The duskblade in v3.5' Player's Handbook II had full base attack bonus and 5th-level spells and was perfectly balanced with other classes. Aside from a few knee-jerk reactions early on in its career, it saw a lot of play (in our group and others) and worked out extremely well in terms of balance, playability, and awesome/cool/fun concept.
Since Pathfinder core classes are a fair bit more powerful than v3.5 core classes anyways, it would make perfect sense for Pathfinder's version of the fighter/mage base class to be a little bit more powerful than the duskblade by having full base attack bonus and 6th-level spells.
How come it wasn't done THAT way?
EDIT: Feel free to use this space as a Magus/Duskblade comparison thread too if you want.
I completely understand asking the question and wanting to debate the topic, but honestly, its been said that there will not be a full BaB 3/4 caster class in Pathfinder, repeatedly, so this really isn't a playtest thread. The playtest threads are really for Jason to figure out what needs to be changed and tweaked, and if he spends time rereading a theoretical discussion thread, its pretty much just eating up design time at this point.
I completely understand asking the question and wanting to debate the topic, but honestly, its been said that there will not be a full BaB 3/4 caster class in Pathfinder, repeatedly, so this really isn't a playtest thread. The playtest threads are really for Jason to figure out what needs to be changed and tweaked, and if he spends time rereading a theoretical discussion thread, its pretty much just eating up design time at this point.
Well, if Jason or the other designers see it that way, they are welcome to move this thread into General Discussion.
|
Because people around here place a lot of importance on Full BAB. I don't understand why, and will never be able to convince them otherwise.
They've effectively married a high BAB with a D10HD, although personally I wouldn't mind seeing a Duskblade-like class work within those guidelines.
As for extra emphasis on BAB, it does matter more than in 3.5 as feats key off it.
Yes, the BAB-HD connection seems like a bad idea in hindsight. I'm uncertain what you mean about the feats.Off the top of my head, power attack is better with a high BAB, as is combat expertise. Im sure there are others too.
In the case of Power Attack, that was true with v3.5 as well.
Duskblade is a warrior with a little magic, the magus is supposed to meet IN THE MIDDLE. That's what was promised in the description of the book and of the class.
So he has a BAB in more or less in the middle between mage and warrior, and his spellcasting is more or less half of mage and warrior.
He should have enough magic to beat a weak warrior, and he should have enough enough magic to beat a weak mage.
What you ask, is like to ask a sorcerer-spell progression for the magus.
I agree that the magus still has some melee problems, but a full BAB is not a solution. Allow the bonded weapon to give a +X bonus greater than +5 would make an easy solution, at lvl 20 he got 15 BAB, and can have a +10 sword, makes 25 attack. A lvl 20 warrior has 20 BAB and can have a +5 sword, makes 25 attack. Of course the warrior gets 1 attack more, but with the worst attack bonus, but that would be only natural, because he is the 100% fighter after all.
Duskblade is a warrior with a little magic, the magus is supposed to meet IN THE MIDDLE. That's what was promised in the description of the book and of the class.
So he has a BAB in more or less in the middle between mage and warrior, and his spellcasting is more or less half of mage and warrior.
He should have enough magic to beat a weak warrior, and he should have enough enough magic to beat a weak mage.
What you ask, is like to ask a sorcerer-spell progression for the magus.
I agree that the magus still has some melee problems, but a full BAB is not a solution. Allow the bonded weapon to give a +X bonus greater than +5 would make an easy solution, at lvl 20 he got 15 BAB, and can have a +10 sword, makes 25 attack. A lvl 20 warrior has 20 BAB and can have a +5 sword, makes 25 attack. Of course the warrior gets 1 attack more, but with the worst attack bonus, but that would be only natural, because he is the 100% fighter after all.
Favored Enemy, Smite Evil, Weapon Training. These are all things that, when combined with full base attack bonus, make the fighting classes truly formidable.
