Alright maybe I am having a hard time following your wording so I will just break this down.
Spell combat. Can cast a spell and still make full attack at -2.
Spell strike cast a touch spell and deliver with free melee rather then though
The two work exactly like that and using them together does not change that.
Cast a touch spell and deliver it with spell strike. Did you just cast a spell and take a -2 on attacks? If yes then spell combat applies and you can take your full attack.
I am not really sure why there is so many problems with this. People seem to be able to understand them one at a time but you put them together (as was in fact intended.) and peoples brains seem to break. Though I don't know why as its pretty straight forward.
With Spell Combat you get your regular weapon attack(s) provided by your BAB plus one spell, but all at -2 to hit. If the spell is a touch attack, you can choose to just do it as a touch attack or you can Spell Strike it with your weapon to hit vs normal AC.
So you were right; Spellstrike does by itself what they seem to think Spell Combat does - it lets you deliver a touch spell through your weapon so you can do weapon damage plus spell damage (the downside being that you hit normal AC, but on the plus side your spells have the same crit range as the weapon you are using, but they still only crit for x2 no matter what).
Since Ive started a magus recently, this is a vagueness that's stumped me as well.
As a magus, you are allowed to perform spells as a secondary attack, much like an offhand attack.
Sword+Magic Missle, for example. by the rules as I understand them, you need the situation to allow for a full attack, as with any other multi attack round. as well, you must make normal concentration checks or maneuver accordingly.
Spellstrike allows you to 'charge' a weapon and make a normal attack, also committing a touch attack spell through the weapon. As I understand it, the charging and attack are a 'full round' action, and do not allow for you to make other attacks in that round. The charging has to be in the same round, and is lost if not discharged according to the spell requirements.
From experience, I've dumped 40+ points of damage (crit well, apprentice) in one round at 4th level. I don't need to both spellstrike and get another spell in thereafter, and I personally interpret the rules as such.
From experience, I've dumped 40+ points of damage (crit well, apprentice) in one round at 4th level. I don't need to both spellstrike and get another spell in thereafter, and I personally interpret the rules as such.
There's the problem; under no circumstance does Spell Combat allow you to cast more than one spell in a round, it just lets you cast a spell in addition to making a full attack.
Spellstrike just replaces the normal touch option for a touch spell with letting you make a weapon attack to deliver it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
spell strike replaces the FREE touch attack to deliver a touch spell with a FREE melee attack.
Spell strike with touch spell. Cast touch spell- deliver with FREE melee attack.
Spell combat with touch spell. Cast spell- deliver spell with FREE touch attack then take your normal attacks. All at -2
Spell combat + spell strike with touch spell. Cast spell- deliver with FREE melee attack then take your normal attacks. All at -2.
You know I am really trying not to come off as rude here but why the heck is this so hard?! There is no vagueness. Each spells out exactly what it does just fine and combining them does not change what they do.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On top of that a magus in fact does not need to discharge the touch spell in the same round. If he should miss he can still deliver it through his weapon the next round. This is specifically covered in a FAQ that is also pasted right on the magus entry of the SRD.
Yes you can do that, and you also wouldn't take the -2 to hit because you aren't using Spell Combat.
With Spell Combat you get your regular weapon attack(s) provided by your BAB plus one spell, but all at -2 to hit. If the spell is a touch attack, you can choose to just do it as a touch attack or you can Spell Strike it with your weapon to hit vs normal AC.
So you were right; Spellstrike does by itself what they seem to think Spell Combat does - it lets you deliver a touch spell through your weapon so you can do weapon damage plus spell damage (the downside being that you hit normal AC, but on the plus side your spells have the same crit range as the weapon you are using, but they still only crit for x2 no matter what).
Okay. Good, that's what i thought.
I did just notice something else.........According to Spellstrike, it can be used in conjunction with Spell Combat, but there is no statement that it MUST be used with Spell Combat. So presumably you could cast a single touch attack spell, deliver it with a FREE melee attack, and then also move instead of delivering your normal attacks.
