Magus ruling question


Rules Questions

101 to 129 of 129 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

blackbloodtroll wrote:

The arcane mark "trick" is just a complicated way of two weapon fighting, with penalties and everything.

It's like saying a rogue who two weapon fights for more sneak attack damage, is using a "cheesy" tactic.

It gets rid of the worst part of two weapon fighting... the two weapon part. You're using the same weapon for all your attacks and don't need to split your resources into two different weapons.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

OMG please let this thread end. It's legal. You basically get two attacks if you have a successful concentration check.
PLEASE LET IT GO.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

no, i agree with BigNorseWolf on this one. People had a big problem with monks flurrying with one weapon. But Magus gets to do it and cast spells and all that jazz? no, big problem. please bring down the nerf hammer Paizo.

If they're "clarifying" flurry of blows because people realized it was vague and rules-immoral to allow them to flurry for all of their attacks with one weapon, why is it permissible to let the Magus do the same?


Seraphimpunk wrote:

no, i agree with BigNorseWolf on this one. People had a big problem with monks flurrying with one weapon. But Magus gets to do it and cast spells and all that jazz? no, big problem. please bring down the nerf hammer Paizo.

If they're "clarifying" flurry of blows because people realized it was vague and rules-immoral to allow them to flurry for all of their attacks with one weapon, why is it permissible to let the Magus do the same?

I'd chalk this up to half the developers operating like many player under the assumption that flurrying all with one weapon was okay, and they designed several subsequent classes based around that assumption (cough) zen archer (/cough)

I thought in the massive hatred flurry of blows thread one of the devs admitted that the in-house interpretations were equivocal.

I won't hold them to the internal consistency on a rule that they admitted needing to significantly review for clarity.


Now it isclerified.
Secound from the top.


FYI, arcane mark is the only spell of level 0 that has a range of touch, on the magus spell list.


Ryan. Costello wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

The "cheese" comment used on everything that one does not like or understand begins to grate.

Cheese applies to RAW that breaks immersion.

Why does a magus get an extra attack any round it wants by using arcane mark?

You can apply the same disbelief to the magus getting a free melee attack with a weapon for any touch spell, not just arcane mark.

Why should they get another attack when they cast shocking grasp?

Your problem here is not reconciling yourself with the spellstrike class feature.

If you wish to talk immersion, then start looking at what spellstrike really does and make an explanation for it. It is not dependent upon casting a touch spell, but rather the dependence is upon what normally grants the free touch attack to deliver the spell. Explain what that means in-game, and then you can explain how spellstrike works in that context.

-James


So here one I was contemplating, making a trip monkey Magus. I was wondering if spell strike goes off if I do a trip attack?


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I would say yes, SolidHalo, but it is unclear.


If you make the trip attack with a weapon, yes. Actually there's an entire archetype pretty much based around that, which is Staff magus. A staff trip magus with a good amount of dexterity can get a lot of attacks of opportunity with greater trip and when the tripped target gets back up.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

The arcane mark "trick" is just a complicated way of two weapon fighting, with penalties and everything.

It's like saying a rogue who two weapon fights for more sneak attack damage, is using a "cheesy" tactic.
It gets rid of the worst part of two weapon fighting... the two weapon part. You're using the same weapon for all your attacks and don't need to split your resources into two different weapons.

On the flip side, they only ever get one additional attack. They can't take Improved TWF or Greater TWF, so it ends up being no different than Rapid Shot, except that it's in melee.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Bobson wrote:
it ends up being no different than Rapid Shot, except that it's in melee.

...and requires concentration checks.


Jiggy wrote:
Bobson wrote:
it ends up being no different than Rapid Shot, except that it's in melee.
...and requires concentration checks.

I always forget that part - I've never actually played a magus.


Von Marshal wrote:
FYI, arcane mark is the only spell of level 0 that has a range of touch, on the magus spell list.

Light.

You can spell combat-sunder objects in an explosion of glowing shrapnel.


