|
In the latest episode of the Know Directions podcast, there was an interview with Jason Bulhman. Amongst other interesting things he revealed a provisional fix to Spell Combat that I hadn't seen discussed here. They were:
- The ability is now received at 1st level
- The penalty on attacks is now -2
- The penalty on Concentration is gone
- You can increase the penalty to attack to increase the Concentration check (on a one-to-one basis)
What are people's thoughts?
In the latest episode of the Know Directions podcast, there was an interview with Jason Bulhman. Amongst other interesting things he revealed a provisional fix to Spell Combat that I hadn't seen discussed here. They were:
- The ability is now received at 1st level
- The penalty on attacks is now -2
- The penalty on Concentration is gone
- You can increase the penalty to attack to increase the Concentration check (on a one-to-one basis)
What are people's thoughts?
This seems like a very powerful 1 level dip to me now. I will need to see what else it gets. In an EK build, I would gladly lose 1 BAB for this ability, taking wizard for the caster levels. With this much extra power, I think they really need to make sure their wording on it is better, so that you cannot cast from your wizard spell slots spells that are on the magus list.
Other than that, I like it. It may be overpowered (though I was arguing that it was ballanced before). It does fix most people's complaints about the ability, but does not address may of our other concerns. Hopefully those will also be addressed.
This seems like a very powerful 1 level dip to me now. I will need to see what else it gets. In an EK build, I would gladly lose 1 BAB for this ability, taking wizard for the caster levels. With this much extra power, I think they really need to make sure their wording on it is better, so that you cannot cast from your wizard spell slots spells that are on the magus list.
Other than that, I like it. It may be overpowered (though I was arguing that it was ballanced before). It does fix most people's complaints about the ability, but does not address may of our other concerns. Hopefully those will also be addressed.
Isn't spell combat strict to Magus spells, though? It's not exactly useful as a lvl 1 dip. And if the arcana still requires magus6 (charlevel6?) you won't be "dipping". Even at the most lenient interpretation the multiclassing arcana can't be taken before the third level in this class.
Isn't spell combat strict to Magus spells, though? It's not exactly useful as a lvl 1 dip. And if the arcana still requires magus6 (charlevel6?) you won't be "dipping". Even at the most lenient interpretation the multiclassing arcana can't be taken before the third level in this class.This seems like a very powerful 1 level dip to me now. I will need to see what else it gets. In an EK build, I would gladly lose 1 BAB for this ability, taking wizard for the caster levels. With this much extra power, I think they really need to make sure their wording on it is better, so that you cannot cast from your wizard spell slots spells that are on the magus list.
Other than that, I like it. It may be overpowered (though I was arguing that it was ballanced before). It does fix most people's complaints about the ability, but does not address may of our other concerns. Hopefully those will also be addressed.
"He can also cast any spell with a casting time of 1 standard action from the magus spell list."
My current reading of it is that it is restricted to any spell on their list, not just spells they know as a magus. If you are EK, with 9th level wizard spells, chance are you know a bunch of spells on the magus list and this ability would be very useful to get up to 6th level spells on a full attack.
Isn't spell combat strict to Magus spells, though? It's not exactly useful as a lvl 1 dip. And if the arcana still requires magus6 (charlevel6?) you won't be "dipping". Even at the most lenient interpretation the multiclassing arcana can't be taken before the third level in this class.This seems like a very powerful 1 level dip to me now. I will need to see what else it gets. In an EK build, I would gladly lose 1 BAB for this ability, taking wizard for the caster levels. With this much extra power, I think they really need to make sure their wording on it is better, so that you cannot cast from your wizard spell slots spells that are on the magus list.
Other than that, I like it. It may be overpowered (though I was arguing that it was ballanced before). It does fix most people's complaints about the ability, but does not address may of our other concerns. Hopefully those will also be addressed.
"He can also cast any spell with a casting time of 1 standard action from the magus spell list."
