Trying to wrap my brain fully around the Magus.
Let's say I cast Shocking Grasp using Spellstrike and I use my handy dandy scimitar to deliver the spell. I understand I'm delivering the touch spell via weapon, but this is where it gets confusing for me. Am I rolling versus my opponents normal AC (because it's now a melee attack) or am I rolling versus their Touch AC (because it's considered a melee touch attack now)?
Normal AC.
So the thought process is that your are fighting something with a high Touch AC and you'd like to use all of your enhancement bonuses and whatnot for a better chance to hit not only with the spell, but possibly the weapon as well?
No, the thought process is that it gives a free melee strike.
Full round attack + spell combat to cast shocking grasp, spell strike to add an extra melee attack rather than a touch attack.
Ok. So tell me if I am correct in my understanding then:
Assuming I am at least a 2nd level Magus (thus having Spell Combat and Spellstrike). Could I cast Shocking Grasp, move 5', putting me adjacent to my enemy, and take the Shock and Melee attacks (with the -2 on both)?
|
No, the thought process is that it gives a free melee strike.
Full round attack + spell combat to cast shocking grasp, spell strike to add an extra melee attack rather than a touch attack.
Ok. So tell me if I am correct in my understanding then:
Assuming I am at least a 2nd level Magus (thus having Spell Combat and Spellstrike). Could I cast Shocking Grasp, move 5', putting me adjacent to my enemy, and take the Shock and Melee attacks (with the -2 on both)?
If by "move 5'" you mean take a 5' step, I believe so. You can take a 5' step between attacks in a full attack and spell combat in many ways is similar.
If by "move 5'" you mean take a 5' step, I believe so. You can take a 5' step between attacks in a full attack and spell combat in many ways is similar.No, the thought process is that it gives a free melee strike.
Full round attack + spell combat to cast shocking grasp, spell strike to add an extra melee attack rather than a touch attack.
Ok. So tell me if I am correct in my understanding then:
Assuming I am at least a 2nd level Magus (thus having Spell Combat and Spellstrike). Could I cast Shocking Grasp, move 5', putting me adjacent to my enemy, and take the Shock and Melee attacks (with the -2 on both)?
Yes, I meant 5' step. So timing movement between spell and attacks appears to be king with the Magus. Thanks for the advice everyone.
Yes, I meant 5' step. So timing movement between spell and attacks appears to be king with the Magus. Thanks for the advice everyone.If by "move 5'" you mean take a 5' step, I believe so. You can take a 5' step between attacks in a full attack and spell combat in many ways is similar.No, the thought process is that it gives a free melee strike.
Full round attack + spell combat to cast shocking grasp, spell strike to add an extra melee attack rather than a touch attack.
Ok. So tell me if I am correct in my understanding then:
Assuming I am at least a 2nd level Magus (thus having Spell Combat and Spellstrike). Could I cast Shocking Grasp, move 5', putting me adjacent to my enemy, and take the Shock and Melee attacks (with the -2 on both)?
Although I am not clear on the rules for the 5' step, I would still assume that this tactic would provoke an attack of opportunity for the spellcasting, since the spell isn't finished until you are adjacent to your enemy. Now if you had a weapon with reach, or the "Lunge" feat it might be a different matter.
|
|
Yes, I meant 5' step. So timing movement between spell and attacks appears to be king with the Magus. Thanks for the advice everyone.If by "move 5'" you mean take a 5' step, I believe so. You can take a 5' step between attacks in a full attack and spell combat in many ways is similar.No, the thought process is that it gives a free melee strike.
Full round attack + spell combat to cast shocking grasp, spell strike to add an extra melee attack rather than a touch attack.
Ok. So tell me if I am correct in my understanding then:
Assuming I am at least a 2nd level Magus (thus having Spell Combat and Spellstrike). Could I cast Shocking Grasp, move 5', putting me adjacent to my enemy, and take the Shock and Melee attacks (with the -2 on both)?
