And maybe a rimed frostbite (entangle + fatigue, no save) spellstriked full attack ain't that powerful by itself, but if you combine that with major hurt from a maxed-str-full-dmg-power-attack with a 2-handed-weapon...?You know, any non-magus can do this with a primary bite attack.
If you can math out for me how a bite attack will do similar amounts of damage when compared to a Greatsword or Falchion/Nodachi/Elven curve blade... I might be convinced otherwise.
(and the elven curve blade reminds me that it is finessable and thus cancels the entire we want str to mean something, we need 2-handers to work for magus, argument)
As Redneckdevil kindly pointed out... I forgot 1 free action... so that's 4 free actions plus full usage of standard+move+swift actions.
Yes, for me that is too much.
And maybe a rimed frostbite (entangle + fatigue, no save) spellstriked full attack ain't that powerful by itself, but if you combine that with major hurt from a maxed-str-full-dmg-power-attack with a 2-handed-weapon...?
And as I pointed out, most spells a magus will cast for combat don't actually have a component requirement, so this is moot. It's even more moot when as Quantam Steve pointed out that retrieving components isn't a free action, its a non-action.
Unless a particular opponent has a high enough AC that a magus iterative attacks will almost never hit, the magus will do more damage using spell combat (and thus a 1-hander) than he will do making a single spell cast and spellstrike 2-handed each round. I'm just not understanding why that extra 3-4 points of damage is the deal breaker when if the magus had opted to use spell combat with multiple iteratives he's likely to get an extra 10-15 or so.
Actually with the rules on touch spells, once u cast a touch spell u can "hold" that spell thru different rounds. Seeing how u need a free hand not to only cast the spell BUT also to grab the components for the spell (seems people forgot about that free action). So I would say releasing ur hand AND grabbing the components are 2 free actions back to back.
Imho I'd say a 2handed weapon magus can do it, but they would have to release the spell for the free attack on the next round round.
That way it can be done and wouldn't be seen as an abuse on the rules of free actions. But then again that brings up range as in they would be doing 2 free actions in reloading as in grabbing the amko and then reloading...But honestly what is the main difference between spell strike and spell combat? Ur still attacking and casting a spell in the same round, only difference is one gives a free attack where the other isn't restricted to touch spells. So if ur attacking AND casting in the same round only difference is the end results then why is a 2 hander allowed for one and isn't allowed for the other? Your really doing the exact same actions swinging a weapon and casting a spell in the same round, why is it allowed for one and not the other?
Beyond the points other posters pointed out, Spell Combat also gives you your iterative attacks. Casting a spell and delivering it through Spellstrike is only one attack.
edit: main point ninja'd
I do, however, find it disingenuous to claim that a limit of 1 free action per round is a reasonable interpretation of RAW.And you'd be right to feel that way. But that isn't the claim I made, and you very well know that.
You said:
I do have a general rule that if there is an issue regarding magic, I will always take the more restrictive interpretation of the RAW text.
in this instance your restrictive interpretation is that 2 free actions (release, regrip) was too many. That's not your general limit on free actions, but in this instance it is your limit.
Am I misunderstanding you? Is the limit on free actions not the interpretation you are using to disallow two-handed Spellstrike?
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...?That's what I would have thought too, but this FAQ seems to imply that you can indeed break the free action attack you get from a touch spell away from the actual action to cast said spell.
I'm not sure why you are allowed to do that, but that's the FAQ.
Because they're distinct actions.
Standard action to cast.Free action to deliver.
That the standard action to cast grants the free action to deliver doesn't mean that they're part of the same action.
Drawing components is a non-action and the free action to deliver the spell is granted as part of the spell. So, unless you count actions granted by spells against the normal number of actions allowed, that's two free actions.
Why is this then listed under free actions in the combat section of the CRB
Free Action - Attack of Opportunity^1Cease concentration on a spell - No
Drop an item - No
Drop to the floor - No
Prepare spell components to cast a spell^5 - No
Speak - No
Also, the touch granted by touch spells is a free action otherwise you'd have to do it in the same standard action you cast the spell... not after moving around.