Yes. Or you could cast the spell, then move and deliver the attack to avoid AOO's. Just like any caster could with any touch spell just you deliver it with your weapon. This is a very good low lvl tactic,
If I remember correctly there was a developer clarification on this a while back that clarified you get an extra free melee attack to deliver the spell with Spellstrike + Spell Combat.
Essentially, you get:
1 Melee Attack
1 Melee Attack to deliver the Spell
The Spell
For what is basically a total of 3 attacks.
The free melee attack for the spell isn't extra; it replaces the standard touch attack.
If you mean that you essentially get three attacks because you get to deal weapon damage twice, plus spell damage, then you are right but it is still only two attack rolls and one spell being cast. I'd just watch the way you say it because people here are already confused =p
The first one says that you do your normal attacks, cast your spell, and the deliver it with Spellstrike, but then the second one says that you get your attacks, can deliver the spell as a touch, and then get an extra free attack?
There seems to be a bit of discrepancy there. >_<
I don't see the difference.
First one says you can "attack as normal, cast the spell, and attack with the free attack", and the second one says you get "your attack + spell + free attack".
The first one seems to say full attack + spell (potentially delivered through Spell Strike). The second one seems to say full attack + spell with free touch + extra melee attack the way it's worded. I guess I could see the second one also meaning full attack + spell (with Spell Strike or not).
|
Which of us is correct?
You are correct, if the spell you cast is a touch spell. A couple of points:
1. If you miss with your free attack, you are still holding the charge. Any subsequent attacks may be used to deliver the spell.
2. You don't have to cast a touch spell. You can cast any spell you have memorized and don't have to cast before attacking. For example, you could take your normal attack(s) at -2, 5-foot step, cast vanish.
Can you discharge multiple charges of Chill Touch in the same round by casting the spell first, doing your touch attack through your weapon, and then taking your full attack action and continuing to stab with your sword? You're still holding the charge, right?
Second question, if I'm holding a charge, I presume casting a second touch attack spell wipes the charge out. Does casting other spells (vanish, lightning bolt, whatever) also wipe the charge out?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
These are the legal possibilities (assuming 1 attack in the full attack sequence):
1. Just a normal full-round attack
2. Just a spell
3. A full-round attack and a spell that doesn't require an attack roll (example shield); all attacks at -2
4. A full-round attack and a spell that does require a touch attack. All attacks at -2; the touch attack is done as part of casting the spell (no "extra" attack is granted to the full-round attack)
5. A full-round attack and a spell that requires a melee touch attack. All attacks at -2; the touch attack is done as part of casting the spell (no "extra" attack is granted to the full-round attack)
5. A full-round attack and a spell that requires a melee touch attack. The magus may use Spellstrike to deliver the spell as a normal attack (dealing normal attack damage) instead of the melee touch attack. No touch attack is given (as it has been changed to a normal attack instead), but the full-attack routine does gain one additional attack (the one representing the spellstrike attack)
@beej67
1: multiple charges from chill touch, as i understand it, YES, u can.
2: ANY spell cast while holding a charge wipes the charge.
+1
|
|
Can you discharge multiple charges of Chill Touch in the same round by casting the spell first, doing your touch attack through your weapon, and then taking your full attack action and continuing to stab with your sword? You're still holding the charge, right?
Second question, if I'm holding a charge, I presume casting a second touch attack spell wipes the charge out. Does casting other spells (vanish, lightning bolt, whatever) also wipe the charge out?
Casting any spell terminates held charges.
Lets say you have Bab 6/1.
Can you....
Full attack [in this example you'll get 2 attacks from bab 6/1]
AND
Cast a spell [say chill touch]
AND
Attack with your weapon to deliver the chill touch. All in one turn????
Basically going...
Full Round Attack, then Standard Action, then Standard Action - all in one turn? Oh I guess you can shove a 5ft. step in there somewhere too!
