All you need is a spell staff that is also a weapon (such as a quarterstaff). Then you take Wand Wielder.
Congratulations, you can now use Spell Combat with any spell in the staff while dual-wielding it with your Two-Weapon Fighting feats.
If your GM will let you, make your offhand weapons into spell trigger items as well. That way you could have, say, two +5 short swords that are also wands.
EDIT: Just wanted to clarify that I'm assuming the spell trigger item obviates the need for a free hand, otherwise you would never really be able to use Wand Wielder in conjunction with Spell Combat (which would make the ability's existence moot).
Since a staff is a simple weapon that lacks the punch of a lot of the other options, and since more mages need to fight with staffs, I think this is a great idea as the sole way to get TWF on the Magus.
All you need is a spell staff that is also a weapon (such as a quarterstaff). Then you take Wand Wielder.
Congratulations, you can now use Spell Combat with any spell in the staff while dual-wielding it with your Two-Weapon Fighting feats.
If your GM will let you, make your offhand weapons into spell trigger items as well. That way you could have, say, two +5 short swords that are also wands.
EDIT: Just wanted to clarify that I'm assuming the spell trigger item obviates the need for a free hand, otherwise you would never really be able to use Wand Wielder in conjunction with Spell Combat (which would make the ability's existence moot).
I think the problem is that Spell Combat is essentially Two-Weapon Fighting, so unless you houserule to allow it, I don't see you being able to use Spell Combat(Two-Weapon Fighting alternative like Flurry of Blows) and the standard Two-Weapon fighting line... Otherwise, you are trying to do get double the actions from the off-hand.
Although, this would allow you to use it as a Two-Handed Weapon. Which is awesome, because I love quarterstaves :)
What book is "Wand Wielder" in?
If it is in a third-party supplement or 3.5, is this even worth Paizo fussing over?
It's a Magus Arcana. Straight from the playtest notes. It let's you substitute a spell trigger item rather than a cast spell when using Spell Combat.
What book is "Wand Wielder" in?
If it is in a third-party supplement or 3.5, is this even worth Paizo fussing over?
Its one of the arcanas the Magus may choose from, thus official.
You could also just take Improved Unarmed Strike and Two-Weapon Fighting (or one level of monk) and make attacks with both hands. Especially if you cast a touch spell that allows for multiple touches, then you can add the spell effect to each of your unarmed strikes (although you have to hit the normal AC of course).
|
All you need is a spell staff that is also a weapon (such as a quarterstaff). Then you take Wand Wielder.
Congratulations, you can now use Spell Combat with any spell in the staff while dual-wielding it with your Two-Weapon Fighting feats.
If your GM will let you, make your offhand weapons into spell trigger items as well. That way you could have, say, two +5 short swords that are also wands.
EDIT: Just wanted to clarify that I'm assuming the spell trigger item obviates the need for a free hand, otherwise you would never really be able to use Wand Wielder in conjunction with Spell Combat (which would make the ability's existence moot).
okay so your assuming custom magic items then? Because last I checked, no +5 short swords were wands. In anycase, the wording for spell combat is that it's a full round action to make attacks with a light or one handed weapon and cast a spell. The wand wielder lets you replace casting a spell with using a wand or staff instead of having a free hand...this does not negate that you are still only allowed to make a full attack using only A (as in one singular) light weapon or one handed weapon. So if you have a longsword in one hand and a staff that is a quarter staff in the other, spell combat with one wielder lets yous make a full attacking using the sword and then use a charge off the staff.
So assuming that wand wielder allows you to use a wand of staff it your off hand while wielding a light or one handed meele weapon - makes sense otherwise the ability isn´t useable - there are some problems:
-As pointet out already the ability may prevent a combination, since it´s like two weapon fighting.
-Even if this points doesn´t prevent it, the only way you could use a staff in one hand is it you take a small sized staff.
The magus doesn´t seem to be intended to be able to use two weapon fighting
Spell Combat (Ex): At 1st level, a magus learns to cast
spells and wield his weapons at the same time. This
functions much like two-weapon fighting, but the off-
hand weapon is a spell that is being cast. To use this
ability, the magus must have one hand free, while wielding
a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand. As
a full-round action, he can make all of his attacks with
his melee weapon at a –2 penalty and can also cast any
spell from the magus spell list with a casting time of 1
standard action. If he casts this spell defensively, he can
decide to take an additional penalty on his attack rolls,
up to his Intelligence bonus, and add the same amount
as a circumstance bonus to his concentration check. If
the check fails, the spell is wasted, but the attacks still
take the penalty. A magus can choose to cast the spell
first or make the weapon attacks first, but if he has more
than one attack, he cannot cast the spell between weapon
attacks. The magus must have one hand free to use this
ability, even if the spell being cast does not contain
somatic components.