Just so I'm sure we're on the same page here - A magus cannot use a two handed weapon and spell combat in the same round. Basically his options are:
A. Use a one-handed weapon. Perform a full attack and simultaneously cast spells (with a -2 penalty), using spellstrike to take advantage of the additional free attack if he chooses to use a melee touch spell such as Shocking Grasp. If he is not in a position to use Spell Combat (like if his target is out of range) he can instead cast a melee touch spell, move to the target, and Spellstrike (either with a 1h grip or a 2h grip) the target as a free action.
B. Use a two-handed weapon. He can perform a full attack (but not cast a spell) or he can cast a spell and use the two-handed weapon to deliver the (melee touch) spell via a single attack through Spellstrike.
For most people this isn't really an issue because two handed weapons are very poor weapons for magi in general - they can't wield a two-handed weapon and use their core class ability (Spell Combat). Changing to a two-handed grip for Spell Strike (which is specifically not legal with Spell Combat) means they'll most likely get an additional +1 to +3 damage on a single attack, not more. If they have a higher strength modifier than that they most likely simultaneously lose out on any follow-up attacks via Spell Combat since they can only make a single attack instead of taking all of their iterative attacks.
Drawing components is a non-action and the free action to deliver the spell is granted as part of the spell. So, unless you count actions granted by spells against the normal number of actions allowed, that's two free actions.Why is this then listed under free actions in the combat section of the CRB
Free Action - Attack of Opportunity^1
Cease concentration on a spell - No
Drop an item - No
Drop to the floor - No
Prepare spell components to cast a spell^5 - No
Speak - NoAlso, the touch granted by touch spells is a free action otherwise you'd have to do it in the same standard action you cast the spell... not after moving around.
Interesting that it isn't described as a free action in the Magic section. I wonder if speaking the verbal components is also an additional free action.
I never said delivering the touch wasn't a action, I said it's a bonus free action granted by the spell (like a Haste attack) and shouldn't be counted against the normal limit.
Just so I'm sure we're on the same page here - A magus cannot use a two handed weapon and spell combat in the same round. Basically his options are:
A. Use a one-handed weapon. Perform a full attack and simultaneously cast spells (with a -2 penalty), using spellstrike to take advantage of the additional free attack if he chooses to use a melee touch spell such as Shocking Grasp. If he is not in a position to use Spell Combat (like if his target is out of range) he can instead cast a melee touch spell, move to the target, and Spellstrike (either with a 1h grip or a 2h grip) the target as a free action.
B. Use a two-handed weapon. He can perform a full attack (but not cast a spell) or he can cast a spell and use the two-handed weapon to deliver the (melee touch) spell via a single attack through Spellstrike.
For most people this isn't really an issue because two handed weapons are very poor weapons for magi in general - they can't wield a two-handed weapon and use their core class ability (Spell Combat). Changing to a two-handed grip for Spell Strike (which is specifically not legal with Spell Combat) means they'll most likely get an additional +1 to +3 damage on a single attack, not more. If they have a higher strength modifier than that they most likely simultaneously lose out on any follow-up attacks via Spell Combat since they can only make a single attack instead of taking all of their iterative attacks.
Correct on all points.
What are people's opinions on using a one-handed weapon in two hands for Spellstrike?
Is a single free action (grip) too much?
On the large, they generally do have vocal and somatic components.
And as I pointed out, most spells a magus will cast for combat don't actually have a component requirement, so this is moot.
And? The somatic is the only reason the release/regrip free actions are needed. The vocal has no bearing on this discussion - speaking to cast a spell is not its own free action, speaking to cast a spell is part of the cast a spell action, whether that spell is being cast as immediate, swift, or standard action. RAW wise this is all legal if your GM allows you 3 or more free actions in a round (which the wizard FAQ explicitly allows those specific 3 free actions).
Number of free actions is not the issue. It's whether your hand is committed for a round sequence or not.
