| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The devs said during playtesting that the magus was intended to be restricted to 1 handed weapons only. People tried to use all sorts of logic to get around the intent. In short you might find a way around the wording to use it two-handed but the intent is for it to not be used 2-handed.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Spellstrike is NOT spell combat. You aren't using an 'offhand' to cast.
He'll spellstrike is not even technically it's own action.
It says 'when you cast a touch spell you can then deliver that spells free touch attach via a weapon attack'
So you could 2hand with it.
You definately cannot 2hand for spell combat. It actually states your off hand is free.
So on Move+Spellstrike you can 2hand your weapon.
On spell combat you cannot.
Well the description states it's a 'free' attack. Not a 'free attack at -2 for dual weilding'
You cast the spell (with Somatic components if required) then with the free attack you get you 2hand.
I don't like to make these assumptions without backup so I'll post this in the ASK JAMES JACOBS thread.
One could combine spellstrike with a 2h weapon if they have three or more hands. Like a two level alchemist dip.
I've read the rules a few times now and I'm curious if a magus with a two-handed weapon can use spellstrike with it. It does say that the free attack is part of casting the spell, so I'm not sure if you need that free hand for spellstrike or just for spell combat.
Assuming you've met all the requirements for Spellstrike (You cast the spell, the range was 'touch', and it was from the Magus spell list) then you can deliver the spell with any weapon you are wielding as part of a melee attack.
It's a free action to let go of a two-handed weapon with one hand (now carrying it, not wielding it) and to put it back it's either free, or not an action. Either way, you're fine to let go, cast, put back, attack.
You guys are seriously saying that a Magus can cast a spell, move 30', then smack a guy, but he can't manage to put his other hand back on his weapon?
Though, in most cases, a one-handed weapon is better for the Magus. You can use Spell Combat with it, and when not using Spell Combat, use both hands for damage and power attack and whatnot.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
You guys are seriously saying that a Magus can cast a spell, move 30', then smack a guy, but he can't manage to put his other hand back on his weapon?
Though, in most cases, a one-handed weapon is better for the Magus. You can use Spell Combat with it, and when not using Spell Combat, use both hands for damage and power attack and whatnot.
Well the developers are. If you prefer, it's all one flowing attack, so they can't 'hand off/hand on'.
Actually I'll burn the feat for bastard sword/katana just for the flexibility. katana has the advantage of the higher crit range (and I like curved blades personally).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack."
Uh the problem is that when you cast the spell you make an attack with a weapon you are WIELDING, because you are carrying the 2-handed weapon not wielding it when you cast the spell you can't spell combat
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You guys are seriously saying that a Magus can cast a spell, move 30', then smack a guy, but he can't manage to put his other hand back on his weapon?Well the developers are.
Not really.
Jason Bulmahn said no two-handed weapons for Spell Combat, not Spellstrike.
James Jacobs said "but overall, magi do not use two-handed weapons. They need to keep a hand free for spellcasting—they're not "fighter/wizards" as much as they are two weapon fighters who just happen to use spells as their off-hand weapon. So two-handed weapons are nonsensical in most cases—the staff magus is the only one I know of that breaks that rule."
Yes, it's mostly nonsensical because they would be unable to use their signature ability (Spell Combat) and want a hand free for casting anyway. But that doesn't stop them from using both hands when not otherwise occupied.
If you prefer, it's all one flowing attack, so they can't 'hand off/hand on'.
It's a 'flowing' attack that takes place after they move up to their speed, or six rounds later, or after 6 hours of marching?
The only reason I can see to not allow them to deliver the spell with both hands is if you use the rule about touching 'anything' discharging the spell, and have 'anything' include your own hand or the weapon you're using to make the attack (which doesn't make any sense anyway).
Actually I'll burn the feat for bastard sword/katana just for the flexibility. katana has the advantage of the higher crit range (and I like curved blades personally).
Is going from d6 (Scimitar) to d8 (Katana) really worth a feat? Remember, you can use any one-handed weapon with both hands for 1.5xStr and extra Power Attack.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I have a magus in my game and sometimes he wants to go 2H with spellstrike. I allow it - it seems to be fine by RAW and it's certainly not breaking anything. It's not allowed for spell combat, though.In order to do that, you pretty much have to cast your spell on the round before the one you want to strike in.
