Spell Combat + multiple natural attack?

Round 3: Revised Magus Discussion

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required.

What are the rules for using Spell Combat if the Magus has multiple natural attacks like; 2 claws (primary) and bite (secondary)?

#Currently playing a Round 3 version of Magus

Since Spell Combat is like Two Weapon Fighting, I'd say that if you use all your natural attacks in a round where you use Spell Combat, all your natural attacks are treated as secondary (-5 penalty) - and you still need to keep a hand free for the spell, so you can't attack with that claw.

Granted, I'm sure if you only take one natural attack (the free claw) you don't take the secondary attack penalty.

Dark Archive

I'm not sure that's fair even if it were accurate. It think the rules are pretty fuzzy on this. Although Spell Combat is like TWF, it clearly isn't. If it were, touch attacks would also suffer a -2 penalty to hit, which they don't.

I'd probably allow the Magus in question to use all his primary attacks at attack-2 as though they were weapon attacks.

It's important to note, though, that by RAW you can't even use spell combat with natural attacks. It says you have to be "wielding a light of one handed melee weapon..."

While i assume one claw is holding the weapon, and one claw is casting the touch spell (normal touch attacks), that the bite would follow the normal rules. Since the normal rules use the chart for two weapon fighting (as if the character had TWF), then the secondary attacks would follow that.

**-2 to Weapon, Spell, and Secondary (bite)

But the Arcane Pool use of Enchanting Held weapons makes the Spell Combat not supposed to use natural attacks. Also, with further review, i noticed alot of powers based off held weapons. The only thing that wasn't based off held weapons were the spells like Beast Shape on the spell list (where you can't hold weapons).

I hope that Round 4 or final version will clarify this problem.

Well, spell combat says you can "make all your attacks with your melee weapon". If your melee weapon is natural, you perform all attacks common to your full attack with natural weapons (which is all natural weapons, with one at fullbab and 1,5xSTRMOD and all others at fullbab-5 and 0,5xSTRMOD), making sure not to use a claw if it'd leave you without free hands.

Also remember that a full attack with both a crafted and natural weapons is "full weapon iteration + all natural weapons once each at -5 and 0,5xSTRMOD", so a magus with BAB 12, one bite and one claw could do "3 sword attacks, a claw attack and a bite attack" normally...and during spell combat "3 sword attacks and a bite attack" to leave the free hand.

Dark Archive

Again, you actually can't use spell combat without a melee weapon in hand.

Magus Playtest wrote:
To use this ability, the magus must have one hand free, while wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand.

ok, so a half orc magus with toothy/razor tusk...
could he HOLD a weapon, cast a spell and bite someone?

seems like this isnt intended, its oneof those "it doesnt say I cant" lawyerly things. "gee im HOLDing a weapon"

Dark Archive

Point of fact, if you have a bite attack and are holding a weapon you can do all three. Like Synapse said, the bite attack is at -5 and gets only 1/2 str but you can add it to your normal attack routine.

YuenglingDragon wrote:

Again, you actually can't use spell combat without a melee weapon in hand.

Magus Playtest wrote:
To use this ability, the magus must have one hand free, while wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand.

It's RAW, but it doesn't make sense from a logical standpoint. For flavor's sake, take for instance a fighter that focuses on natural attacks as opposed to crafted weapons, or a sorcerer/magus with the abyssal or draconic bloodlines. Should natural attacks be inferred by the phrase "held weapon," or should the RAW be taken literally? This is definitely a rule point we'd like to see clarified.

Spell Combat seems pretty lopsided anyway; I'm looking for the thread addressing it specifically.

Wouldn't this mean that you can't use spell combat when you're unarmed? Like, if you want to use unarmed strikes? If so, that's a big problem and doesn't make any sense.

I read it as the first attack MUST have a held weapon. The only way to get past that, is by wearing spiked guantlet (if using natural attacks theme).

Can't a natural attack count as a light weapon?

The requirements is "a light or one-handed melee weapon". It doesn't specify it must be a manufactured weapon, so a natural weapon works just fine.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Ultimate Magic Playtest / Round 3: Revised Magus Discussion / Spell Combat + multiple natural attack? All Messageboards
Recent threads in Round 3: Revised Magus Discussion