If its not a full-attack I think you are hard pressed to say the hand is committed for the full round to casting a spell using the TWF FAQ.
For example. A player is holding a shield in one hand. With their other hand could they pull something from their bags, drop it on the ground, then cast a spell?
If they are holding a bow in one hand, could they cast a spell, draw an arrow (free action) with their free hand?
Could a player with a longsword with BAB +11 make a two handed attack, release one hand and make a one handed attack, drop the sword and make an unarmed attack? Or two handed attack, one handed attack, two handed attack?
Could a player two handed attack with a melee weapon, drop it, quickdraw a bow, and complete the rest of their iteratives?
Or could a wizard release one hand from his weapon, cast a spell, make a touch attack with the free hand, and regrip his weapon?
Remember, casting a spell is a standard action, not a full round action (well normally of course). The standard action isn't the complete round. Could a wizard cast a spell (using up one of his hands) then use a move action to climb a rope? How does he do that if one hand has been 'used' for the round?
His hand is only occupied for the duration of the action he is taking, in this case the standard action. If he is using spell combat or TWF, both which are full round actions, the hand is occupied for the entire full round action - hence the you cannot two handed wield plus punch with a gauntlet ruling.
Or a (phalanx soldier 3 / magus 2) using a buckler and a now-one-handed nodachi.Make that a Skirnir Magus and I think you're golden to use spell combat even??
I'm not sure though spell combat says that your weapon has to be light or one handed, I don't think either Jaunt Grip Or the Phalanx Soldier's abilities actually make the two handed weapons they use in one hand into one handed weapons.
Also, Skirnir's version of spell combat is really ambiguous: does it let you replace your one handed weapon with a shield? Or does it let you spell combat with a sword and a shield?
I think it's the former, but if it is the latter then Thunderstriker, Phalanx Soldier and (almost) Titan Mauler all look like pretty amazing multiclass options.
I think skirnir's Shielded Spell Combat is supposed to be sword + shield, rather than free-hand + shield, otherwise the ability to use your shield-hand for somatic casting requirements at the cost of your shield bonus is pretty baffling.
Personally, were I DMing, I'd ok that with the Phalanx Soldier ('use any polearm or spear of his size as a 1-handed weapon') but not Titan Mauler ('may choose to wield a two-handed melee weapon in one hand with a –2 penalty').
Number of free actions is not the issue. It's whether your hand is committed for a round sequence or not.
Your hand is not committed for the entire round when casting a spell (unless you're casting a spell with a casting time of 1 round).
Cast, move, quick draw, attack is completely legit. Your other arm doesn't even come into play.
|
The wizard however is only getting the shocking grasp damage, not advantage of having the spell damage being added to a carrier weapon damage with the superior chance to crit both.
And the disadvantage of changing a touch attack into a normal AC attack.
Against most targets you pay dearly for those extra hp of damage and a better critical range.|
|
As Redneckdevil kindly pointed out... I forgot 1 free action... so that's 4 free actions plus full usage of standard+move+swift actions.
Yes, for me that is too much.
And maybe a rimed frostbite (entangle + fatigue, no save) spellstriked full attack ain't that powerful by itself, but if you combine that with major hurt from a maxed-str-full-dmg-power-attack with a 2-handed-weapon...?
Drawing components is a non-action and the free action to deliver the spell is granted as part of the spell. So, unless you count actions granted by spells against the normal number of actions allowed, that's two free actions.
As I said, if that's too much for you, we're playing different games.
LazarX, your problem then isn't with the number of free actions used here, your concern is the amount of damage the magus can dish out.
The wizard however is only getting the shocking grasp damage, not advantage of having the spell damage being added to a carrier weapon damage with the superior chance to crit both.What I'm concerned with, is establishing base precedents. I also want to leave at least SOME of the martial tricks exclusive to those who are invested in martial. Two handed weapons are one of the few things in which the fighter type characters distinguish themselves. I have no problems with magi wielding greatswords if they wish, but I prefer to have the magi make the sacrifice of not being able to steal that from the fighter without forgoing his nova damage.