In any case, the wording for spell combat is that it's a full round action to make attacks with a light or one handed weapon and cast a spell. The wand wielder lets you replace casting a spell with using a wand or staff instead of having a free hand...this does not negate that you are still only allowed to make a full attack using only A (as in one singular) light weapon or one handed weapon.
Does the rules for double weapons not say that a double weapon is treated as though you had a one-handed weapon and a light weapon? Wand wielder obviates the need for an empty hand, and you have what is "effectively a one-handed weapon" in the other.
The only thing that MIGHT defeat it is the notion that you are dual-wielding twice, which some say you can't do.
|
Staff-wise with Wand Wielder I'd say you could hold the thing with both hands (as in normal 'quarterstaff fighting') but when you use Spell Combat to trigger the staff's powers (in place of the usual spell part of Spell Combat) that counts as using one 'end' of the staff, no matter what the visual description is.
Or, put another way, you get one extra attack with two-weapon fighting, period - that could be an attack with the staff's 'other' end, a kick with your boot, or triggering a staff power with Spell Combat + Wand Wielder - but it's only ever one of them. The advantage is you don't have to keep switching between one and two hands, or drawing and sheathing your weapons in some comical dance based on game mechanics.
Of course, normal two-weapon fighting has the Improved and Greater versions, for extra 'bonus' attacks. A Feat covering that for Spell Combat purposes would be nice... or could even be a nice replacement for the Improved and Greater Spell Combat features of the Magus progression - I'd take an extra attack when using Spell combat over a +2 to Concentration rolls any day! So, that'd be Improved Spell Combat giving you an extra melee attack at -5, and Greater Spell Combat giving you an extra melee attack on top of that at -10.
In any case, the wording for spell combat is that it's a full round action to make attacks with a light or one handed weapon and cast a spell. The wand wielder lets you replace casting a spell with using a wand or staff instead of having a free hand...this does not negate that you are still only allowed to make a full attack using only A (as in one singular) light weapon or one handed weapon.Does the rules for double weapons not say that a double weapon is treated as though you had a one-handed weapon and a light weapon? Wand wielder obviates the need for an empty hand, and you have what is "effectively a one-handed weapon" in the other.
The only thing that MIGHT defeat it is the notion that you are dual-wielding twice, which some say you can't do.
Quote:
Double: You can use a double weapon to fight as if fighting with two weapons, but if you do, you incur all the normal attack penalties associated with fighting with two weapons, just as if you were using a one-handed weapon and a light weapon. A double weapon can be wielded as a one-handed weapon, but it cannot be used as a double weapon when wielded in this way—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round.
You can only use it as a light weapon when caluculating the penalities when using two-weapon fighting.
I guess you might use a staff as a one-handed weapon, but this would prevent you from using the other end for two weapon fighting.
|
|
In any case, the wording for spell combat is that it's a full round action to make attacks with a light or one handed weapon and cast a spell. The wand wielder lets you replace casting a spell with using a wand or staff instead of having a free hand...this does not negate that you are still only allowed to make a full attack using only A (as in one singular) light weapon or one handed weapon.Does the rules for double weapons not say that a double weapon is treated as though you had a one-handed weapon and a light weapon? Wand wielder obviates the need for an empty hand, and you have what is "effectively a one-handed weapon" in the other.
The only thing that MIGHT defeat it is the notion that you are dual-wielding twice, which some say you can't do.
A quarterstaff is a one handed weapon when held in one hand...you can not use it as a double weapon in that case and so you gain no TWF albilites. I doubt this is what you mean tho since I doubt your a cheese monkey enough to try and argue that you could TWF with a double weapon in one hand...IF your talking about having a sword in one hand and a quarterstaff which is a magical staff in the other, then spell combat with wand wielder is a full round action that lets you use the spell from the staff and get all your attacks with ONE of those two weapons as it specifically says with A as in one, singual light or one handed weapon can get all attacks as part of the full round action.
Besides debating the specific scenario within the current playtest rules, this is exactly why I feel the relation of Spell Combat to 2WF needs to be cleared up. What if somebody casts a spell granting a Ranged Touch Attack? Shouldn`t they get a -2 to hit for such spell if it`s supposed to work like 2WF? WHat about if it grants a Ranged Touch Attack for X rounds, would such attacks then be considered under 2WF (requiring the 2WF Feat for lesser penalties) or what? What if some creature has more than 2 arms? Can they Spell Combat + 2WF or would they conflict?