Seraphimpunk wrote:
no, i agree with BigNorseWolf on this one. People had a big problem with monks flurrying with one weapon. But Magus gets to do it and cast spells and all that jazz? no, big problem. please bring down the nerf hammer Paizo.

Or... Fix the monk instead. In fact, wait for the monk fix that's actually promised..


SolidHalo wrote:
So here one I was contemplating, making a trip monkey Magus. I was wondering if spell strike goes off if I do a trip attack?

No, no more than you would successfully deliver a held touch spell when making an unarmed trip attack.

In order to deliver a held touch spell you need to make a melee touch spell to deliver it. You can substitute a natural weapon or unarmed strike vs normal AC and also deliver the held spell. A Magus can also substitute (via spellstrike) a melee weapon attack vs normal AC to do so.

But grapples don't automatically deliver them, nor do trips, sunders, steals, dirty tricks, bull rushes, repositions, etc.

-James

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

james maissen wrote:
SolidHalo wrote:
So here one I was contemplating, making a trip monkey Magus. I was wondering if spell strike goes off if I do a trip attack?

No, no more than you would successfully deliver a held touch spell when making an unarmed trip attack.

In order to deliver a held touch spell you need to make a melee touch spell to deliver it. You can substitute a natural weapon or unarmed strike vs normal AC and also deliver the held spell. A Magus can also substitute (via spellstrike) a melee weapon attack vs normal AC to do so.

But grapples don't automatically deliver them, nor do trips, sunders, steals, dirty tricks, bull rushes, repositions, etc.

-James

Which you've got to admit is a little wonky, and prime material for houseruling in home games. :P


A held spell goes off if you accidentally touch someone.

If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges.

It'd make sense that it'd go off on any unarmed attack, trip, or being grappled.

Dark Archive

Bobson wrote:

A held spell goes off if you accidentally touch someone.

If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges.
It'd make sense that it'd go off on any unarmed attack, trip, or being grappled.

Especially since all of those combat maneuvers are officially Attacks.

A touch spell goes off when you make an attack roll and hit someone.
A combat maneuver is an attack roll that requires you to reach out and contact that target.

So any combat maneuver that succeeds is a successful attack and the spell goes off.


Mathwei ap Niall wrote:
Bobson wrote:

A held spell goes off if you accidentally touch someone.

If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges.
It'd make sense that it'd go off on any unarmed attack, trip, or being grappled.

Especially since all of those combat maneuvers are officially Attacks.

A touch spell goes off when you make an attack roll and hit someone.
A combat maneuver is an attack roll that requires you to reach out and contact that target.

So any combat maneuver that succeeds is a successful attack and the spell goes off.

On a thread derailing note... if you grapple a caster that has a charged touch attack, can you force him to discharge it on himself with a pin?


Mathwei ap Niall wrote:
Bobson wrote:

A held spell goes off if you accidentally touch someone.

If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges.
It'd make sense that it'd go off on any unarmed attack, trip, or being grappled.

Especially since all of those combat maneuvers are officially Attacks.

A touch spell goes off when you make an attack roll and hit someone.
A combat maneuver is an attack roll that requires you to reach out and contact that target.

So any combat maneuver that succeeds is a successful attack and the spell goes off.

Actually, you're only allowed to make a "normal unarmed attack (or an attack with a natural weapon)." If a combat maneuver would be considered a normal unarmed attack, it can be used to deliver the touch spell, otherwise it cannot.

However if you touch anything, the spell is discharged. It's unclear whether this means the spell is delivered to the creature or object touch, or just discharged harmlessly with no effect. If you can deliver the spell with an accidental touch, this would mean you don't actually have to succeed on the combat maneuver to deliver the spell, on make contact. Unfortunately, there is no way to determine if a failed combat maneuver made contact.

Dark Archive

Quantum Steve wrote:
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:
Bobson wrote:

A held spell goes off if you accidentally touch someone.

If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges.
It'd make sense that it'd go off on any unarmed attack, trip, or being grappled.