My current reading of it is that it is restricted to any spell on their list, not just spells they know as a magus. If you are EK, with 9th level wizard spells, chance are you know a bunch of spells on the magus list and this ability would be very useful to get up to 6th level spells on a full attack.
I wonder if that interpretation is really valid... class descriptions are self contained unless stated otherwise so I presume in this case, if he can't cast from his spell list (not from other lists that overlap), he can't SComb it.
"He can also cast any spell with a casting time of 1 standard action from the magus spell list."
My current reading of it is that it is restricted to any spell on their list, not just spells they know as a magus. If you are EK, with 9th level wizard spells, chance are you know a bunch of spells on the magus list and this ability would be very useful to get up to 6th level spells on a full attack.
Umm yeah any spell from his list, he can cast with his magus slots, which are only usable with spells he gains from his maguses level with spells he was in his magues spell book.
A 1 level dip is useless, ya only could use the spells from your one level of magues. You can't be a wizard 1/ sorc 8 and used your sorc slots to cast wizard spells or add spells into your spellbook a level 1 wizard can not cast. This is the very same thing.
You can use spell combat only with magues spell slots, and those are usable only with spell you learn from that class.
I actually started playing a Magus (lvl 1) just this pass weekend, and was glad to catch the spoiler on the pod cast....
I think I like the fix, although it does leave me wondering a couple of things...
Does Spellstrike still fall at 1st level as well ? or has it been bumped to 2nd level ?
If both Spellstrike and Spellcombat are at 1st level, what's at 2nd level ?
|
|
Until we get a version we can actually pick over, instead of just a verbal discussion, probably using fast terms instead of the actual meaning (like all his spells, instead of all his magus spells), I'm not really worried about much.
I just hope they really understand what was wrong with magus, instead of just tweaking numbers.
"He can also cast any spell with a casting time of 1 standard action from the magus spell list."
My current reading of it is that it is restricted to any spell on their list, not just spells they know as a magus. If you are EK, with 9th level wizard spells, chance are you know a bunch of spells on the magus list and this ability would be very useful to get up to 6th level spells on a full attack.
Umm yeah any spell from his list, he can cast with his magus slots, which are only usable with spells he gains from his maguses level with spells he was in his magues spell book.
A 1 level dip is useless, ya only could use the spells from your one level of magues. You can't be a wizard 1/ sorc 8 and used your sorc slots to cast wizard spells or add spells into your spellbook a level 1 wizard can not cast. This is the very same thing.
You can use spell combat only with magues spell slots, and those are usable only with spell you learn from that class.
This brings up an interesting question. When a magus multiclasses with wizard levels, does he automatically get to use his magus spells as wizard spells? Does he have to keep two copies of each spell?
|
|
This brings up an interesting question. When a magus multiclasses with wizard levels, does he automatically get to use his magus spells as wizard spells? Does he have to keep two copies of each spell?"He can also cast any spell with a casting time of 1 standard action from the magus spell list."
My current reading of it is that it is restricted to any spell on their list, not just spells they know as a magus. If you are EK, with 9th level wizard spells, chance are you know a bunch of spells on the magus list and this ability would be very useful to get up to 6th level spells on a full attack.
Umm yeah any spell from his list, he can cast with his magus slots, which are only usable with spells he gains from his maguses level with spells he was in his magues spell book.
A 1 level dip is useless, ya only could use the spells from your one level of magues. You can't be a wizard 1/ sorc 8 and used your sorc slots to cast wizard spells or add spells into your spellbook a level 1 wizard can not cast. This is the very same thing.
You can use spell combat only with magues spell slots, and those are usable only with spell you learn from that class.
Why would it be one list? It's 2 classes. It's always worked like this, so this wouldn't be any different.
yeah its two lists, just like a wizard sorcerer. The sorcerer still needs to have a spell on his known sorcerer list to cast it with those slots, even if it already is in his spell book.
Nothing new about having two lists.
yeah its two lists, just like a wizard sorcerer. The sorcerer still needs to have a spell on his known sorcerer list to cast it with those slots, even if it already is in his spell book.
Nothing new about having two lists.
