It has been mentioned in the old forum that while a high threat weapon like a scimitat increases the chance of critical hits, and this does affect the damage of the spell, the critical multiplier is only x2.
Does the new language change any of this? The way I read it, a critical effect could be impossible.
The way I see it:
Delivering touch spells through a keen scimitar just got real sweet.
It would be really sweet to get a clarification since the language has changed.
Pretty please
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
Dislike. More tweakings of the rules to make x multipliers less effective than ranges isn't a good thing - it's actually one of the changes I've like least about Pathfinder to date, since the two were intended to be equivalent.
I'll certainly be house ruling this. Either the spell only crits on a 20, or it doesn't benefit from a crit at all.
Dislike. More tweakings of the rules to make x multipliers less effective than ranges isn't a good thing - it's actually one of the changes I've like least about Pathfinder to date, since the two were intended to be equivalent.
I'll certainly be house ruling this. Either the spell only crits on a 20, or it doesn't benefit from a crit at all.
Agreed. I don't like the idea of players feeling like they have to have a high crit weapon to be effective.
It may come from my pala tank in world of warcraft, but damage spikes are a very bad thing.
If the enemy can hit me for 40-80 points of damage I and the healers can prepare for it. If there is a chance, even a small one, that an attack witll cause 160 points of damage I am dead.
So a critical multiplier over x2 isn´t really an option. I could live with something like:
Keen Spells: Spells delivered using spellstrike only crit a 19-20x2 on the weapon attack roll.
The difference between high and low crit weapons isn't as big a deal as it sounds, unless the magus is focusing exclusively on dealing damage with the spells.
What determines whether you want a 1p, 2p or 3p crit weapon is how much of your damage is going to come exclusively from spellstrike.
1p weapons are hosed since they rely on higher multipliers instead.
2p weapons are better whenever you aren't spellstriking damage. The standard comparison, scimitar vs longsword, has the scimitar lagging behind until the bonus damages were over +17.
Spellstrike is what closes that "Bonus damage minimum" gap quickly. Generally the less you rely on spellstrike the worse crit ranges become. I'm expecting things to vary significantly when a magus focuses his spell delivery on debuffs and medium-range effects.
If someone would kindly take the time to play or simulate battles like:
---
Featureless land.
Difficult terrain or cramped space.
Cover points like walls and fences.
---
All using the same 20/x2 weapon or weapon combinations.
---
Each against single and multiple enemies, starting in melee and at range.
---
Enough battles to burn a day's worth of resources in each setup...
---
At low, medium and high levels (say, 3/9/16)
---
Well, I'd be extremely grateful. I won't be able to play for the rest of the month but if I have such logs I can give reasonable estimates over when each crit range is better than the others.
Agreed. I don't like the idea of players feeling like they have to have a high crit weapon to be effective.Dislike. More tweakings of the rules to make x multipliers less effective than ranges isn't a good thing - it's actually one of the changes I've like least about Pathfinder to date, since the two were intended to be equivalent.
I'll certainly be house ruling this. Either the spell only crits on a 20, or it doesn't benefit from a crit at all.
Would you, then, be in favor of doing away with the entire crit line of feats as anything that rewards a high crit range is a bad thing?
Critting with weapons is not generally as great a potential threat as critting with say... a Polar Ray.
Would you, then, be in favor of doing away with the entire crit line of feats as anything that rewards a high crit range is a bad thing?
Which requires an arcana and, if doable at all, will cost most magi more than they can pay for a day(at most it will be doable once per day).
And that requires a high level. 30d6 to 50d6 damage is laughable after level 15.
Would you, then, be in favor of doing away with the entire crit line of feats as anything that rewards a high crit range is a bad thing?
A fighter who focuses on crit weapons/feats is roughly comparable to a fighter who focuses on archery, or two-weapon fighting, or tanking, or any number of other options.
A magus who uses a longsword or axe isn't really comparable to one who uses a rapier. The potential of doubling spell damage so frequently makes the rapier wielding magus strictly superior. That leave traps, not options.
Would you, then, be in favor of doing away with the entire crit line of feats as anything that rewards a high crit range is a bad thing?A fighter who focuses on crit weapons/feats is roughly comparable to a fighter who focuses on archery, or two-weapon fighting, or tanking, or any number of other options.
A magus who uses a longsword or axe isn't really comparable to one who uses a rapier. The potential of doubling spell damage so frequently makes the rapier wielding magus strictly superior. That leave traps, not options.
Well, one could make the argument that a fighter who specializes in the longsword comes out slightly ahead of one who uses an axe simply because he wastes less crits damage on overkill. That's the nature of crit range vs multiplier. That same argument doesn't apply to longsword vs scimitar, though.
A Magus only gets a significant advantage using a scimitar over a longsword if he utilizes Spellstrike. As you've pointed out, that means he has to hit a much higher AC than than if he used the free touch attack for only a bit more weapon damage, and a better chance to crit, which he would then have to confirm at the higher AC. If he uses this ability with spell combat, it gets even worse since he doesn't get a free attack and must use one of his regular attacks to deliver the spell. Then factor in that a Magus who chooses a scimitar over a longsword is doing less damage every time he swings his weapon without using Spellstrike.
I think, all things accounted for, it comes out a lot more even than you think.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
Would you, then, be in favor of doing away with the entire crit line of feats as anything that rewards a high crit range is a bad thing?
I'd be in favor of reengineering them so they were more effective with a high multiplier weapon, to keep the options balanced.
I'm actually doing some design right now that attempts to favor high range for frequency, but high multiplier for impact (basically, it counts more if the high mult weapon tags you). We'll see if it is received well.