Especially since all of those combat maneuvers are officially Attacks.

A touch spell goes off when you make an attack roll and hit someone.
A combat maneuver is an attack roll that requires you to reach out and contact that target.

So any combat maneuver that succeeds is a successful attack and the spell goes off.

Actually, you're only allowed to make a "normal unarmed attack (or an attack with a natural weapon)." If a combat maneuver would be considered a normal unarmed attack, it can be used to deliver the touch spell, otherwise it cannot.

However if you touch anything, the spell is discharged. It's unclear whether this means the spell is delivered to the creature or object touch, or just discharged harmlessly with no effect. If you can deliver the spell with an accidental touch, this would mean you don't actually have to succeed on the combat maneuver to deliver the spell, on make contact. Unfortunately, there is no way to determine if a failed combat maneuver made contact.

There is nothing in the rules on touch attacks that states it must be a normal unarmed attack or natural weapon.

The rules for touch spells in combat state:

Quote:

Touch Spells in Combat

Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action. You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll.

Touch Attacks: Touching an opponent with a touch spell is considered to be an armed attack and therefore does not provoke attacks of opportunity. The act of casting a spell, however, does provoke an attack of opportunity. Touch attacks come in two types: melee touch attacks and ranged touch attacks. You can score critical hits with either type of attack as long as the spell deals damage. Your opponent's AC against a touch attack does not include any armor bonus, shield bonus, or natural armor bonus. His size modifier, Dexterity modifier, and deflection bonus (if any) all apply normally.

According to this all you need to do is succeed on an attack roll to discharge the spell.

As for the discharging it's easiest to just rule if you fail on the attack roll you just missed.


Normally an attack could miss because you missed, or because you hit and the armor absorbed it all. There's no armor for a touch attack - if you miss, you miss.

MC Templar wrote:


On a thread derailing note... if you grapple a caster that has a charged touch attack, can you force him to discharge it on himself with a pin?

No, it'd go off on you as soon as you successfully touched him. That could be a good thing if he was holding a charge of Cure Critical Wounds, or a bad one if he had Shocking Grasp...


@Matthew

Read the section immediately after the one you quoted.

PRD wrote:
Holding the Charge: If you don't discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell, you can hold the charge indefinitely. You can continue to make touch attacks round after round. If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates. You can touch one friend as a standard action or up to six friends as a full-round action. Alternatively, you may make a normal unarmed attack (or an attack with a natural weapon) while holding a charge. In this case, you aren't considered armed and you provoke attacks of opportunity as normal for the attack. If your unarmed attack or natural weapon attack normally doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity, neither does this attack. If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and the spell discharges. If the attack misses, you are still holding the charge.

So your only two options, normally, for delivering a held charge are a standard action touch attack, or a normal unarmed attack.

The section you bolded refers to the free touch attack you get when you cast a touch spell. While you can touch allies without rolling, you must succeed at an attack roll to touch enemies with your touch attack. That attack can only be a touch attack.


Bobson wrote:

Normally an attack could miss because you missed, or because you hit and the armor absorbed it all. There's no armor for a touch attack - if you miss, you miss.

MC Templar wrote:


On a thread derailing note... if you grapple a caster that has a charged touch attack, can you force him to discharge it on himself with a pin?

No, it'd go off on you as soon as you successfully touched him. That could be a good thing if he was holding a charge of Cure Critical Wounds, or a bad one if he had Shocking Grasp...

That's disappointing.... I'd love to see the dramatic struggle over a touch spell the way movie heroes and villains fight over a knife or gun.

If you know that enemy caster is holding a harm spell, grappling his arm to prevent him from initiating the touch seems dramatically appropriate. :)


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
MC Templar wrote:
Bobson wrote:

Normally an attack could miss because you missed, or because you hit and the armor absorbed it all. There's no armor for a touch attack - if you miss, you miss.

MC Templar wrote:


On a thread derailing note... if you grapple a caster that has a charged touch attack, can you force him to discharge it on himself with a pin?