Well I think the interesting thing is that wizards and magi can learn spells from each other. I have no problem with keeping separate lists. I just wondered if you need to have two different copies of say truestrike in your book/books.
"He can also cast any spell with a casting time of 1 standard action from the magus spell list."
My current reading of it is that it is restricted to any spell on their list, not just spells they know as a magus. If you are EK, with 9th level wizard spells, chance are you know a bunch of spells on the magus list and this ability would be very useful to get up to 6th level spells on a full attack.
Umm yeah any spell from his list, he can cast with his magus slots, which are only usable with spells he gains from his maguses level with spells he was in his magues spell book.
A 1 level dip is useless, ya only could use the spells from your one level of magues. You can't be a wizard 1/ sorc 8 and used your sorc slots to cast wizard spells or add spells into your spellbook a level 1 wizard can not cast. This is the very same thing.
You can use spell combat only with magues spell slots, and those are usable only with spell you learn from that class.
Fireball is on the magus's spell list. It meets the requirements set for the current version of spell combat, regardless of whether or not this particular casting is from a magus spell slot, a wizard spell slot, or a spell completion item. It does not say spells in the Magus's spell book. His spell list is the entirety of the spells that a Magus could know, not just ones he does know or ones that he has memorized in a magus spell slot.
eh no, to use spell combat ya need to cast the spell as a magues, it must be from his list yes, but must also use his magus spell slots. It is a class ablity they always work in that manor unless it spells out clearly they do not.
This one does not say clearly it does not follow the standard class rules, so it does.
eh no, to use spell combat ya need to cast the spell as a magues, it must be from his list yes, but must also use his magus spell slots. It is a class ablity they always work in that manor unless it spells out clearly they do not.
This one does not say clearly it does not follow the standard class rules, so it does.
No where in the rules for the ability does it say that you must use spells from the magus's spell slots. It says spell list. That could be a scroll by the rules, as you would still be casting a spell on your list. There is nothing in the rules as they are currently written to prevent someone from casting wizard spells that are on the magus list using spell combat.
It is a class ablity. Class ablitys work off items gained from that class. So yes unless it clearly says otherwise it uses spells slots from the class.
Your view on how it works is not one that is valid with how every other class works. Ya can't cast sorcerer spells with wizard spell slots. This is the very same thing.
No where in the rules for the ability does it say that you must use spells from the magus's spell slots. It says spell list. That could be a scroll by the rules, as you would still be casting a spell on your list. There is nothing in the rules as they are currently written to prevent someone from casting wizard spells that are on the magus list using spell combat.eh no, to use spell combat ya need to cast the spell as a magues, it must be from his list yes, but must also use his magus spell slots. It is a class ablity they always work in that manor unless it spells out clearly they do not.
This one does not say clearly it does not follow the standard class rules, so it does.
Remember that the contents of a class are referred only to that class. For example: When the flurry of blows states that the flurry bab is the monk's level, this is only the BAB that the monk class contributes to the attack. (this was a big deal back a while ago).
Thus, all text in the magus description is referred onl to the magus contribution, unless it is stated otherwise (like the Broad Study arcana, whose sole purpose is to allow spells from other classes to be used with SComb)
No where in the rules for the ability does it say that you must use spells from the magus's spell slots. It says spell list. That could be a scroll by the rules, as you would still be casting a spell on your list. There is nothing in the rules as they are currently written to prevent someone from casting wizard spells that are on the magus list using spell combat.eh no, to use spell combat ya need to cast the spell as a magues, it must be from his list yes, but must also use his magus spell slots. It is a class ablity they always work in that manor unless it spells out clearly they do not.
This one does not say clearly it does not follow the standard class rules, so it does.
Remember that the contents of a class are referred only to that class. For example: When the flurry of blows states that the flurry bab is the monk's level, this is only the BAB that the monk class contributes to the attack. (this was a big deal back a while ago).