I presume this means you disagree with the assertion that releasing and re-grabbing your 2H weapon with one of your hands is a free action?
I have a magus in my game and sometimes he wants to go 2H with spellstrike. I allow it - it seems to be fine by RAW and it's certainly not breaking anything. It's not allowed for spell combat, though.In order to do that, you pretty much have to cast your spell on the round before the one you want to strike in.
Even if you read "any weapon he is wielding" as being required at the time of casting rather than the time of making the melee attack, it would still work with a one-handed weapon.
You're wielding a longsword. Cast spell. You have now cast a spell WHILE wielding the weapon. Then later, you put your other hand back on it (Free action) and make the attack. Same weapon, it has never NOT been wielded since casting the spell, and two hands.
It's irrelevant. A hand is not "Free" if it's committed to a combat activity at any point in the round.
Nowhere in Spellstrike does it mention having a hand free. You do not need a free hand to use Spellstrike. You could cast a Stilled touch spell without ever taking a hand off your greatsword and then use Spellstrike to deliver it.
This thread is not about Spell Combat.
So if my fighter has a BAB of +6/+1 and uses his first attack to throw a dagger, he can't benefit from dervish dance on his second attack?
Are you wielding a scimitar with one hand? Is it for a creature of your size? Are you NOT carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand? If yes to all, then Dervish Dance lets you use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on melee attack and damage rolls.
If 'No' to any of those (for example, while throwing the dagger) then you can't use the feat.
It doesn't say "free hand" so LazarX's rule doesn't apply, regardless of whether it's correct.
At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack. Instead of the free melee touch attack normally allowed to deliver the spell, a magus can make one free melee attack with his weapon (at his highest base attack bonus) as part of casting this spell.
- So instead of doing sign language with my hand and then using it to poke someone i can do sign language with my hand and use a sword to poke someone. I don't see why that couldn't be done with the hand at the bottom of a two hander. If you're one handing it the spell goes from your left hand to your right to the sword to the foe. Grabbing the sword should just cut out the middle man.
You can't argue that the hand is busy casting the spell and can't be used on the sword because with a touch attack the hand is used twice anyway: once to cast the spell and once to poke someone in the eye.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You need the free hand to CAST. You can't have a spellstrike unless there's a spell cast involved in the process.
The touch attack is a separate action from casting the spell.
Standard action: Cast spell.
Free action: Put hand on sword.
Move action: move up to your speed.
Free action: Make attack granted by spell, either as a touch, or through a weapon via Spellstrike.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You pretty much have gone beyond the action economy I allow per round. You've got too many free actions.
Swift actions are limited per round. Free actions are not.
Switching from a one handed to a two handed grip is not listed anywhere as an action at all. It should be a non action that's part of the swing, since when you shift around swinging a two handed weapon you might take your hand off and on as part of an attack routine.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Swift actions are limited per round. Free actions are not.
Actually, they are.
Free Actions: "However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free, as decided by the GM."
It's just that LazarX has decided the reasonable limit is 1.
So if you want to cast a touch spell, you better not speak, or you've hit his 2 free action per round limit.
It's just that LazarX has decided the reasonable limit is 1.
Its not particularly reasonable in this case. The same reasoning would prevent the firing of more than 2 arrows per round.
Its not particularly reasonable in this case.
My post was not really kind (the sarcastic last sentence) which I regret, but I think the Magus is a very polarizing class, and it's unlikely to convince anyone it works differently than they want.
I'll take this opportunity to link the Spellstrike FAQ thread in case anyone wishes to add a FAQ tag to it...
I read all the post and I was thinking about one reason that a magus can't use a greatsword...
the spell combat say that is like the two weapon fighting feat, if the two weapon fighting feat say that you have to combat with two hands, I think that if you want to use spell combat, you need to fight with the two hands like if you are carrying a weapon in your bad hand, no?
Hmm, not sure if I should make my own thread, but what would a Two-handed Archetype for the Magus look like?
