What if the Magus didn't lose a spell when failing to cast defensively?

[cfalcon]

Would this help with his limited spells / day? Right now a Magus who tries to melee and cast on the same round is taking a pretty big risk of doing nothing at all- and is rather likely at low level to lose a large chunk of his magical goodness right away.

What if the penalty was more in line with a melee class trying something a little more risky (lost opportunity) and less in line with a caster doing something they usually try NOT to do (cast while standing in melee)?

So what if the Magus didn't lose a spell when failing to cast defensively? What if it just stayed memorized, or was unable to be cast in the following round but after that would be available again?

[Freesword]

It would take some of the sting out of the spell combat penalties at low levels.

It is however a big benefit over all other casters.

[Chris Kenney]

Freesword wrote:

It would take some of the sting out of the spell combat penalties at low levels.

It is however a big benefit over all other casters.

I would probably only have it work this way during Spell Combat. (You're an expert in waiting until the perfect moment, and making the perfect moment with the weapon in your hand. If you fail to cast Defensively, you simply didn't find a good time to cast so you don't lose the spell.)

[seekerofshadowlight]

I don't think thats a great idea, seems too good.

[cfalcon]

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

I don't think thats a great idea, seems too good.

It could be too good. But I guess my point is-

Casting Defensively isn't something the typical caster WANTS to do, it's something his enemies FORCE him to do. It's balanced around that. This guy WANTS to do it, but the mechanics maybe punish him for doing that too much?

Every feat you spend improving your ability to cast, that everyone just is sort of used to casters having, is a feat you don't get to spend improving your ability to punch, that everyone is just sort of used to punchy-types having.

I guess my point is, if you are going to try to get an attack AND a spell off, and you have a huge chance of missing the attack, and a huge chance of the spell going away totally, that might be too much. Maybe it's enough if instead he just lost his ability to use it that round.

But, it could be too strong a suggestion.

[seekerofshadowlight]

so your saying they should be able to full attack and cast a spell with zero penalty if they fail the check?

Hell allowing them to full attack and cast a spell at the same time even with the -4 is huge. I am not ok with no penalty for failing that roll while doing 2 rounds worth of actions in 1 round.

[TriOmegaZero]

The penalty for failing the check is not getting two rounds worth of action according to the suggested change.

[Cartigan]

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

so your saying they should be able to full attack and cast a spell with zero penalty if they fail the check?

Other than having the spell do nothing and taking penalties to the attack?

[seekerofshadowlight]

And this is ok? You tried to cast the spell and failed, why should you gain a befit and zero drawback for failing?

I disagree with this. You should not get a freebi spell. And that is what this is.

[seekerofshadowlight]

Cartigan wrote:

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

so your saying they should be able to full attack and cast a spell with zero penalty if they fail the check?

Other than having the spell do nothing and taking penalties to the attack?

Big deal, ya take a -4 and can never loose a spell ever by failing...big deal.

[Cartigan]

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

Cartigan wrote:

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

so your saying they should be able to full attack and cast a spell with zero penalty if they fail the check?

Other than having the spell do nothing and taking penalties to the attack?

Big deal, ya take a -4 and can never loose a spell ever by failing...big deal.

Never lose a spell by failing - so what? The spell never goes off. You have gained nothing and decreased your chance to hit by 20%. If it succeeds, it works just the same as it would it you lost the spell when you failed. The only difference is people might actually use the ability.

[Malaclypse]

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

Cartigan wrote:

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

so your saying they should be able to full attack and cast a spell with zero penalty if they fail the check?

Other than having the spell do nothing and taking penalties to the attack?

Big deal, ya take a -4 and can never loose a spell ever by failing...big deal.

It's actually not a big deal. Compare: a rogue that misses can still use sneak damage next round, and never has to rest to regain sneak damage.

[greatamericanfolkhero]

cfalcon wrote:

Would this help with his limited spells / day? Right now a Magus who tries to melee and cast on the same round is taking a pretty big risk of doing nothing at all- and is rather likely at low level to lose a large chunk of his magical goodness right away.

What if the penalty was more in line with a melee class trying something a little more risky (lost opportunity) and less in line with a caster doing something they usually try NOT to do (cast while standing in melee)?

So what if the Magus didn't lose a spell when failing to cast defensively? What if it just stayed memorized, or was unable to be cast in the following round but after that would be available again?

This could actually work.