The downside to having way too many actions in one round being a -2 to your attacks and making a Concentration roll!
Really?
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lets say you have Bab 6/1.
Can you....
Full attack [in this example you'll get 2 attacks from bab 6/1]
AND
Cast a spell [say chill touch]
AND
Attack with your weapon to deliver the chill touch. All in one turn????
This part's correct, but...
Basically going...
Full Round Attack, then Standard Action, then Standard Action - all in one turn? Oh I guess you can shove a 5ft. step in there somewhere too!
This part doesn't match what you said a minute ago.
First you list:
1) Full attack
2) Cast chill touch
3) Deliver chill touch through weapon
Then you list:
1a) Full round attack (matches #1)
2a) Standard action (matches what #2 would normally cost)
3a) Standard action (presumably you're pairing this with "deliver spell through weapon"?)
Thing is, #3 and #3a don't match. As per Core rules on touch spells, #3 would normally be a free action (but targeting Touch AC and not dealing weapon damage). Spellstrike changes it to being weapon-based (getting weapon damage and targeting normal AC), but it was already a free action before the Magus ever got a hold of it.
So the BAB+6 magus can, as a full round action, do the following:
1) Attack at +6 (but with a -2 penalty)
2) Attack at +1 (same penalty)
3) Cast chill touch
That's Spell Combat. Upon completing the third step, Core rules say he can use a free action to deliver the chill touch that he just cast, and do so any time this turn.
When he uses that free action that the Core rules are already giving him, Spellstrike will let him turn it from a poke to a stab.
Clear?
Can you....
Full attack [in this example you'll get 2 attacks from bab 6/1]
AND
Cast a spell [say chill touch]
AND
Attack with your weapon to deliver the chill touch.
Technically no, as Spell Combat is a specific full-round action, not a full-attack.
However, you do get to make all of your attacks with your weapon.
So if you do that in the other order, a level 8 magus can:
* Use Spell Combat (a full-round action)
* Cast Chill Touch
* Make an attack as a free action as a result of casting a touch spell, and use Spellstrike to deliver it with a weapon instead of touch, taking -2 penalty to attack roll from Spell Combat
* Make normal iterative attacks with weapon, taking -2 penalty to attack rolls from Spell Combat
Any of those attacks that hit will deliver a Chill Touch in addition to regular damage.
Basically going...
Full Round Attack, then Standard Action, then Standard Action - all in one turn? Oh I guess you can shove a 5ft. step in there somewhere too!
Only one standard action. It's basically a full-attack, using Two-Weapon Fighting, with the off-hand attack being replaced with a spell.
Lets say you have Bab 6/1.
Can you....
Full attack [in this example you'll get 2 attacks from bab 6/1]
AND
Cast a spell [say chill touch]
AND
Attack with your weapon to deliver the chill touch. All in one turn????Basically going...
Full Round Attack, then Standard Action, then Standard Action - all in one turn? Oh I guess you can shove a 5ft. step in there somewhere too!
The downside to having way too many actions in one round being a -2 to your attacks and making a Concentration roll!
Really?
Yes a magus can do all this in one round.
But a two weapon fighter could make his normal full round attacks +1 additional attack, too. with the same -2 to all attacks. And he can do it every round without needing to cast a spell.And if he is a bard and has some immediate action spells he can cast this spell, too.
So a magus can't really do much more than a TWF Bard with the right spell.
It's the casting a spell and full attack that seems pretty strong to me but I guess the spell list is where the designers have "balanced" that ability out.
I would have thought [in fact did!] that just casting and attacking in the same round was good enough of an ability to make the class stand out.
You live and learn!
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Funnily enough, the only magus I've played with seems to do remarkably little Spellstriking or Spell Combat, usually choosing instead to either cast control spells from the back or else pump up his weapon with Arcane Pool points and simply attack. So it must not be too broken, eh?
Let me see if I've got this straight then:
A level two magus can attack twice in one round with a one-handed weapon (and with the same penalties as two-weapon fighting with two weapons, one of them light) as long as they cast a spell with a range of touch. But not if they don't cast a touch spell, because not casting a spell... takes longer?