There already is one: Staff Magus
While most magi use a one-handed weapon as their melee implement of choice, one group of magi uses the quarterstaff instead. These lightly armored magi use staves for both defense and inflicting their spells upon enemies. Skilled in manipulating these weapons with one hand or two, they eventually learn how to use arcane staves as well, and are just as formidable in combat as their sword-swinging brethren.Weapon and Armor Proficiency: A staff magus is proficient with simple weapons only. He can cast magus spells while wearing light armor without incurring the normal arcane spell failure chance. Like any other arcane spellcaster, a magus wearing medium armor or heavy armor or using a shield incurs a chance of arcane spell failure if the spell in question has a somatic component. A multiclass magus still incurs the normal arcane spell failure chance for arcane spells received from other classes. This replaces the normal magus weapon and armor proficiency feature.
Quarterstaff Master (Ex): At 1st level, the staff magus gains the Quarterstaff Master feat as a bonus feat, even if he does not meet the normal prerequisites. He only gains the benefit of this feat when wearing no armor or light armor.
Quarterstaff Defense (Ex): At 7th level, while wielding a quarterstaff, the staff magus gains a shield bonus to his Armor Class equal to the enhancement bonus of the quarterstaff, including any enhancement bonus on that staff from his arcane pool class feature. At 13th level, this bonus increases by +3. This ability replaces the medium armor and heavy armor class abilities.
Staff Weapon (Su): At 10th level, a staff magus treats any magical staff he is wielding as a magical quarterstaff with an enhancement bonus to attack and damage equal to the staff's caster level divided by 4 (minimum +1). The staff must have at least 1 charge for the magus to use this ability. A staff magus can restore 1 charge to a staff by expending a number of points from his arcane pool equal to the level of the highest-level spell cast in the staff, as long as at least one spell in the staff is on the magus spell list. The magus cannot restore charges to more than one staff per day. This ability replaces fighter training.
Magus Arcana: The following magus arcana complement the staff magus archetype: critical strike, dispelling strike, maneuver master, and spell shield.
There already is one: Staff MagusThat's a one-handed archetype. Quarterstaff Master lets you fight with a Quarterstaff in one hand. They still have spell-combat, and they have nothing to encourage using a Quarterstaff as a two-handed weapon.
And the Devs said that staff-magus is as close as a magus is supposed to come to 2-hand fighting... a magus is no eldritch knight... a magus dual-wields a 1-hand weapon with magic. :-S
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Its funny people cry up a storm about Dex magi being way to common and yet want to make up rules (that are in no way supported by RAW.) to remove the one very tiny benefit a Str magus has.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When thy first Magus was born, thy Gods of Magic giftet them thy blessing of a gifted left hand, with the speed of spell casting. Then, thy Gods of War, angered by his more-godlike OP brethren, cursed that same left hand to never be able to be used to fight. Taken by pity of the yet-another poor victim of the never ending fighter-vs-wizards struggle of the heavens, thy Gods of Pathfinder gifted the magus with a pink tutu, and declared that forever the Magis of the ages to comes where to be first class table dancer. Amen
|
|
Bringing this up again because I really want an official ruling on this.
People say RAW 2-handed spellstrike is legal. YET, one dev has ruled that a hand must be free to be able to cast a spell with somatic components. It looks like the consensus with dev testimony is no. You have to have a hand free to use Spell-strike or spell combat. In any case, it can be house-ruled to be otherwise OR make use of the still spell metamagic feat.
Sucks really. The magus class could use something to make it, ya know, good.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Reckon 2 hand is legit.
From Pazio FAQ:
"What kind of action is it to remove your hand from a two-handed weapon or re-grab it with both hands?
Both are free actions. For example, a wizard wielding a quarterstaff can let go of the weapon with one hand as a free action, cast a spell as a standard action, and grasp the weapon again with that hand as a free action; this means the wizard is still able to make attacks of opportunity with the weapon (which requires using two hands).
As with any free action, the GM may decide a reasonable limit to how many times per round you can release and re-grasp the weapon (one release and re-grasp per round is fair)."
http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9qda
I believe it was brought up in another thread about the definition of weilding and I believe duelist enchants and defending enchants were brought up. It was stated that simply having the weapon in ur hand was defined as weilding but attacking with that weapon. So basically uare casting the spell while u make an attack. Meaning u are not simy casting the spell then attacking but casting it at the same time ur swinging, hence the part about "currently weilding as part of a melee attack". Your getting the free attack because u are casting and swinging at the same time, the 2 actions are being done at the same moment hence why an attack and spell casting are sharing the same action.