==
AKA 8one6

[Soliloquies]

cfalcon wrote:

Would this help with his limited spells / day? Right now a Magus who tries to melee and cast on the same round is taking a pretty big risk of doing nothing at all- and is rather likely at low level to lose a large chunk of his magical goodness right away.

What if the penalty was more in line with a melee class trying something a little more risky (lost opportunity) and less in line with a caster doing something they usually try NOT to do (cast while standing in melee)?

So what if the Magus didn't lose a spell when failing to cast defensively? What if it just stayed memorized, or was unable to be cast in the following round but after that would be available again?

After playtesting this today, I agree the risk was too great for me to even try to get a spell off while in combat. I had a better chance of hitting with the sword than making a 17 concentration check to get a spell off.

I can see a compromise where if you blow your concentration check by 5 or less, then you dont lose the spell but if you fail higher than 5, you lose it.

[james maissen]

cfalcon wrote:

So what if the Magus didn't lose a spell when failing to cast defensively? What if it just stayed memorized, or was unable to be cast in the following round but after that would be available again?

Well seeing that at higher levels the magus doesn't have much of a problem with spell combat because the penalty to hit is lessened then removed.. I'd suggest simply doing away with the penalty to hit and the requirement to cast defensively.

If you can get away with casting non-defensively (getting missed by the AOO, or casting 5' step and full attack) then enjoy the advantage.

But the attack penalty has to go away. A -4 to hit is insane. A monk only gets a -1 (net) to hit for flurry and that goes away by 5th becoming a bonus to hit by 9th that continues to increase. And the monk is considered weak.

The magus has a bard's resources for spells per day. They burn out quick as the magus plays like he's a sorcerer with his spells.

Economy will balance out spell combat.

The magus has to balance out being a d8 class in melee and that's a steep curve.

-James

[wakedown]

The penalty is pretty steep at low levels, especially level 2.

I'm very much in favor of *something* here. A level 2 magus has three 1st level spells. If the magus doesn't want to completely ignore his 1st level main-feature ability of Spellstrike, at _least_ one of those is shocking grasp, if not two of them.

At level two, this is actually better damage than his rogue buddy - he gets a whopping +2d6 on top of his weapon, while the rogue needs a flank and is only getting +1d6. Although, the rogue doesn't get -4 to hit when making a sneak attack, and on top of this only get a 50/50 chance to concentrate to do the extra damage. This is certainly a steep price to pay, when with 3 spell slots, you can only do this twice a day - whereas, usually in our "Day of 7-10 Encounters" a rogue is getting at least 12 rounds of sneak attack damage dice.

I'm also not a fan of adding more dice rolling to the game, so by not having the concentration check, you do streamline the game.

A possible mechanic might be to remove the spell failure chance if the Magus volunteers to cast the spell at a lower caster level. For example, if a 2nd level magus casts his shocking grasp as a 1st level caster, there's no need for the concentration check.

This still feels a bit weak, as a 2nd level magus who allocates all 3 spell slots to Shocking Grasp - in a day of encounters - gets +1d6 damage three times - and that's not counting the impact of -4 to hit.

[james maissen]

wakedown wrote:

At level two, this is actually better damage than his rogue buddy - he gets a whopping +2d6 on top of his weapon, while the rogue needs a flank and is only getting +1d6. Although, the rogue doesn't get -4 to hit when making a sneak attack, and on top of this only get a 50/50 chance to concentrate to do the extra damage.

Actually it's only better damage than the rogue buddy if the rogue is not making two attacks.

Seeing as the magus is spending his feat on combat casting in order for the combat cast chance to be as high as 50% (and even then need a 16INT), doesn't seem wrong for the rogue to spend his feat on TWF.

The magus will be taking a -4 to hit with this melee attack and be less than 50% chance of getting his spell delivered (he still has to hit after he successfully casts). Meanwhile the rogue will be taking a -2 to hit on each of his two melee attacks.

As you mentioned the magus is burning one of his 3 or so spells for the day to do this!

For a closer comparison at this level.. consider that a rogue could become proficient in the great sword by 2nd level. The rogue gets one attack for 3d6 +1.5x STR while the magus is dealing (say with a longsword) 1d8+1xSTR +2d6 shocking grasp. If the rogue has the same stats as the magus and both have a 14STR then he's dealing more damage than the magus before we consider the chances to hit and successfully cast the spell!

I suggest that people run the numbers without any penalties and without requiring one to combat cast (either have someone else provoke, get missed by the AOO or be out of range for it.. etc). I would posit that with the limited resources of the magus in terms of spells that this is already balanced.

-James