And yes, I do have a general rule that if there is an issue regarding magic, I will always take the more restrictive interpretation of the RAW text.
I am all for house-rules to fix aspects of the game that I find unbalances my game. You should see the changes I made to the Summoner.
I do, however, find it disingenuous to claim that a limit of 1 free action per round is a reasonable interpretation of RAW.
If a bard is using Weird word to attack 10 targets and get 10 free actions attacks, you guys would limit him to 3 free actions and so only 3 attacks?
Same thing when someone is throwing several objects with Telekinesis?(Examples chosen to stay in the realm of magic)
|
|
However, swift action touch spells with spell strike are really not a lot different from Pool Strike, which is always a swift action, scales, and can be used with spellstrike. It's not like that same swift action magus couldn't swift action an Area of Effect spell, then standard action a touch spell onto his one handed sword to get a free extra attack then full attack to deliver every charge. Or swift action a touch to get a free attack, then another touch with multiple charges to get another free attack and then take his BAB with spell combat.
Or, if he had Hasted assault, he could swift action a haste on himself, use a touch spell, then take his full BAB with that touch spell.
Really, Spell Combat is amazing, giving it up means giving up the potential of a max 6 attacks, three of which would be at full BAB-1, and a minimum of two of them would also deliver touch spells, among MANY other possibilities not limited by melee.
Pool strike is a standard action ....
Pool Strike (Su): The magus can expend 1 point from his arcane pool as a standard action to charge his free hand with energy. He can make a melee touch attack with that hand as a free action as part of activating this ability. If the touch attack hits, it releases the charge and deals 2d6 points of energy damage (acid, cold, electricity, or fire, chosen when he spends the arcane pool point to activate this ability). He can use this ability with the spellstrike class feature. If he misses with this attack, he can hold the charge for up to 1 minute before it dissipates. At 6th level, and every three levels thereafter, the amount of damage dealt by this attack increases by 1d6.
and that put it in the "fairly bad " list of magus arcana for me.
If there is some FAQ or errata changing that, I would like you to point it to me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Casual reminder that PCs are superhuman compared to us.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If third party material is allowed, Super Genius Games allows two ways to do this. But, they cost resources and/or feats.
In the New Magus Arcana PDF, there are arcana you can pick up to enrune a specific weapon. There are versions for shields, light off hands, and two handed weapons. Once you spend your arcane points for the day, that weapon allows you to do somatic components.
In Spellcasting feats 2, there are a set of feats that are similar but have a few drawbacks. The two handed weapon one imposes a penalty to defensive casting but allows the use of a falcion for example.
Not to revive an old thread... My only issue with the 'no 2 handed weapons for spellstrike' thing is I just want to play a deathly magi with a Scythe and pretty much literally be Magus playing a Magus
This argument has long been resolved.
Spellstrike has no restrictions on what weapon can be used. Only Spell Combat restricted.
When a spell is held, if you touch the weapon with the hand that his holding it, the spell is discharged.
As far as I know, only the Mindblade archtype gets around this restriction.
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.
Where does it mention the free hand that is holding the spell? The FAQ is talking about the weapon that is already being held and the hand that is holding it.
There is no requirement that the spell has to be held in a free hand.
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.
If the magus is holding, or picks up a two-handed weapon, he does not count at "touching" anything.
A magus can juggle weapons while holding a charge, should he so choose.
Where does it mention the free hand that is holding the spell? The FAQ is talking about the weapon that is already being held and the hand that is holding it.
There is no requirement that the spell has to be held in a free hand.
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.
If the magus is holding, or picks up, a two-handed weapon (or any other weapon), he does not count at "touching" anything.
A magus can juggle weapons while holding a charge, should he so choose.
"With that hand..." is mentioned twice in the faq, and makes no mention of the free hand that the mage still has that had cast and is holding the spell. (Assuming Spell Combat was used in casting said spell)
For the overly pedantic, we'll assume the magus is not an idiot and the hand holding the spell is the one already holding his weapon.