Also if ur wanting spell combat but be able to weild 2handed swords, then ur wanting arcane bond weapon which vanguards get at lvl 1. It specifically states that they can cast spells thru the weapon while making attacks. Some really speffy stuff that class does. They seemed to be the "magus" that uses 2handed weapons design.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bringing this up again because I really want an official ruling on this.
People say RAW 2-handed spellstrike is legal. YET, one dev has ruled that a hand must be free to be able to cast a spell with somatic components. It looks like the consensus with dev testimony is no. You have to have a hand free to use Spell-strike or spell combat.
Not quite. Spellstrike never require you to have a free hand. Rules at hand, it never says anything like that. Spell combat require it. Then, let leave alone Spell Combat, it has its own rules and this topic is about Spellstrike. Now, spellstrike let you to deliver a touch spell with your weapon instead of your touch,. This is the basis. Now, as per FAQ, swith from 1H to 2H is a free action. FAQ says that two wielding change is fair. So, if I'm a magus, I can have my weapon wielded 2H at the start of my turn, and then, the magic happen:
-free action: switch to 1H wield-standard action: cast a touch spell
-move action: getting close to the enemy
-free action: switch to 2H wield
-free action: deliver touch spell with my weapon.
No rules contraddiction, no accidental discharge (as per FAQ - http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fz#v5748eaic9oym
Magus: Can a magus use spellstrike (page 10) to cast a touch spell, move, and make a melee attack with a weapon to deliver the touch spell, all in the same round?
Yes. Other than deploying the spell with a melee weapon attack instead of a melee touch attack, the magus spellstrike ability doesn’t change the normal rules for using touch spells in combat (Core Rulebook page 185). So, just like casting a touch spell, a magus could use spellstrike to cast a touch spell, take a move toward an enemy, then (as a free action) make a melee attack with his weapon to deliver the spell.
On a related topic, the magus touching his held weapon doesn’t count as “touching anything or anyone” when determining if he discharges the spell. A magus could even use the spellstrike ability, miss with his melee attack to deliver the spell, be disarmed by an opponent (or drop the weapon voluntarily, for whatever reason), and still be holding the charge in his hand, just like a normal spellcaster. Furthermore, the weaponless magus could pick up a weapon (even that same weapon) with that hand without automatically discharging the spell, and then attempt to use the weapon to deliver the spell. However, if the magus touches anything other than a weapon with that hand (such as retrieving a potion), that discharges the spell as normal.
Basically, the spellstrike gives the magus more options when it comes to delivering touch spells; it’s not supposed to make it more difficult for the magus to use touch spells.
—Sean K Reynolds, 02/07/12
The dev and the people are agreed all the ways.
|
|
Bringing this up again because I really want an official ruling on this.
People say RAW 2-handed spellstrike is legal. YET, one dev has ruled that a hand must be free to be able to cast a spell with somatic components. It looks like the consensus with dev testimony is no. You have to have a hand free to use Spell-strike or spell combat.
Not quite. Spellstrike never require you to have a free hand. Rules at hand, it never says anything like that. Spell combat require it. Then, let leave alone Spell Combat, it has its own rules and this topic is about Spellstrike. Now, spellstrike let you to deliver a touch spell with your weapon instead of your touch,. This is the basis. Now, as per FAQ, swith from 1H to 2H is a free action. FAQ says that two wielding change is fair. So, if I'm a magus, I can have my weapon wielded 2H at the start of my turn, and then, the magic happen:
-free action: switch to 1H wield
-standard action: cast a touch spell
-move action: getting close to the enemy
-free action: switch to 2H wield
-free action: deliver touch spell with my weapon.No rules contraddiction, no accidental discharge (as per FAQ - http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fz#v5748eaic9oym
** spoiler omitted **...
I guess it would all depend on your GM and what he'll allow you to do. I've had the idea to do a 2h magus with the Myrmadiarch archetype (Stacking Weapon Training, Power Attack, Arcane Strike and Arcane Pool with Spellstrike for damage shenanigans) and abusing the style arcana you get for tripping shenanigans(love that word).