Question: does this apply if you cast 'light'? That has a range of touch and can be cast every round forever.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let me see if I've got this straight then:
A level two magus can attack twice in one round with a one-handed weapon (and with the same penalties as two-weapon fighting with two weapons, one of them light) as long as they cast a spell with a range of touch.
You forgot the concentration check to cast defensively because they're in melee. And if they fail and lose the spell, they don't get the Spellstrike attack, but their normal attack still gets the -2 penalty.
So yeah, it's like TWF, only bad.
Question: does this apply if you cast 'light'? That has a range of touch and can be cast every round forever.
This question came up a million years ago with arcane mark. Jason Bulmahn (lead designer) said it's fine.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This question came up a million years ago with arcane mark. Jason Bulmahn (lead designer) said it's fine.
So...
No rulings here, but I thought I would bring up a point that is the primary reason I have not gone in an altered this ability, even in light of the arcane mark issue.
Remember that you have to leave one hand open to pull this particular trick off, which in the end, means that this trick is really no better than Two-Weapon Fighting, you are just swapping your off-hand attack for a spell. Well, that was the original intent anyway. So the Arcane Mark bit just lets you take that extra off-hand attack, albeit with your on hand weapon. Handy, sure, but hardly overpowering.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Cruising the boards late night style
Well, except it lets the magus one-hand-flurry and there may or may not be an AoO provoked.
You forgot the concentration check to cast defensively because they're in melee. And if they fail and lose the spell, they don't get the Spellstrike attack, but their normal attack still gets the -2 penalty. So yeah, it's like TWF, only bad.
Casting a level 0 spell defensively is pretty easy. Level 5 character, +4 Int bonus, +4 from a feat = 95% success rate? So it's soon like TWF, only you don't need to buy two weapons, and you keep a hand free in combat.
Casting a level 0 spell defensively is pretty easy. Level 5 character, +4 Int bonus, +4 from a feat = 95% success rate? So it's soon like TWF, only you don't need to buy two weapons, and you keep a hand free in combat.
...at the cost of a feat, and investing heavily in a mental stat that another TWF character doesn't need.
...at the cost of a feat
Regular two-weapon also costs a feat, and Combat Casting is useful anyway.
You're getting this a bit confused because many are making the mistake of separating components which are not.
That doesn't actually contradict anything I said, does it?
A low-level magus can make two attacks with one weapon, with certain penalties, but they can't do this when not casting a spell. This is a bit silly. (It's also a bit annoying for core monks, who were forbidden from two-weapon fighting with one weapon.)Note: I am the OP's GM, so whoever convinces me wins the thread.
Not sure what convincing you need beyond "the developer has flat out stated his intention".
Or creative designer, whichever.
Think its silly or not that's how it works. If you want to get into the list of "silly" things in 3.5/PF we will be here all day.
The magus abilities like many other abilities are not bound by reality. Even in the sense of in that world reality is bent all the time by almost every class. In the sense of outside that world.... it's a game. It is designed as just that. Is the abilities in question unbalanced in context of the game as a whole? No. So why does it matter?
RAW it works. That should be clear because the ability states that you can do this with a touch spell and some cantrips are touch spells.
Some GMs think it is too much to allow and houserule it. So did mine. He ruled that arcane mark and brand (a curse cantrip the hexcrafter gets) work only as long as it is not already on the target.
So at least once per opponent. More if he saves vs brand.
I don't understand what Matthew Downie wants to be convinced of. It is a strange ability but really it is working as intended and it is not overpowered.
It has the benefit of only needing one weapon for all attacks. But it has several drawbacks as well.
- Casting defensively: The DC is not very hard but there is a chance to fail. Plus the enemy could counterspell you or there could be anti magic zones etc.
- You need a hand free.
- Most dual wielders (except rugues) hav a higher BAB compared to the Magus. Even the monk's BAB is higher while he uses FoB.