No, it'd go off on you as soon as you successfully touched him. That could be a good thing if he was holding a charge of Cure Critical Wounds, or a bad one if he had Shocking Grasp...

That's disappointing.... I'd love to see the dramatic struggle over a touch spell the way movie heroes and villains fight over a knife or gun.

If you know that enemy caster is holding a harm spell, grappling his arm to prevent him from initiating the touch seems dramatically appropriate. :)

I'm not so sure that, that is true. The spell is discharged if the CASTER touches anything. If something touches the caster, it is NOT discharged (otherwise, simply taking a step would discharge a touch spell).

Dark Archive

Quantum Steve wrote:

@Matthew

Read the section immediately after the one you quoted.

PRD wrote:
Holding the Charge: If you don't discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell, you can hold the charge indefinitely. You can continue to make touch attacks round after round. If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates. You can touch one friend as a standard action or up to six friends as a full-round action. Alternatively, you may make a normal unarmed attack (or an attack with a natural weapon) while holding a charge. In this case, you aren't considered armed and you provoke attacks of opportunity as normal for the attack. If your unarmed attack or natural weapon attack normally doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity, neither does this attack. If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and the spell discharges. If the attack misses, you are still holding the charge.

So your only two options, normally, for delivering a held charge are a standard action touch attack, or a normal unarmed attack.

The section you bolded refers to the free touch attack you get when you cast a touch spell. While you can touch allies without rolling, you must succeed at an attack roll to touch enemies with your touch attack. That attack can only be a touch attack.

And if you re-read what you posted that only comes into effect if you DON'T make an attack in the round you cast the spell. In the round you do cast the spell you use the free attack you get for casting the spell to do the trip attempt and the only requirement then is to succeed on any attack.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Mathwei ap Niall, I think there is something unclear in your posts.

You are claiming that caster can deliver a touch spell, in the same round in which he has cast it with a trip attack or any other kins of attack that is not a the free touch attack granted by the spell?

Or are you speaking of hold spells and discharging them the next round?

Or speaking of a spellstriking Magus?

Reading your posts it seem you are truing to give all people the capacity to use any kind of standard attack together with a touch range spell.


Ravingdork wrote:
MC Templar wrote:
Bobson wrote:

Normally an attack could miss because you missed, or because you hit and the armor absorbed it all. There's no armor for a touch attack - if you miss, you miss.

MC Templar wrote:


On a thread derailing note... if you grapple a caster that has a charged touch attack, can you force him to discharge it on himself with a pin?

No, it'd go off on you as soon as you successfully touched him. That could be a good thing if he was holding a charge of Cure Critical Wounds, or a bad one if he had Shocking Grasp...

That's disappointing.... I'd love to see the dramatic struggle over a touch spell the way movie heroes and villains fight over a knife or gun.

If you know that enemy caster is holding a harm spell, grappling his arm to prevent him from initiating the touch seems dramatically appropriate. :)

I'm not so sure that, that is true. The spell is discharged if the CASTER touches anything. If something touches the caster, it is NOT discharged (otherwise, simply taking a step would discharge a touch spell).

That's a valid point. After all, you *can* cast Cure Light Wounds on a stone... it just fails to do anything because it isn't a valid target. It's not like the spell spontaneously refuses to be cast.

Maybe it does have to be with hands/manipulators. After all, you rarely refer to "touching" something with your shoulder or foot. (Brushed or stepped in is more common, respectively, although touched is valid.) So it could be that anything you touch with your hands triggers it.

The "even unintentionally" clause does seem to imply it can be forced to go off against your will, though. And I would assume anyone trying to avoid being grappled is going to attempt to use their hands. So in my own games, I'd probably rule that it has to be a hand touch, but that you'd have to specifically declare that you're trying to avoid setting it off (and thus automatically failing to avoid the grapple) if someone does grapple you.

101 to 129 of 129 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Magus ruling question All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.