That is, after all, the entire point of spellstrike. To deliver a touch spell through a weapon, not as a touch attach with the empty hand used to cast the spell.
Not that is really matters. Anyone holding charges can deliver with all available appendages, not just the one used to cast the spell (Assuming that a) it was not a stilled spell and b) they have hands.)
Also assuming a person wants to be overly pedantic, we can read the next line of the FAQ.
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.
First, from my understanding Tengu cannot wield a bastard sword or katana or Estoc as a one handed weapon without EWP, they can simply use it as a 2H weapon as if they had martial weapon proficiency regardless of what their chosen class allows for weapon proficiency. Still need EWP to use the sword one handed.
Second, this discussion took 7 years just to conclude that the class ability of the magus wasn't given to him to make it harder for him to be a magus? Wow.
The real question is who would ever argue with it, and why? What GM stops the magus from two handing a katana with spellstrike? The argument alone seems like it would be more of an inconvenience than whatever menial difference in damage the magus might do is worth. Who cares that much to actually halt gameplay to argue about this? Honestly, the magus putting two hands on his sword is going to break the game? I think they should get bladed brush combat for free just to encourage reach weapon magi, because why not?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Your basically TWF with a spell instead of a weapon. That hand needs to be free for the entire round for the Magus to be able to effect the use of Spell Combat. The real question is if he can use the weapon two handed after Spell Combat was used the round before and he still is holding the spell.
Nothing in this thread is about Spell Combat.
This thread is strictly about Spellstrike.
First, from my understanding Tengu cannot wield a bastard sword or katana or Estoc as a one handed weapon without EWP, they can simply use it as a 2H weapon as if they had martial weapon proficiency regardless of what their chosen class allows for weapon proficiency. Still need EWP to use the sword one handed.Tengus are trained from birth in swordplay, and as a result are automatically proficient with sword-like weapons (including bastard swords, daggers, elven curve blades, falchions, greatswords, kukris, longswords, punching daggers, rapiers, scimitars, short swords, and two-bladed swords).Bastard Sword Proficiency means using it 1 handed. Just about anybody that might ever use a Bastard Sword can use one 2 handed without taking Bastard Sword Proficiency at all. Likewise, proficiency with a Katana means Exotic Weapon Proficiency Katana. I mean, wow, really?
Let's say I were a Human Wizard and you were a Tengu Wizard. We both wanted to use a Katana. I have to take a Feat to become proficient with that Katana, but you can use it as if you already had that Feat, can't you? You have the "special training" to use it, and that means using it 1 handed.
Right?
A Khopesh is a sword. Being a Tengu means you can use it as if you had Exotic Weapon, Khopesh, right? Why is that not the case for Bastard Sword: just because another interpretation is possible?
An Elven Curve Blade is a sword, right? A Tengu is proficient with it, right? Doesn't that mean that a Tengu can use an Elven Curve Blade as if it had EWP, Elven Curve Blade?
I really don't want to derail this ancient thread, but the swords in question state they can be used as martial 2H weapons if you don't have EWP. It would be like using the Elven Curveblade you brought up. But to get fancy with it and use a bastard sword or katana or Estoc as a one handed weapon, a Tengu still needs EWP.
Where the Tengu swordtrained ability really shines is Elven Curveblades and Falcatas, especially in classes without martial weapon proficiency.
For the purpose of this discussion, as a magus, you're better off being a half elf, and taking the Elven Battle Focus line of feats. You can get EWP via the ancestral arms alternative racial ability if you want.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One can use Spellstrike whilst using Spell Combat. My point was a clarification on the issue and how the Magus would use such abilities.
The current conversation is in response to a magus wanting to use a scythe without spell combat.
The answer is, yes, you can spellstrike while using a scythe in two hands.
Since the character is not intending to use Spell Combat, the responses should not try to muddle rules with abilities that are not being used.