Thus, all text in the magus description is referred onl to the magus contribution, unless it is stated otherwise (like the Broad Study arcana, whose sole purpose is to allow spells from other classes to be used with SComb)
I have thus far not found a single ruling or confirmation of this. If you can find one, I would love to see it. It is not in the book anywhere, or the faq. Though I am incorrect about scrolls, apparently when you cast off of a scroll you aren't actually casting a spell, based off of the ruling.
| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
No where in the rules for the ability does it say that you must use spells from the magus's spell slots. It says spell list. That could be a scroll by the rules, as you would still be casting a spell on your list. There is nothing in the rules as they are currently written to prevent someone from casting wizard spells that are on the magus list using spell combat.eh no, to use spell combat ya need to cast the spell as a magues, it must be from his list yes, but must also use his magus spell slots. It is a class ablity they always work in that manor unless it spells out clearly they do not.
This one does not say clearly it does not follow the standard class rules, so it does.
Remember that the contents of a class are referred only to that class. For example: When the flurry of blows states that the flurry bab is the monk's level, this is only the BAB that the monk class contributes to the attack. (this was a big deal back a while ago).
Thus, all text in the magus description is referred onl to the magus contribution, unless it is stated otherwise (like the Broad Study arcana, whose sole purpose is to allow spells from other classes to be used with SComb)
Does a Cleric6(Healing Domain)/Bard4/MysticTheurge10 Empower her cure spells that she casts as a Bard?
As far as casting actual bard cure spells, no. Dunno about theurge stuff.
Does a Cleric6(Healing Domain)/Bard4/MysticTheurge10 Empower her cure spells that she casts as a Bard?
My interpretation is yes.
As far as casting actual bard cure spells, no. Dunno about theurge stuff.
And I suppose that a Fey Sorcerer / Nature Oracle / Mystic Theurge casting Command (or some other divine spell from the Compulsion subschool) would not get the +2 to DC? Such multiclass casters are not very strong anyway, so I'm in favour of allowing the synergy unless that's doing it wrong. I'm not sure where that rules call comes from--can you point me to a page number or a FAQ entry? If not, shall we FAQ-mark it together?
@Back on topic--I'm interested to see if there are limits to the attack roll penalty, lest a Magus just add an attack at a hideous penalty to ensure that all their casting on the defensive auto-succeeds.
As far as casting actual bard cure spells, no. Dunno about theurge stuff.And I suppose that a Fey Sorcerer / Nature Oracle / Mystic Theurge casting Command (or some other divine spell from the Compulsion subschool) would not get the +2 to DC? Such multiclass casters are not very strong anyway, so I'm in favour of allowing the synergy unless that's doing it wrong. I'm not sure where that rules call comes from--can you point me to a page number or a FAQ entry? If not, shall we FAQ-mark it together?
@Back on topic--I'm interested to see if there are limits to the attack roll penalty, lest a Magus just add an attack at a hideous penalty to ensure that all their casting on the defensive auto-succeeds.
I think that by mid levels, their defensive casting checks will be so good that it wont really matter. A couple extra penalties on the defensive check, but I doubt you will ever see much more than a -2 to the attack roll, and by level 10 I don't think you will see it used much at all.
I think that by mid levels, their defensive casting checks will be so good that it wont really matter. A couple extra penalties on the defensive check, but I doubt you will ever see much more than a -2 to the attack roll, and by level 10 I don't think you will see it used much at all.As far as casting actual bard cure spells, no. Dunno about theurge stuff.And I suppose that a Fey Sorcerer / Nature Oracle / Mystic Theurge casting Command (or some other divine spell from the Compulsion subschool) would not get the +2 to DC? Such multiclass casters are not very strong anyway, so I'm in favour of allowing the synergy unless that's doing it wrong. I'm not sure where that rules call comes from--can you point me to a page number or a FAQ entry? If not, shall we FAQ-mark it together?
@Back on topic--I'm interested to see if there are limits to the attack roll penalty, lest a Magus just add an attack at a hideous penalty to ensure that all their casting on the defensive auto-succeeds.