Although I am not clear on the rules for the 5' step, I would still assume that this tactic would provoke an attack of opportunity for the spellcasting, since the spell isn't finished until you are adjacent to your enemy. Now if you had a weapon with reach, or the "Lunge" feat it might be a different matter.
You can explicitly cast a touch spell, move your normal speed and deliver your free touch attack (p. 185). As far as I'm aware, if you cast outside of a threatened area this avoids AoO. The wording says that you move between casting the spell and making the touch attack.
Doing the same with a 5' step seems unobjectionable. I only wonder if the parallel between full attack and spell combat holds true.
|
You can cast spells like shocking grasp outside of an enemy's threatened area, hold the charge in your hand, then discharge it when you are adjacent. While the charge is held in your hand, your hand is considered an armed weapon, so the touch is treated as an armed attack (which does not provoke) rather than an unarmed attack (which does provoke). If you wait until you're adjacent to cast the spell, though, you will provoke as normal. I'm not sure, but I think you also provoke when you cast a spell into your weapon, if you are in a threatened area when you do so. If you're going to play a Magus, you should also definitely take the Combat Casting feat.
If you're going to play a Magus, you should also definitely take the Combat Casting feat.
I would not recommend it unless you know that the game ends at 5th level or so. Because the magus has only 6 levels of spells the usefullness of the feat expires pretty fast. Take a trait for +2 concentration instead.
|
|
I'm not sure what having only 6 levels of spells has to do with the effectiveness of the Combat Casting feat. Although they don't get higher than 6th level spells, they will still be casting those spells through every level of their progression. It's not like they reach the highest level of their spell progression then suddenly stop being spellcasters. And as front line fighters, they're still going to be primarily using touch spells and often using Spellstrike in melee range. There will never be a diminished need to cast defensively or to increase their ability to do so. Nothing wrong with taking a trait to give +2 to concentration, but Combat Casting gives +4, and if they don't stack, a +4 is better than a +2, and if they do stack, a +6 is better than both.
Don't forget Uncanny Concentration from UM. +2 to concentration and stacks w/Combat Casting.
I think he's saying that you don't really need the +4 b/c a lvl 6 spell cast at lvl 16 and casting defensively is a Concentration check of 15 + 12(double spell lvl)= 27 and you have a CL of 16, likely INT bonus of +6 or higher, +2 from improved spell combat, so you roll d20 and add 24, so w/ CC you need to roll 3 or higher or 5 or higher w/ the trait.
It's just as useful at low levels as it is for a Wiz though. At lvl 5 a wiz has a 5+5(int)+4(CC)= 14+d20 v DC of 19 for lvl 2 spell, where Magus has 5+4(int likely lower b/c also needs Sta or Dex)+4(CC)= 13+d20 for same DC 19 for 2nd lvl spells and he's much more likely to need to cast defenseively
[Edit] had to change whole post b/c can't add and thought the DC was 37
another question about spellstrike, can it be made with a 2h weapon? had a player try to make an elven magus with the curve blade to capitalize on the extended crit range and everyone called BS.
another question about spellstrike, can it be made with a 2h weapon? had a player try to make an elven magus with the curve blade to capitalize on the extended crit range and everyone called BS.
Spellstrike yes, spell combat no.
I'm not sure what having only 6 levels of spells has to do with the effectiveness of the Combat Casting feat. Although they don't get higher than 6th level spells, they will still be casting those spells through every level of their progression. It's not like they reach the highest level of their spell progression then suddenly stop being spellcasters. And as front line fighters, they're still going to be primarily using touch spells and often using Spellstrike in melee range. There will never be a diminished need to cast defensively or to increase their ability to do so. Nothing wrong with taking a trait to give +2 to concentration, but Combat Casting gives +4, and if they don't stack, a +4 is better than a +2, and if they do stack, a +6 is better than both.
6 spell level mean two things:
1) Lower concentration DCs.2) Slower spell level progression.