Giving the Magus full base attack bonus by itself won't put him anywhere near the ranger, paladin, or fighter in combat ability simply because he won't have any of those attack/damage increasing abilities--in fact, he would have a primary class feature that PENALIZES his attacks by -4!
So now he can "almost" fight with a weapon, and he can "almost" blast with his spells. Sounds pretty half and half to me at that point.
The ablity to full attack and cast a spell at the same time is damned good with 3/4th BAB. It has been shown after level 10 the checks are almost auto passes.
having that with a full BAB with allows more attacks, earlier and combines with feats is a full out overpowered nighmare.
Bad, bad, bad idea. Ya want full attack, ya loose that power and no spells till level 4.
Hurray for arbitrary design!
The ablity to full attack and cast a spell at the same time is damned good with 3/4th BAB. It has been shown after level 10 the checks are almost auto passes.
having that with a full BAB with allows more attacks, earlier and combines with feats is a full out overpowered nighmare.
Bad, bad, bad idea. Ya want full attack, ya loose that power and no spells till level 4.
A class that doesn't get good until level 10 does not sound like a balanced class worth playing.
You are way overstating the potential for full BAB imbalance.
No I am not. By level 10 the -4 is trivial or near enough, so yeah it may need some work but giving some one what amounts to an auto pass on a full attack and a spell every round is bad.
No I am not. By level 10 the -4 is trivial or near enough, so yeah it may need some work but giving some one what amounts to an auto pass on a full attack and a spell every round is bad.
Auto-pass? Hardly.
Only fighters, paladins against evil, and rangers against favored enemies really get auto-pass attacks. Full BAB by itself just isn't enough.
So you see zero issue ever with 2 or 3 attacks and a spell per round? Or at high levels 3-4 and a 5-6th level spell as a full action?
Your simply not looking at everything. Attacking and casting a spell in the same round is powerful, doing so with multiple attack and boosting those attacks for free with class ability and access to fighter only feats that trigger off a full BAB, is not what I would call a good thing.
The mauges would not have full BAB alone.
The duskblade in v3.5' Player's Handbook II had full base attack bonus and 5th-level spells and was perfectly balanced with other classes. Aside from a few knee-jerk reactions early on in its career, it saw a lot of play (in our group and others) and worked out extremely well in terms of balance, playability, and awesome/cool/fun concept.
Since Pathfinder core classes are a fair bit more powerful than v3.5 core classes anyways, it would make perfect sense for Pathfinder's version of the fighter/mage base class to be a little bit more powerful than the duskblade by having full base attack bonus and 6th-level spells.
How come it wasn't done THAT way?
EDIT: Feel free to use this space as a Magus/Duskblade comparison thread too if you want.
For some reason the designers want to use the Bard chasis (without bard class features) instead of Duskblade.
What might be better is Quick casting more use/day gain at lower levels instead of Spell combat on a Duskblade chasis.
That would mean Arcane Channeling (which is better than Spell strike).
A Pathfindized version would be better. Since it is homebrew could add more buffs.
So it would be like this:
HD: becomes D10 (since it has full bab)
BAB: full
Saves: Good Fort/Will
Skills: same 2+ Int.
Spell Spontaneous, Start with 2 0th + 1/Int bonus, and 2 1st level.
+1 spell/level.
1. Cantrips, armored mage (light),
2. Combat casting, Quick Casting
3. Arcane Channeling
4. Armored Mage (Meduim)
5.
6. Spell power +2
7. Arcane Channeling +1
8. Armored Mage (Heavy Shield)
9.
10. Spell power +3
11. Arcane Channeling +2
12.
13. Arcane Channeling (full attack)
14. Spell power +4
15. Arcane Channeling +3
16.
17.
18. Spell power +5
19. Arcane Channeling +4
20. Spell power +6
Spells/day: 2x Cleric per/day are (same as 3.5 Duskblade)
Quick casting: moves to level 2 to compete w/ Spell combat (with minor editing in useage): Cast spell as swift action, as long as spell standard action or less.
