because it was MMOs, not the first edition of D&D, that came up with the idea of a party consisting of "Thief, fighting man, magic user, and cleric."
:|
It isn't even about those four roles. The question is, "What does the Magus do well?" Right now the answer appears to be "make the other team feel better when they succeed in spite of his failures"
True, they are not the source, but they have embraced class role and magnified it, especially the "you are playing the class wrong" part. I use them as an example of pigeon holing at it worst, not as the source. (I tend to not be as clear as I should when I go into rant mode, my apologies).
Yes, because it was MMOs, not the first edition of D&D, that came up with the idea of a party consisting of "Thief, fighting man, magic user, and cleric.":|
Uhhhhh, have you played earlier D&D?
It's pretty much impossible to do anything without the standard four. Without a thief the constant SoD traps murder your party. Without a fighter the enemies murder your party. Without a cleric to heal your fighter will be murdered, and then so will your party. Without a wizard to cancel out other wizards and then rule the game after a certain level, the party will be murdered.
MMOs are basically being blamed for things D&D has always kept standard. The idea of straying from the four-person-party is very much a new thing that was born almost in 3.x itself.
I partially agree with the beginning statement.
I agree that way too many people think that because the magus is no better than other base (or core) classes, he is not worth choosing. That's min/maxer talk, an not really what an RPG should be about.
However I think that the Magus still lacks style. He must have one free hand to cast, even if he doesn't need it to cast, that makes no sense.
I would suggest that the magus will be changed a bit to help the flavour, a unique ability like those powerpoints would do him good, but not a whole new system like psionics.
Yeah, I totally agree characters should be played however the player wants to (as long as it isn't disruptive--like a PC assassanating other PCs in a non-evil game, etc.). But classes should be designed to fill a role in the game, since class is a mechanical definition and what they mechanically do is also, uh, mechanical.
I currently play a wannabe Sherlock Holmes chaos gnome brass dragon shaman, so I'm pretty comfortable with PCs playing somewhat against type. Our tank is a kobold battle sorcerer and our healer/ranged dudette is a catfolk ranger. The DM is nice enough not spring too many traps at us.
I really really like where the Magus is going. I like its spell list for the most part, and I like its various abilities. I think the math itself needs tweaking, and spellstrike needs to land touch spells on touch AC even if a melee attack misses. There's some minor other issues with the arcana.
HOWEVER, the core concept of the class is solid gold and it plays damn well with a few tweaks in the CoT game I'm GMing. The fighter/mage player just converted to magus and is loving it.
The one free hand to cast thing actually does some very interesting things mechanically:
You can't really wear a shield. This is good, because it keeps you slightly behind fighter AC.
You can always choose to not cast and put a second hand on that weapon. Two handed combat is really really good to be able to do on demand, and makes power attack really attractive for this class.
Right now the primary problem with the class is spell combat's -4 is just too much and spellstrike is too inflexible. -2 would probably fix a horde of the class's problems.
Secondary issues are the distinct lack of awesome in the Magus Arcana, but even Jason is asking for more arcana ideas at this point.
Tertiary issue is that the capstone "True Magus" ability is lackluster.
I really really like where the Magus is going. I like its spell list for the most part, and I like its various abilities. I think the math itself needs tweaking, and spellstrike needs to land touch spells on touch AC even if a melee attack misses. There's some minor other issues with the arcana.
HOWEVER, the core concept of the class is solid gold and it plays damn well with a few tweaks in the CoT game I'm GMing. The fighter/mage player just converted to magus and is loving it.
The one free hand to cast thing actually does some very interesting things mechanically:
You can't really wear a shield. This is good, because it keeps you slightly behind fighter AC.
You can always choose to not cast and put a second hand on that weapon. Two handed combat is really really good to be able to do on demand, and makes power attack really attractive for this class.
Right now the primary problem with the class is spell combat's -4 is just too much and spellstrike is too inflexible. -2 would probably fix a horde of the class's problems.
Secondary issues are the distinct lack of awesome in the Magus Arcana, but even Jason is asking for more arcana ideas at this point.
Tertiary issue is that the capstone "True Magus" ability is lackluster.
Have you looked into mining the Magus Arcana ideas thread for more arcana?
Well since it looks like a lot of people hate the magus because they don't know what role it plays I figure I should go ahead and point that out. To use (shutter) 4th editions terms a magus is a striker/controller that means that they can get in there and put the hurt on 1 enemy or they can help control the battlefield with their spells. How well they do this is entirely up to the player, but generally they won't be any better or worse than any other character. Sometimes they'll shine and sometimes they won't.
Somethings that I would like to see changed with it are more skills and skill points, perhaps a way for them to store a touch spell in their weapon so they could cast another spell without losing the touch spell they just cast, and I would like to see some more magus arcana.
|
|
Forgive me here. I'm not an old school Paizo freak, and I'm definitely not a despicable min-maxer, but I think I see the problem with the Magus class.
New things, especially in RPGs, have to be better to be considered good. The Magus isn't necessarily better than existing Figher-Wizard or Fighter-Sorcerer options, it just gives different options.
Try to look at it that way, and it's actually a pretty neat class.