You saw my numbers, and I saw yours, so we both know this is true by mid-levels. I'm referring to the low-level situation that goes something like this:
"Oh crap, I'm flanked! I really want to 5-foot adjust and hit four of these guys with a Colour Spray, but I'll have to do that on the defensive, and since I'm level 1 with Combat Casting and 16 Int, that has a 40% chance to fail...oh wait, that's right! I only really wanted the spell, so I'll swing around my sword really really inaccurately (-8 more to hit on top of the -2) and auto-succeed. Good thing it's much easier to cast my magic if I swing around a sword wildly."
Now if there's a limiter built in on the penalties, which I fully expect, then this won't be an issue. And I'm sure there could be a way to phrase it like fighting defensively, where the wild swings protect you from incoming attacks or something, but you see what I mean.
"Oh crap, I'm flanked! I really want to 5-foot adjust and hit four of these guys with a Colour Spray, but I'll have to do that on the defensive, and since I'm level 1 with Combat Casting and 16 Int, that has a 40% chance to fail...oh wait, that's right! I only really wanted the spell, so I'll swing around my sword really really inaccurately (-8 more to hit on top of the -2) and auto-succeed. Good thing it's much easier to cast my magic if I swing around a sword wildly."
Now if there's a limiter built in on the penalties, which I fully expect, then this won't be an issue. And I'm sure there could be a way to phrase it like fighting defensively, where the wild swings protect you from incoming attacks or something, but you see what I mean.
Well certainly there would lots of validity to this very situation. Your wild flailing is infact a targeted defense to protect you while casting. And yes it makes the defensive casting much easier, but if it is a class ability it is just fine, as it is part of what you get for trading away some casting ability (as 6 level caster as opposed to a full caster in order to mix fighting and casting). Its actually a good example of a non obvious way to mix fighting and casting.
Though I do admit I would want a restriction in there like there is for combat expertise and power attack. But somehow I expect that will be there when we actually see it written down.
Every time you search it ends at that post, whose user signs and claims to be Bulmahn, but I can't personally confirm if the identity is true.
You're right, that is surely the implication given, so I wonder why Magus even mentions "from the Magus spell list" at all in the Spell Combat and Spellstrike class features--under that interpretation, it would be needless text. I think there's a good chance that JB was talking about terms like "your level" being self-contained as in class level, rather than limiting other goodies not based on level for multiclass characters. Magus aside, since its in beta and the wording is being worked on, I think the issue in the two I brought up probably deserves its own faq entry and its own thread--you'll see it in rules shortly!
I think that by mid levels, their defensive casting checks will be so good that it wont really matter. A couple extra penalties on the defensive check, but I doubt you will ever see much more than a -2 to the attack roll, and by level 10 I don't think you will see it used much at all.As far as casting actual bard cure spells, no. Dunno about theurge stuff.And I suppose that a Fey Sorcerer / Nature Oracle / Mystic Theurge casting Command (or some other divine spell from the Compulsion subschool) would not get the +2 to DC? Such multiclass casters are not very strong anyway, so I'm in favour of allowing the synergy unless that's doing it wrong. I'm not sure where that rules call comes from--can you point me to a page number or a FAQ entry? If not, shall we FAQ-mark it together?
@Back on topic--I'm interested to see if there are limits to the attack roll penalty, lest a Magus just add an attack at a hideous penalty to ensure that all their casting on the defensive auto-succeeds.
You saw my numbers, and I saw yours, so we both know this is true by mid-levels. I'm referring to the low-level situation that goes something like this:
"Oh crap, I'm flanked! I really want to 5-foot adjust and hit four of these guys with a Colour Spray, but I'll have to do that on the defensive, and since I'm level 1 with Combat Casting and 16 Int, that has a 40% chance to fail...oh wait, that's right! I only really wanted the spell, so I'll swing around my sword really really inaccurately (-8 more to hit on top of the -2) and auto-succeed. Good thing it's much easier to cast my magic if I swing around a sword wildly."
