Magi's Spellstrike and 2-Handers

[Nanithice]

Would it be possible for a Magus to use a 2-hander(ie a great sword) to deliver Spellstikes?

He would clearly not gain the bonus from spell combat, as he doesn't have a free hand, but would it hinder the spellstrike too? And is it possible for them to use the Arcana, Pool Strike + Spellstrike in the same manner?

[LazarX]

Nanithice wrote:

Would it be possible for a Magus to use a 2-hander(ie a great sword) to deliver Spellstikes?

He would clearly not gain the bonus from spell combat, as he doesn't have a free hand, but would it hinder the spellstrike too? And is it possible for them to use the Arcana, Pool Strike + Spellstrike in the same manner?

Spell combat does not merely get a "bonus" for having a hand free, it REQUIRES it.

[leo1925]

@LazarX
I think that OP meant, in order to get the bonus of using spell combat and not a bonus when using spellcombat.

Now to answer the OP's question:
Yes you can use a two handed weapon when you are using just spellstrike.

[Lyrax]

Agreed with the dragon above. A magus can cast a spell as a standard action, then get in an attack with a two-handed weapon via spellstrike. Presumably, he was holding this weapon in one hand while casting that spell.

[Nanithice]

Cool! Thanks alot, everyone! Sorry LazarX, if I was a little vague, but Leo was right, that's what I mean't!

[Mojorat]

I disagree, if you are casting a spell then you cannot suddenly grip the sword handle and hit things.

if forexample if a Pc castsva spell thus releasing his hand on his 2 sword. he cannot make oo with the sword as he is not holding it.

same with spell strike, you cannot release the sword then cast a spell re grip thecsword then hit so eo e with it via spell strike.

I really don't see the obsession people have of making magus work with 2h weapons.

[leo1925]

Mojorat wrote:

I disagree, if you are casting a spell then you cannot suddenly grip the sword handle and hit things.

if forexample if a Pc castsva spell thus releasing his hand on his 2 sword. he cannot make oo with the sword as he is not holding it.

same with spell strike, you cannot release the sword then cast a spell re grip thecsword then hit so eo e with it via spell strike.

I really don't see the obsession people have of making magus work with 2h weapons.

Nor do i but it's legal.

Let's say you are weilding a greatsword (this requires two hands), then as a free action you are carrying it in one hand, then you cast the spell with a somatic component, and then as a free action you weild your greatsword (which requires two hands), and then you attack thanks to spellstrike.

[james maissen]

leo1925 wrote:

Nor do i but it's legal.
Let's say you are weilding a greatsword (this requires two hands), then as a free action you are carrying it in one hand, then you cast the spell with a somatic component, and then as a free action you weild your greatsword (which requires two hands), and then you attack thanks to spellstrike.

I'm not sure about letting them wield it in two hands as a free action, more likely it seems like a move action to me.

That said the magus casts a spell, draws his weapon as a move action then 5' steps and delivers it via spellstrike seems quite legal.

-James

[Banatine]

You could always use the Somatic Weaponry feat (a 3.5 feat which was designed for the magus' predecessor, the Duskblade, which allowed him to do exactly this.) One feat to allow it seems pretty reasonable if you want to do it.

[leo1925]

james maissen wrote:

leo1925 wrote:

Nor do i but it's legal.
Let's say you are weilding a greatsword (this requires two hands), then as a free action you are carrying it in one hand, then you cast the spell with a somatic component, and then as a free action you weild your greatsword (which requires two hands), and then you attack thanks to spellstrike.

I'm not sure about letting them wield it in two hands as a free action, more likely it seems like a move action to me.

That said the magus casts a spell, draws his weapon as a move action then 5' steps and delivers it via spellstrike seems quite legal.

-James

Since it's a free action to switch your weapon between hands, i am pretty sure that is also a free action. Also i think i remember James (i think) to saying that it's a free action but i am somewhat tired at the moment so i am going to let someone else find the post and offer a link to it.

[LazarX]

Nanithice wrote:

Cool! Thanks alot, everyone! Sorry LazarX, if I was a little vague, but Leo was right, that's what I mean't!

We've had this discussion about two handed fighting and spell combat. Your hand has to be free for your entire turn in order to enable spell combat. The rule was intentionally designed to force you to one hand fighting.

[leo1925]

LazarX wrote:

Nanithice wrote:

Cool! Thanks alot, everyone! Sorry LazarX, if I was a little vague, but Leo was right, that's what I mean't!

We've had this discussion about two handed fighting and spell combat. Your hand has to be free for your entire turn in order to enable spell combat. The rule was intentionally designed to force you to one hand fighting.

When you are using spell combat, yes you are absolutely right.

[Froze_man]

I agree Leo, Spell Combat and a two-hander is a no-go, not only does it say you need a free hand but it specifically states light or one handed weapon. Spellstrike on the other hand would be fine, taking a hand off of a two hander would fall under James Jacob's ruling here if anything releasing a hand and putting it back on would seem like less of an action than switching a weapon from one hand to the other and back.

[james maissen]

leo1925 wrote:

Since it's a free action to switch your weapon between hands, i am pretty sure that is also a free action.

I recall in 3.5 it expressly was not a free action to 'rewield' a two-hander and made it into the FAQ as I recall...

Move action doesn't seem out of line to me, and you have a move action available so it doesn't seem to prohibit what you're looking for here either.

-James

[The black raven]

Any caster can cast a spell with somatic components while holding a 2-handed weapon. He just does not attack with it. And he still gets to use his 2-handed weapon for AoO later on without needing to take any special kind of action.

This is no different from spellstriking with a 2-handed weapon.