Can't see any text here... ???I'm not seeing it either, but I'm guessing it's dealing with the following:
Arcane Mark has ranged touch, and can be cast upon targets.
The magus when he casts a magus spell that requires a touch can make a free melee attack with his weapon to deliver it via the spellstrike feature at 2nd level.
Casting arcane mark via the spell combat feature at 1st level will then allow the magus, if he makes his concentration check to be able to attack twice in the round at -2. In essence he can, by making a casting defensively check, flurry like a monk with a one handed weapon.
Some people think this is OMG way out of whack too powerful. I guess they think the Monk (who can do this without chance for failure, and gets to treat his BAB as higher when doing so) must be insanely powerful. I'm not sure.
Regardless the magus can do this, and the magus will still be behind the twohanded weapon fighter in terms of average damage.
-James
I am not sure people are thinking it's way out of wack powerful, In my opinion, I just think arcane mark is a poor way to accomplish this. Unfortunately, there's no 0 level touch spells that do 1D3 or 1D4 that makes more sense. I am not opposed to people using it, it's more of a commentary that there should of been 0 level touch spell that came out in UM to facilitate this. Arcane Mark doesn't really stand out as a combat spell that would be used in Spell Combat...
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also remember that all range combat provokes AOOs even if the cast defensive roll is made.
Since arcane mark is not an combat spell it can not be cast in spell combat. Problem solved. Doing this at first level would mean the following things.
1. all of the melee attacks including this one would be at -2.
2. failing the cast defensive roll means that this doesn't go off but the single attack that does is still at -2.
This doesn't apply to Arcane Mark. it is a spell with a range of touch.
School universal; Level sorcerer/wizard 0
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Components: V, S
Range: touch
Effect: one personal rune or mark, all of which must fit within 1 sq. ft.
Duration: permanent
Saving Throw: none; Spell Resistance no
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
GM Discretion, in this case, mine says that it is.The problem with that is that spells are not categorized as combat and non-combat.
Since arcane mark is not an combat spell it can not be cast in spell combat. Problem solved.
Would it be a "combat spell" if the purpose was to use that mark to track the person or do combat spells have to be overtly damaging?
Most any spell "can" be cast in combat, but some are more useful than others.
I feel your dm is nitpicking. My 2c
My GM just allows us to take a touch version variant of ray of frost or acid splash spell. Again, I think a lack of a 0-level touch combat spell is a dropped ball unless the intent was really to raise the value of the Close Range arcana..
I wonder if you could use Reach spell on a level 1 ranged touch spell and make it only touch, lowering its level by 1...
I wonder if you could use Reach spell on a level 1 ranged touch spell and make it only touch, lowering its level by 1...
I doubt that.
But I think the Magus might benefit from the Words of Power system more than most classes would.
|
|
My GM just allows us to take a touch version variant of ray of frost or acid splash spell. Again, I think a lack of a 0-level touch combat spell is a dropped ball unless the intent was really to raise the value of the Close Range arcana..
Words of Power work very well in this instance. You do lose the shocking grasp/ meta magic capability, but you gain the ability to do all elemental damage at a touch range from level 0 spells and up.
edit: ninja'd!
|
But I think the Magus might benefit from the Words of Power system more than most classes would.
Not really. I thought the same thing, but apart from the Borrow Future exploit and melee touch cantrips, he doesn't gain much.
Most of his words are damage effects and since those don't stack, he's pretty much limited to one word effects or wordspells with a very short duration.Most of the damage effects are ranged touch attacks (and not rays), so spellstrike isn't usable with them.
It's still fine for blaster sorcerers.
|
... Casting arcane mark via the spell combat feature at 1st level will then allow the magus, if he makes his concentration check to be able to attack twice in the round at -2...
Spell Combat allows him to cast and full attack. The point of a Magus spamming a cantrip is to use it with Spellstrike to gain an additional weapon attack, and the Magus can't do that until level 2 (when he gets Spellstrike).
Since arcane mark is not an combat spell it can not be cast in spell combat...
Yes, sort of... The thing with Arcane Mark is it's one of those spell which has a range of 'touch', but doesn't say that it requires a 'melee touch attack'.
There are a variety of types of touch spells: those you touch a bunch of friends with in a single round, ones you can hold the charge on and use with a melee touch attack, and the occassional utility spell, like Arcane Mark. Spellstrike specifically allows you to replace the melee touch attack some spells grant you as part of the casting with a weapon attack instead. Admittedly the wording isn't great, but that's clearly the intent, and Arcane Mark really isn't that type of touch spell.
If you could use Arcane Mark as a melee touch attack then it's clearly the most powerful cantrip of all time, as it allows no saving throw - you can happily run around slapping the word 'DICK' (for example) on the face of all your enemies, and there's nothing they can do about it, be they first level Commoner or twentieth level Barbarian. That doesn't seem the intent of the cantrip, and I don't feel the rules support allowing characters to do that either.
During the playtest of the Magus, I recall most people (myself included) assuming that Ultimate Magic would have at least one melee touch attack damaging cantrip specifically to make Spellstrike more useful... but I guess they really want people to take that Close Range arcana instead... ;)
|
|
Yes, sort of... The thing with Arcane Mark is it's one of those spell which has a range of 'touch', but doesn't say that it requires a 'melee touch attack'.
Spells with a range of Touch that are being cast on a target not wanting to be touched require a touch attack, whether it spells out "roll a touch attack" or not. Reduce person would require a touch attack if you cast it on something you were fighting.