Now if there's a limiter built in on the penalties, which I fully expect, then this won't be an issue. And I'm sure there could be a way to phrase it like fighting defensively, where the wild swings protect you from incoming attacks or something, but you see what I mean.
I don't really mind this. It gives the Magus the ability to spend a full round action to cast defensively better. I think that is a great class ability. The fact that it has this wierd side effect of requiring you to make an attack isn't anything new. Just look at Combat Expertise. "S!#+ I need more AC versus those archers. Guess I will attack this stool next to me." At least the fact that you are casting defensively implies that you have a target in range.
"Oh crap, I'm flanked! I really want to 5-foot adjust and hit four of these guys with a Colour Spray, but I'll have to do that on the defensive, and since I'm level 1 with Combat Casting and 16 Int, that has a 40% chance to fail...oh wait, that's right! I only really wanted the spell, so I'll swing around my sword really really inaccurately (-8 more to hit on top of the -2) and auto-succeed. Good thing it's much easier to cast my magic if I swing around a sword wildly."
Now if there's a limiter built in on the penalties, which I fully expect, then this won't be an issue. And I'm sure there could be a way to phrase it like fighting defensively, where the wild swings protect you from incoming attacks or something, but you see what I mean.
Well certainly there would lots of validity to this very situation. Your wild flailing is infact a targeted defense to protect you while casting. And yes it makes the defensive casting much easier, but if it is a class ability it is just fine, as it is part of what you get for trading away some casting ability (as 6 level caster as opposed to a full caster in order to mix fighting and casting). Its actually a good example of a non obvious way to mix fighting and casting.
Though I do admit I would want a restriction in there like there is for combat expertise and power attack. But somehow I expect that will be there when we actually see it written down.
To be clear, I agree with you on all points (including that I expect to see that they already have a limit built in). My example was just to indulge my silly whimsy and show the extreme (though I guess more extreme would be to not take Combat Casting and take a -12 to auto-succeed).
To be clear, I agree with you on all points (including that I expect to see that they already have a limit built in). My example was just to indulge my silly whimsy and show the extreme (though I guess more extreme would be to not take Combat Casting and take a -12 to auto-succeed)."Oh crap, I'm flanked! I really want to 5-foot adjust and hit four of these guys with a Colour Spray, but I'll have to do that on the defensive, and since I'm level 1 with Combat Casting and 16 Int, that has a 40% chance to fail...oh wait, that's right! I only really wanted the spell, so I'll swing around my sword really really inaccurately (-8 more to hit on top of the -2) and auto-succeed. Good thing it's much easier to cast my magic if I swing around a sword wildly."
Now if there's a limiter built in on the penalties, which I fully expect, then this won't be an issue. And I'm sure there could be a way to phrase it like fighting defensively, where the wild swings protect you from incoming attacks or something, but you see what I mean.
Well certainly there would lots of validity to this very situation. Your wild flailing is infact a targeted defense to protect you while casting. And yes it makes the defensive casting much easier, but if it is a class ability it is just fine, as it is part of what you get for trading away some casting ability (as 6 level caster as opposed to a full caster in order to mix fighting and casting). Its actually a good example of a non obvious way to mix fighting and casting.
Though I do admit I would want a restriction in there like there is for combat expertise and power attack. But somehow I expect that will be there when we actually see it written down.
I presume howver much you can reduce on one side can't make the counterpenalty become a bonus. So the -4/-2 could become -6/0 or 0/-6 or anything inbetween.
I presume howver much you can reduce on one side can't make the counterpenalty become a bonus. So the -4/-2 could become -6/0 or 0/-6 or anything inbetween.To be clear, I agree with you on all points (including that I expect to see that they already have a limit built in). My example was just to indulge my silly whimsy and show the extreme (though I guess more extreme would be to not take Combat Casting and take a -12 to auto-succeed)."Oh crap, I'm flanked! I really want to 5-foot adjust and hit four of these guys with a Colour Spray, but I'll have to do that on the defensive, and since I'm level 1 with Combat Casting and 16 Int, that has a 40% chance to fail...oh wait, that's right! I only really wanted the spell, so I'll swing around my sword really really inaccurately (-8 more to hit on top of the -2) and auto-succeed. Good thing it's much easier to cast my magic if I swing around a sword wildly."