This is useable each day 2 + 1/2 Duskblade class level.
Arcane Channeling: Standard action, cast touch spell you know abd deeliver through weapon with melee attack in same action, no provoke. If attack successful, attack deals damage normally then spell effect is resolved.
At 7th level and every 4 levels thereafter, you gain a bonus to attack bonus when channeling a spell starting at +1 (up to +4 at level 19).
At 13th level, you can full attack while channeling.
Each target gets effect of touch spell.
Spell power: when you damagea target, it lowers their SR by indicated number. This last till end of encounter
Basically that sums up.
I changed Cantrips (before there were X/day)
Arcane Channeling now adds attack bonus
Quick Cast gained sooner and used more often.
So you see zero issue ever with 2 or 3 attacks and a spell per round? Or at high levels 3-4 and a 5-6th level spell as a full action?
You mean exactly like it already works? Should the Magus be limited such that it can only perform one attack on a full-round action indefinitely?
There is a difference
Current
1 Attack + spell 1-7th level
2 attacks + spell 8-14th level
3 attacks + spell 15-20th level
Full BAB
1 attack + spell 1-5th level
2 attacks + spell 6-10 level
3 attacks + spell 11-15 level
4 attacks + spell 16-20 level
I think its already powerful, buffing the ablity with more attacks is not a great idea
I'm just surprised people keep thinking the dusk blade was a balanced class. Aside from the PHB2 being a horribly written book, I'm guessing no-one else ran into the twf Dusk blade with 2 Keen-spell storing kukris? The burst damage was insane.
The fact that you think burst damage "is insane" is telling.
I'm just surprised people keep thinking the dusk blade was a balanced class. Aside from the PHB2 being a horribly written book, I'm guessing no-one else ran into the twf Dusk blade with 2 Keen-spell storing kukris? The burst damage was insane.
A rogue with two keen spell storing kukris does more damage.
The ablity to full attack and cast a spell at the same time is damned good with 3/4th BAB.
Oh the 25% of the time it actually works?!
I will echo Ravingdork's sentiment. A class that isn't playable until level 10 is not exactly a balanced class. In fact, it's s~&!.
Ah pulling random percents out of thin air will always convince me....
By level 10 it works fine, which points to it being fine but needing work at the low end of the class. Most of the low end play test are showing it is a little weak while past 10h level it shows its fine if only able to keep up for 2 or 3 fights.
Taking that into account it would show that combat casting works fine, but needs adjusted for low ed and the class needs a bit more staying power.
Ah pulling random percents out of thin air will always convince me....
About as much as your random moronic statements about the ability to have a full BAB spellcasting class will convince anyone with the ability to think and do math for themselves.
I don't see much thinking, alot of random demands without thinking about the ripples such changes case across the board however.
"Moronic" Meatrace?
"Unthinking" Seeker?
Surely we can be more civil than this on a mere playtest.
Also, I presented a logical case, Seeker. Just because you disagree with it doesn't mean I didn't put any thought into it.
I know ya put thought into it, but ya didn't look at the whole of the thing. Its like folks wanting the wiz/sorc spell list. It sounds good till ya start to really think about it.
Changes to BAB, effect many things. How your ability work for starters, what feats work with them, how doe feats that used to not be able to get now effect the class with full BAB. How the extra attacks and spell casting combined effect every level.
You start a chain reaction and need to adjust every thing and look at how it effects everything.
Saying "Just make it Full BAB " is very arbitrary and not looking at the whole of he thing.
If you make a change you really need to sit and think, how the changes effects everything.
BAB is a Cumulative add on for the melee classes...a full BAB is another +5 to hit over levels...without using magic.
That is substantial and consistently undervalued. Consider...if it were NOT so valuable, would everyone be clamoring for it?
No. Yet people consistently whine when they don't have it. Coincdence? I think not.
FUll BAB is extremely valuable. The complaints about not having it only prove it so. Full BAB is to Melee what full Spellcasting is to Casters.