The problem is, no matter how you look at it, it's a neat class that's also really bad at what it tries to do.
It doesn't need to be better then anything, but that doesn't give it the excuse to be bad.
Same challenge Cartigan offered me. Name a level and I'll make a Magus and you can make another class and we'll compare them.
You keep saying bad. I say compared to what.
Yes, because it was MMOs, not the first edition of D&D, that came up with the idea of a party consisting of "Thief, fighting man, magic user, and cleric."
The thief? He wasn't even introduced until Supplement 1.
And the classic AD&D party was about six PCs of various classes, usually including at least one each of fighter, cleric, and magic user, plus their henchmen and a dozen hireling swordsmen.
I think it would be safe to assume 8 am PST, or whenever Paizo staff gets in in the morning for them. More likely 12:00 am PST if you want to be safe.
Okay, thanks Dorje Sylas.
I decided to go ahead and throw my magus villain at them tomorrow anyway (he'll be encounter #2 for the night) so, I should be able to post my playtest that night (or Tuesday morning).
Hope I wasn't a pain in the butt... I just wanted to know a time so I could actually participate in playtest feedback this time. This one seems pretty important. (Not that the other playtests weren't mind you...)
Anyway... thanks.
Dean
I have. You got two out of four right. They intended for it to be that way for all four of them, but they forgot to actually give the trap disarmer a decent chance at disarming traps but did not forget to make him try twice and have to succeed both times so the most likely outcome is that the thief finds the trap by falling victim to it. Livestock can do that, and smart parties will quickly become sheep herders to compensate.
They also forgot to give the Fighter something to make enemies actually attack him.
Well, perhaps "tried" is better then "this is what they did" ;p
In MMOs on the other hand, players tend to be downright hostile if you don't play your class according to its role in the group. Fighters should be holding aggro, not thinking about damage - that's what mages and DPS classes are for. Cleric is strictly a buff and heal bot and should never get near a mob.
Maybe it's just the people I've gamed table top with. Maybe it's the MMO focus of grinding XP as efficiently as possible. All I know for sure is based on my personal experience, even in 2nd ed I had more accommodation for not playing to class role than in MMOs. YMMV
This is - perhaps ironically - the opposite of how it works in WoW, where fighters and clerics can both be insanely powerful damage dealers. We ain't playing Everquest I anymore ;p
The problem isn't that it is under- or overpowered, the class is fine.
The problem is how you have to play the Magus to make it a balanced class, i.e. not using some of the class features.
Nothing that can't be modified after paytesting imho.
Yes, the key to playing the Magus is to not use it's class features.
Why are you playing the Magus again?
I don't post much on these kind of threads, but here's my 2 cp. I think where they are going with the Magus is about right. 3/4 attack bonus, with 3/4 spell progression. What they need to do is make enough options to allow the players to choose a path for themselves, whether they want to be more combat, or more spellcaster. This can probably be utilized by more Magus Arcana choices, options to swap for armor acess, or additional spell access, etc.
If a character wants a tougher, more powerful fighting Magus, then there may need to be one stream for that. If the player wants a more powerful magic caster, their should be a stream for them.
Otherwise, they may just need to create an alternate warrior/arcanist class based on the paladin template (full attack, low spells casting), or just choose to be a straight fighter, or straight arcane spellcaster.
For first posting, Maguc isn't terrible, so lets work together to make it great!!!
why in gods name did you dump Int down to 7? Twice? I get your optimizing but I never understand why anyone wants to play a pc like that.
why in gods name did you dump Int down to 7? Twice? I get your optimizing but I never understand why anyone wants to play a pc like that.
I once played an Int 3, Wis 15 PC as a secondary character. It was actually kind of fun acting all instinctual. But it WAS a backup character, and I wouldn't want my primary PC to communicate in growls.
(This occured when X-Men was publishing the Age of Apocalypse, so my 2nd PC was based on Wildchild...and my primary was like Sabretooth...in 2nd Ed. AD&D!)
Forgive me here. I'm not an old school Paizo freak, and I'm definitely not a despicable min-maxer, but I think I see the problem with the Magus class.
New things, especially in RPGs, have to be better to be considered good. The Magus isn't necessarily better than existing Figher-Wizard or Fighter-Sorcerer options, it just gives different options.
Try to look at it that way, and it's actually a pretty neat class.
Don't you just love it when people create threads purely to lecture people on their perception of the game without any numbers or play tests to back it up?
If a character wants a tougher, more powerful fighting Magus, then there may need to be one stream for that. If the player wants a more powerful magic caster, their should be a stream for them.
I don't think they need a choice or different stream for either of those, it really comes done to how you build the character. For example if I want a tough fighting magus I can make a dwarf with high strength, wield a dwarven waraxe, take toughness for the 1st lvl feat, take +1 hit point for favored class and cast shield when combat starts.
So at 1st lvl that's at least 12 HPdamage is d10+ 1 1/2 strength mod
and AC is 17 or higher
the attack bonus is just 1 off of the regular fighter and this can be overcome with magic weapon, true strike or even shocking grasp in a pinch(+3 to hit enemies wearing metal armor) and that's without any buffs from teammates.