Now if there's a limiter built in on the penalties, which I fully expect, then this won't be an issue. And I'm sure there could be a way to phrase it like fighting defensively, where the wild swings protect you from incoming attacks or something, but you see what I mean.
Well certainly there would lots of validity to this very situation. Your wild flailing is infact a targeted defense to protect you while casting. And yes it makes the defensive casting much easier, but if it is a class ability it is just fine, as it is part of what you get for trading away some casting ability (as 6 level caster as opposed to a full caster in order to mix fighting and casting). Its actually a good example of a non obvious way to mix fighting and casting.
Though I do admit I would want a restriction in there like there is for combat expertise and power attack. But somehow I expect that will be there when we actually see it written down.
But it's starting out at -2/+0 now, so any additional reduction would make it a bonus. I also considered a cap that leveled up like Power Attack (1 until level 3, then 2 until level 7, etc) as a possible choice, but that only gives small adjustments until the concentration check is easy enough without, so now I'm not sure exactly how they'll do it.
Does it work like power attack? A penalty to attack for every attack made in that round? If not, I can see 2nd or third iterative attacks being sacrificed for the concentration check...it probably wouldn't hit anyway.
But it's starting out at -2/+0 now, so any additional reduction would make it a bonus. I also considered a cap that leveled up like Power Attack (1 until level 3, then 2 until level 7, etc) as a possible choice, but that only gives small adjustments until the concentration check is easy enough without, so now I'm not sure exactly how they'll do it.
I think limmitted to your BAB might be a good choice.
But it's starting out at -2/+0 now, so any additional reduction would make it a bonus. I also considered a cap that leveled up like Power Attack (1 until level 3, then 2 until level 7, etc) as a possible choice, but that only gives small adjustments until the concentration check is easy enough without, so now I'm not sure exactly how they'll do it.I think limmitted to your BAB might be a good choice.
I considered that as well, but thought they might not want to have it unusable at level 1--perhaps caster level?
I considered that as well, but thought they might not want to have it unusable at level 1--perhaps caster level?But it's starting out at -2/+0 now, so any additional reduction would make it a bonus. I also considered a cap that leveled up like Power Attack (1 until level 3, then 2 until level 7, etc) as a possible choice, but that only gives small adjustments until the concentration check is easy enough without, so now I'm not sure exactly how they'll do it.I think limmitted to your BAB might be a good choice.
There has to be some level-based element, otherwise you could take -20 to hit at first level for guaranteed success and a chance to roll a 20.
There has to be some level-based element, otherwise you could take -20 to hit at first level for guaranteed success and a chance to roll a 20.I considered that as well, but thought they might not want to have it unusable at level 1--perhaps caster level?But it's starting out at -2/+0 now, so any additional reduction would make it a bonus. I also considered a cap that leveled up like Power Attack (1 until level 3, then 2 until level 7, etc) as a possible choice, but that only gives small adjustments until the concentration check is easy enough without, so now I'm not sure exactly how they'll do it.I think limmitted to your BAB might be a good choice.
Yep, that was sort of my main point in my first post on the subject (except you really only need a -8 or so, -12 if you don't take Combat Casting)--sorry it got lost along the way. Silly internet making communication harder ^_^
|
|
There has to be some level-based element, otherwise you could take -20 to hit at first level for guaranteed success and a chance to roll a 20.
I considered that as well, but thought they might not want to have it unusable at level 1--perhaps caster level?
And what is wrong with that? You would be wasting a full attack to get +20 to your roll to concentration, or burning a spellslot and incurring an Attack of Opportunity to to gain a pretty much guaranteed attack, again only on a full attack. It doesn't seem broken to me, it does seem a little loose at the hips to not have a level description but I cant think of this really breaking anything.