I don't see the Magus as full Melee anymore then I do a cleric. The problem with many of the playtests is we are hampered by not knowing the true extent of his spell list and any available feats that are coming out in the same book...we can only work with what we are given.
Likewise, i dont' see the magus replacing either class in its role, anymore then I see the Bard doing so. If that means the Magus is a 5th wheel class, with more versatility then power, I'm quite cool with that. Wizards should dominate spellcasting, fighters should dominate melee, and a magus should fill either slot on demand, but definitely not dominate in either.
Otherwise, why play a fighter or wizard, when you can get the best of both?
\===Aelryinth
I'm just surprised people keep thinking the dusk blade was a balanced class. Aside from the PHB2 being a horribly written book,
Lolwhat?
I'm guessing no-one else ran into the twf Dusk blade with 2 Keen-spell storing kukris? The burst damage was insane.
...so? Was that a unique capability of the Duskblade?
|
|
I'm just surprised people keep thinking the dusk blade was a balanced class. Aside from the PHB2 being a horribly written book,
Lolwhat?
I'm guessing no-one else ran into the twf Dusk blade with 2 Keen-spell storing kukris? The burst damage was insane....so? Was that a unique capability of the Duskblade?
Of course it was. Everyone knows all the fighters with spell-storing Kukri's had no wizard friends to put spells into their precious toys... Much less go adventuring with said wizards!
stuff
Things of note.
Clerics get medium armor off the bat, and 9 spell levels. Also domains, some of which are phenomenal. Magus gets...crapped on because he's trying to be ARCANE casting and a competent melee combatant. Can't have that no no. Divine caster? Psh no problem, we won't even give you spell failure in armor! Also, here, have a million dollars! You win at life!Cl=/=BAB in any way shape or form. CL is about 10x more valuable, at least for a FULL caster, because you can't buy it. You can always get another +1 to your weapon or +2 strength, or take weapon focus. For the record I'm okay with Magus being medium BAB if he has stuff to make up for it. As it sits he has medium BAB AND other demands on his to hit. Among a lot of other problems. Remember that people are also clamoring for the Magus to be a spontaneous spellcaster, which is much much worse. Sometimes it's less about power and more about feel of the class.
Magus should not be an either or proposition. He should be capable (not dominating) in combat WHILE being a competent spellcaster. That's the whole point, to mix the both, not waffle between being crap at both, because that's what you get when you make a multiclass wiz/ftr. The whole point was to make something that wasn't that awful and yet everyone's comparing it level by level saying "yup Magus is on par with a wiz/ftr who is taking alternating class levels in these two classes" which is freaking horrible and painful. If he can't do both things, at once, competently (read: not as well as a fighter in combat and not as good as a wizard in spellcasting, but gets by) out of the box then it's a box we should send back to the manufacturer.
For the record though, just doing something simple like making the Magus full BAB and changing little to nothing else actually fixes a lot of problems. He can have weapon focus or power attack at level 1. Lets him not auto-miss or do laughable 1h damage. The poor guy is already straddled with being forced to use a light or 1h weapon to do his main shtick, without full power attack his damage is pathetic. It makes spell combat that much less painful until level 8. So yes, while BAB isn't the bee's knees, to hit IS. So is doing damage that does more than tickle. Unfortunately these things are bizaarely tied to having a BAB of +1 or better, so at level 1 and 2 the Magus is the worst class in the game. Level 4 ish he is playable, and level 8 he is good i.e. on par but still not as good as his contemporaries: bard, inquisitor, and summoner. The summoner, by the way, can cast and attack in the same round from levels 1-20 with no penalties because his goddanged eidolon doubles his action economy. Cheater!
Also, while HD is married to BAB now, an extra 1hp a level isn't exactly game breaking. People act like the move from d8 to d10 makes him automatically able to take a punch in the lovespuds and laugh it off. It's 1hp/level.