That means that the chances of a magus succeding on a cast defensive roll are increasing on a much faster rate than a wizard's.
I said that the trait should be enough because that +2 can help you during the low levels when your chances aren't good enough and you save one of your feats on something else.
another question about spellstrike, can it be made with a 2h weapon? had a player try to make an elven magus with the curve blade to capitalize on the extended crit range and everyone called BS.Spellstrike yes, spell combat no.
if a spell has somatic components, how can they be performed with a 2h weapon?
if a spell has somatic components, how can they be performed with a 2h weapon?another question about spellstrike, can it be made with a 2h weapon? had a player try to make an elven magus with the curve blade to capitalize on the extended crit range and everyone called BS.Spellstrike yes, spell combat no.
Simple, you hold the weapon in one hand in order to cast the spell and then you weild it in two hands in order to attack.
|
|
Don't forget Uncanny Concentration from UM. +2 to concentration and stacks w/Combat Casting.
I think he's saying that you don't really need the +4 b/c a lvl 6 spell cast at lvl 16 and casting defensively is a Concentration check of 15 + 12(double spell lvl)= 27 and you have a CL of 16, likely INT bonus of +6 or higher, +2 from improved spell combat, so you roll d20 and add 24, so w/ CC you need to roll 3 or higher or 5 or higher w/ the trait.
It's just as useful at low levels as it is for a Wiz though. At lvl 5 a wiz has a 5+5(int)+4(CC)= 14+d20 v DC of 19 for lvl 2 spell, where Magus has 5+4(int likely lower b/c also needs Sta or Dex)+4(CC)= 13+d20 for same DC 19 for 2nd lvl spells and he's much more likely to need to cast defenseively
[Edit] had to change whole post b/c can't add and thought the DC was 37
Ah, okay, I see what he's saying.
if a spell has somatic components, how can they be performed with a 2h weapon?another question about spellstrike, can it be made with a 2h weapon? had a player try to make an elven magus with the curve blade to capitalize on the extended crit range and everyone called BS.Spellstrike yes, spell combat no.
The Touch spells always required a successful touch attack to work; this just puts a weapon into the mix. You could argue that touching someone IS the somatic part of the spell, which you now achieve via the weapon, two-handed or otherwise.
If you think about, no one can really touch an enemy to get the touch spell off if their hands are bound or pinned (conditions that might make somatic component spells impossible). "Gesturing" might not enter into it. Might make an interesting game night if someone's hands were tied but they were still able to "touch" the BBEG - what if they roll a 20 on their attack roll? Shouldn't that be enough?
there is a feat to get rid of the somatic part of a spell, still spell.
there are spellcraft dcs to cast spells while bound or grappled.
What if the Elven Curved blade was sized 1 step smaller to be used one handed? Could spell strike be used with a small elven curved blade?
Spellstrike doesn't care what kind of melee weapon you use. Dagger, greataxe, whatever.
Spell Combat requires you to be wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand. A small elven curve blade can be wielded as a one-handed weapon by a medium creature. Ask your DM first, though.
I'm not sure why you would want to do this, you wouldn't get two-handed strength or power attack, so why not save a feat, the rules argument, and keep your bonus to hit by using a rapier? d8 vs d6 isn't that big of a difference in the long run.
This was a thread necromancy, but I'll still take this opportunity to link the Spellstrike FAQ thread in case anyone wishes to add a FAQ tag to it.
If you want higher damage with a increased crit range try a katana or Urumi both are exotic and do 1d8 damage from ultimate combat. Honestly though the rapier or scimitar are more then enough for your budding magus since your feats would honestly be better spent increasing damage in other ways such as arcane strike or metamagic feats that increase spell damage. I would make those selections more to change the feel of the magus then anything else.
I can see the argument that you could hold the two handed weapon with one hand then use the spellstrike but really feels like an AOO. Part of the balance of the class and fluff is that is one free hand. Using the two handed weapon seems out of bounds to me.