It's all about what stats you have and what spells you choose. You can make a front line fighter type if you play your cards right, he might not be the best front line fighter but he he will be a front line fighter who can blast or zap enemies with spells and won't get hit by magic missiles.
That isn't to say that they can't make some magus archetypes with alternative class features. I would be interested to see what they come up with for those.
This is - perhaps ironically - the opposite of how it works in WoW, where fighters and clerics can both be insanely powerful damage dealers. We ain't playing Everquest I anymore ;pWoW has neither fighters nor clerics. Each of their classes grasps several archetypes and makes them available. The Warrior class in WoW handles the berserker, the armored knight, and the man-at-arms. The priest class handles the pure healer, the "come on, stand up to it" type of healer, and some crazy psionic thing. The paladin handles the holy warrior, the holy armored knight, and the cleric type guy.
But if these guys are set up to be "insanely powerful damage dealers" they aren't doing the other roles at all. They would have to "respec" to do that.
Anyway, WoW doesn't have wizards either. The closest is the mage class, which is basically a guy in a bathrobe shooting wads of blue or red as fast as he can jam 2.
That's more or less what I was implying, yes.
The "warrior" class isn't just there to tank, as Freesword claimed. Oh certainly one talent spec of warrior does tank, fantastically well. But an Arms warrior is a monstrocity in PVP and the Fury warrior is a blender of death.
...At least, it was such back when I played :3c
My point is, the claim was made that "all warriors do in MMOs is tank," and that couldn't be farther from the truth.
|
|
For a class that has to get up in an enemies face I notice a bit of survival issues in my game we're playtesting.
Something we tried to do to add at least a LITTLE something to it was add in this affect.
Arcane Shield (Su): Starting at Level 1 a Magus can spend a full round action to summon their Arcane Shield. This ability functions as the Shield spell but only supplies a +1 AC bonus instead of the +4. It also does not prevent magic missiles. Every 5 levels past level 1 (5,10,15,20) this bonus increases by +1 to a maximum of +5. This is a shield bonus to AC and does not stack with other shield bonuses to AC (such as from the actual shield spell).
We found this little addition helped (even moderately) at level 1. Between this and our Magus picking up Dodge, they had a bit better time im combat.
It has also been tossed back and forth about the Arcane Strike abilities a Magus gets. As a player pointed out to me, a Magus should be more in line with an Inquisitor in some regards. Their judgements last the fight so why don't the buffs from the Arcane Strike?
I'd say pull the Arcane Strike ability in line to a number of times per day like the Judgement ability with the buff granted based on spell sapped. We'll be playing with this Weds to find out how it works.
I think one of the problems with the magus is that it doesn't seem to be designed to fill a particular role. Sure, it's a nifty combo of arcanist and melee combatant, but it doesn't seem to fit one of the main party roles.Why does a class have to be pigeon holed into tank, healer, arcanist, thief? I am no fan of the scared cows of alignment or Vancian casting, but I would rather keep both if it means these restrictive class roles get confined to a firey pit forever. This is one of the things I detest most about MMOs. I tend to take it personally when I am playing my character the way I want to and am told I am "doing it wrong" because I am not playing the class "to role".
You will excuse my going into rant mode, but this is something that really grinds me the wrong way.
Because in a party game, a character has to do something that benefits the party. A role has to be filled. What do you propose the roles to be?
Arcane Shield (Su): Starting at Level 1 a Magus can spend a full round action to summon their Arcane Shield. This ability functions as the Shield spell but only supplies a +1 AC bonus instead of the +4. It also does not prevent magic missiles. Every 5 levels past level 1 (5,10,15,20) this bonus increases by +1 to a maximum of +5. This is a shield bonus to AC and does not stack with other shield bonuses to AC (such as from the actual shield spell).
No offense, but this is the kind of design I don't like.
"This ability functions like shield [proceed to remove all of shield's properties]."No, the ability gives you +1 Shield Bonus to AC + 1/5 lvls. And how long does it last? Even your description of it being like Shield doesn't explain that. Does it last indefinitely? Minutes per class level? Rounds per class level? Character level?
|
|
Arcane Shield (Su): Starting at Level 1 a Magus can spend a full round action to summon their Arcane Shield. This ability functions as the Shield spell but only supplies a +1 AC bonus instead of the +4. It also does not prevent magic missiles. Every 5 levels past level 1 (5,10,15,20) this bonus increases by +1 to a maximum of +5. This is a shield bonus to AC and does not stack with other shield bonuses to AC (such as from the actual shield spell).No offense, but this is the kind of design I don't like.
"This ability functions like shield [proceed to remove all of shield's properties]."
No, the ability gives you +1 Shield Bonus to AC + 1/5 lvls. And how long does it last? Even your description of it being like Shield doesn't explain that. Does it last indefinitely? Minutes per class level? Rounds per class level? Character level?
Sorry was just kind of posting off handedly.
We had it permenant though could be dispelled as normal. Basically, we gave them a monkish style AC progression just in magic form.
And don't worry, I'm not offended. Nothing to be offended about I don't think O_o