Aerylith, your argument is silly. "why play a wiz or ftr when you can get the best of both" well drrrr. Because a magus is only 6 levels of spells, a very limited spell list, and doesn't get a bonus feat every other level on top of wpn/armor training, bravery, tower shields, etc etc. Those classes canNOT be boiled down to "that guy's a full caster" and "that guy has full base attack".
I think there's a point to be made that 3/4ths BAB can work...but you need to drastically alter how the Magus succeeds to replace it.
It's Psychic Warrior vs Duskblade.
Psychic Warrior was a really good class. Duskblade was a really good class. The difference was, Duskblade used his spells purely to do damage (he already had full BAB), whereas Psychic Warrior used powers to add both damage and attack bonus at the same time (He had 3/4ths BAB).
It's the difference between pure damage dealing and offensive buffs.
Right now, the Magus' spell list reads like the Duskblade - and, accordingly, he should have full BAB to go with it. He doesn't have offensive buffs to knock his lower attack bonus into "able to fight" levels. He is, in fact, pretty much the only medium BAB character who cannot increase his attack bonus, which is saying a lot.
If the Magus' spell list was more like the Psychic Warrior, with a lot of offensive buffs to increase his ability to do damage, then the medium BAB wouldn't be so much of a problem. But it's not that spell list.
The Magus has a lot of damage dealing spells with a few utility spells. He has a fair number of defensive buffs, but didn't we learn from the monk that being purely defensive is meaningless?
ALso there's people here that think the Warlock was overpowered. Duh, they'll think the Duskblade was "too good." They hold the 3.5 fighter as the standard for power, after all. When you see a turd sandwich as good eatin', even the simplest BLT will seem divine in comparison.
I too thought this class should have been full base attack and D10 hit die with light casting. We already have a number of mid-casters as it is, edlrich knight, dragon disciple, Arcane Dualist, and the Inquisitor to a degree.
Sure we have room for another mid-rang caster/fighter, but to do so with NO full melee light caster seems very odd.
|
|
ALso there's people here that think the Warlock was overpowered. Duh, they'll think the Duskblade was "too good." They hold the 3.5 fighter as the standard for power, after all. When you see a turd sandwich as good eatin', even the simplest BLT will seem divine in comparison.
I played with that guy he also thought my Mindblade was broken.
|
I too thought this class should have been full base attack and D10 hit die with light casting. We already have a number of mid-casters as it is, edlrich knight, dragon disciple, Arcane Dualist, and the Inquisitor to a degree.
Sure we have room for another mid-rang caster/fighter, but to do so with NO full melee light caster seems very odd.
Welcome to the club. This is the thread for you.
Welcome to the club. This is the thread for you.I too thought this class should have been full base attack and D10 hit die with light casting. We already have a number of mid-casters as it is, edlrich knight, dragon disciple, Arcane Dualist, and the Inquisitor to a degree.
Sure we have room for another mid-rang caster/fighter, but to do so with NO full melee light caster seems very odd.
Not quite what I was talking about, when I talk about light casting I must have misunderstood how it was being used.
I think a full BAB Magus is fine. Jason said not a chance, though, so there it is.
|
I have NO issues with the duskblade getting full BAB because their spells known was VERY limited (1 per level after level 1 is pretty bad) from a VERY limited spell list. Instead of the magus getting boosted from 3/4 BAB to full with such limited magic, I'd rather see the magus spell list increased. This is suppose to be a balanced gish. The duskblade was not. The duskblade is a fighter oriented gish and if you really want that, bug them about it in UC as even if they are interested in making such a class, it would be out of place in UM anyways.
Course I don't think I would ever play a magus over an EK. The low level suck worse for the magus. The mid levels are a bit better for the magus...but high levels are better for the EK. And I like spells too much to give up 7-9th level spells for what the magus gives. Which means that some of the high level spells need to be lowered and stuck on the magus list. Like how it is for the bards or this class is really gonna end up being the next soul knife.