Likewise I don't think that dipping into a level of magus for other classes is a problem. Rather I like the idea of some benefit for multiclassing classes rather than a paranoid curbing on the practice. It becomes a trade-off and not really a problem.-James
My only real issue with it is the Magus 1 Wizard 5 EK 10 build that then has the primary class ability of the magus with better spellcasting, better BAB, and better HP. The rest of the Magus class needs to be good enough to not make this build drasticly better. I do like class abilities working together most of the time.
Real question is why would you want to do such a combination? I could see fighter/wizard but not magus/wizard. Considering how much magus you'd need to take to get the arcana to open up the wizard list for use, you'd turn into a pretty crappy magus and a fairly sucky wizard as caster levels would obviously not stack.
This brings up an interesting question. When a magus multiclasses with wizard levels, does he automatically get to use his magus spells as wizard spells? Does he have to keep two copies of each spell?
Because for a feat and a BAB, any Eldrich Knight would get spell combat. I would make that trade any day. That is why the question of whether or not spell combat works on any spells on the magus's spell list, or just ones that he casts using magus spell slots is important.
Because for a feat and a BAB, any Eldrich Knight would get spell combat. I would make that trade any day. That is why the question of whether or not spell combat works on any spells on the magus's spell list, or just ones that he casts using magus spell slots is important.Real question is why would you want to do such a combination? I could see fighter/wizard but not magus/wizard. Considering how much magus you'd need to take to get the arcana to open up the wizard list for use, you'd turn into a pretty crappy magus and a fairly sucky wizard as caster levels would obviously not stack.
This brings up an interesting question. When a magus multiclasses with wizard levels, does he automatically get to use his magus spells as wizard spells? Does he have to keep two copies of each spell?
Taking 1 level of Magus does not let you use spell combat with a different classes spells. You need Broad Study to do that. Now if you only want it to cast a 1st level magus spell with spell combat, that is different. Is that worth a BAB and a feat? mmm, truestrike twice a day...
Taking 1 level of Magus does not let you use spell combat with a different classes spells. You need Broad Study to do that. Now if you only want it to cast a 1st level magus spell with spell combat, that is different. Is that worth a BAB and a feat? mmm, truestrike twice a day...
No he doesn't:
"He can also cast any spell with a casting time of 1 standard action from the magus spell list."
Doesn't say he has to have taken them with his Magus levels only that they have to be on the list.
Either it means what it says (which contradicts what you're saying) or it needs to be re-written.
Taking 1 level of Magus does not let you use spell combat with a different classes spells. You need Broad Study to do that. Now if you only want it to cast a 1st level magus spell with spell combat, that is different. Is that worth a BAB and a feat? mmm, truestrike twice a day...
That is NOT what Broad Study does. Broad Study lets you use Spellstrike and Spell Combat with spells that are not on the Magus spell list.
As written, as long as the spell is on the Magus spell list and takes 1 standard action to cast, he can use Spell Combat with it.
Note that the language to "correct" this (which assumes it is considered a problem) already exists in other classes. That language is "You can cast any Magus spell with a casting time of 1 standard action ...". The fact that they specified the spell list rather than the actual spell means that at least the original intent was to allow its use as a multiclassing feature.
Taking 1 level of Magus does not let you use spell combat with a different classes spells. You need Broad Study to do that. Now if you only want it to cast a 1st level magus spell with spell combat, that is different. Is that worth a BAB and a feat? mmm, truestrike twice a day...That is NOT what Broad Study does. Broad Study lets you use Spellstrike and Spell Combat with spells that are not on the Magus spell list.
As written, as long as the spell is on the Magus spell list and takes 1 standard action to cast, he can use Spell Combat with it.
Note that the language to "correct" this (which assumes it is considered a problem) already exists in other classes. That language is "You can cast any Magus spell with a casting time of 1 standard action ...". The fact that they specified the spell list rather than the actual spell means that at least the original intent was to allow its use as a multiclassing feature.
Seriously??? Well then I apologize to Caineach. I had no idea the wording was that open ended.