However, this just means I don't take Still Spell as a feat now that it seems to be legal on its own. Kinda cool but I am going to bank on DMs restricting this a bit since it's likely going to cause them to raise an eyebrow when I asked them if it's ok.
I guess it would all depend on your GM and what he'll allow you to do.
Wait, hold on a sec. I'm speaking strictly by the rules, as we're in the rules section. raw, you can definitely spellstrike with a 2H weapon. If a DM don't allow, well, we're going in the hr field, which is really debatable.
However, this just means I don't take Still Spell as a feat now that it seems to be legal on its own. Kinda cool but I am going to bank on DMs restricting this a bit since it's likely going to cause them to raise an eyebrow when I asked them if it's ok.
Ask him: rules at hand it's legal, even if 2H spellstrike is not the magus' point of strenght.
Spellstriking with a 2handed weapon is perfectly legal and quite viable for those times when you can't use a full round action on Spell Combat.
For instance, your enemy is 30 feet away from you and you're wielding a scimitar. Take a standard action to cast Shocking Grasp, spend a free action changing your grip on the scimitar from onehanded to twohanded, spend a move action to move over to the enemy, and use your free touch attack (from Shocking Grasp) to spellstrike with your scimitar, enjoying the extra damage from wielding it with both hands.
In my example I use a 1h weapon because you still need a onehanded weapon for Spell Combat. In theory you could make a magus that focuses on spellstriking with traditional twohanded weapons (greatsword etc) but it means you lose out on the core class ability of the magus - Spell Combat.
I might have gone a little overboard on the editing in this post, but its very easy to mix up Spell Combat and Spellstrike - it's important to recognize that they're two independent class features that are valid options when used separately as well as together.
|
I guess it would all depend on your GM and what he'll allow you to do. I've had the idea to do a 2h magus with the Myrmadiarch archetype (Stacking Weapon Training, Power Attack, Arcane Strike and Arcane Pool with Spellstrike for damage shenanigans) and abusing the style arcana you get for tripping shenanigans(love that word).
However, this just means I don't take Still Spell as a feat now that it seems to be legal on its own. Kinda cool but I am going to bank on DMs restricting this a bit since it's likely going to cause them to raise an eyebrow when I asked them if it's ok.
I think the best option for a 2h Magus is a Titan Mauler2/Magusx. It essentially is the same as Spellstriking with a 2h weapon, but for times when you really need a full attack and an in-combat buff, you can spell combat your buff, and take a collective -4 penalty to your weapon attack (-2 Jotungrip, -2Spell Combat). You could go for something other than Titan Mauler that lets you wield a 2h weapon in 1 hand, but I think it would be tough to give up the best class feature that Magus gives (Spell Combat, IE, full attack with a buff/attack).
As to the question, I don't see why people are so confused. You cast with 1 hand, then re-grab with it just before you attack. Spell doesn't have somatic components? Then you don't let go of the weapon since you don't have to. Of course, free actions may be limited, so beware.
|
Jumping into the fray!
SPELL COMBAT IS OPTIONAL! However, a spell casted without spell combat is a standard action. Therefore, if you want to use a 2h, you must cast the spell with one hand, and then regrab your weapon and use the free attack (Note, no use of spell combat). You will not get any more attacks, you already used your standard action.
Another option is the quicken spell/still spell option. Using that, you do a full attack and get a spell strike.
You cannot use spell combat and a 2h, but you can use a 2h with spell strike. Make sense?
What bothers me with the free action regrabbing is:
Spellstrike allows you to channel a touch spell through your weapon... but casting a spell (standard action) with the touch (part of that same standard action) would mean you'd have to regrab (free action) in the middle of your standard action...
Normally actions are a sequence... and normally you cannot take another action in the middle of a different action? (Like moving past somebody and attack on the way, unless you have spring attack)
The regrabbing would have to be a non-action for that?
I don't deny that you could cast that spell, hold the charge, and then channel it through your standard attack next round.
start standard action touch-spell-casting
free action weapon grip
end standard action touch-spell-channeling
-> seems like a "no" to me... you cannot split standard actions...?
Gunslingers do it...