- You are restricted in the kinds of armor you can use
- You lose more than one class ability if you use a twohanded weapon. (Spell combat and spellstrike) even if you follow the errata (which I think was taken back) about monks not being able to flurry with a single weapon they only lose flurry when using a twohanded weapon. Not flurry and something else. And in fact they don't even loose flurry they just have to make the additional attack with an unarmed strike.
It is a really nice class that gives options that classes like the fighter lack and they are fun to play. Still both our twohanded weapon users outperform the magus in the long run. Because to deal top damage the magus needs to use real spells. the extra attack from spellstriking with cantrips just keeps him from being neglectable.
Their has been no errata regarding the Monk yet. If there is, allowing them to flurry with one weapon is a possible candidate for the errata. The clarification was never taken back, although that's a curiously popular meme.
Perhaps my wording was wrong.
There was a statement of the original intend but there was not errata yet one way or the other. So for me it is still on hold because untill that errata comes it is to be handled as written, wich is not clear. Stating the intend alone makes no rule.
But I don't want to derail this thread further.
Fact is that the magus has a potential advantage over other TWF users but has several drawbacks as well.
So to say his ability* is stronger or more powerful than TWF is something I have to contradict.
*speaking about either spell strike or spell combat. Two combined class abilities can/should well be better than a single feat or a single class ability someone else gets.
Yeah, I don't really have any serious problem with it and I'm going to allow it. I was just irritated by the earlier suggestion that it was simple and obvious how it was supposed to work. Also, being told I was getting it confused when I had it right.
Spell Combat is best thought of as a form of two weapon fighting which can take the following two forms.
1. Melee strike at BAB -2 plus a cast spell which is done with a concentration check.
Note that it says "all of his attacks" so if he has a high BAB, that's multiple attacks with his weapon. Also, the spell can be cast before or after the attacks.
Spellstrike is a mechanic which can either be used within spell combat as listed above. Or it can be the only attack in that round which means it strikes at BAB par.
Any time you could deliver a touch spell, you can use your weapon instead. This includes the free attack granted by casting a spell, and also includes an attack action or full-attack the next round while holding a charge. Since it's optional ("can") you can make a full-attack, and choose which attack(s) to use Spellstrike with.
A concentration check to cast the spell is still needed if it's done in melee.
In most cases, yes, but if you're not worried about provoking, or think the foe won't be able to hit you anyway, you can cast normally. It's not a requirement of the ability.
|
Casting any spell terminates held charges.Can you discharge multiple charges of Chill Touch in the same round by casting the spell first, doing your touch attack through your weapon, and then taking your full attack action and continuing to stab with your sword? You're still holding the charge, right?
Second question, if I'm holding a charge, I presume casting a second touch attack spell wipes the charge out. Does casting other spells (vanish, lightning bolt, whatever) also wipe the charge out?
Chill touch isn't a held charge.
It is a melee touch with multiple uses.
Chill touch isn't a held charge.
Chill Touch is a spell with a Range of Touch. This means it's a touch spell, and follows the rules for touch spells. If you don't discharge the spell in the round you cast it, you hold the charge. Since, in the majority of cases, you won't be able to fully discharge a Chill Touch spell in the round you cast it, the charge frequently gets held.
Even though it has multiple uses, it will still dissipate if you cast another spell while holding the charge.
|
|
Grick:
Touch Spells and Holding the Charge: In most cases, if you don't discharge a touch spell on the round you cast it, you can hold the charge (postpone the discharge of the spell) indefinitely. You can make touch attacks round after round until the spell is discharged. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates.
Some touch spells allow you to touch multiple targets as part of the spell. You can't hold the charge of such a spell; you must touch all targets of the spell in the same round that you finish casting the spell.
- * -
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.
1) Chill touch is discharged after 1 touch? No. But both set of rules about holding a charge assume that a hold spell is discharged after the first successful touch.
2) All Chill touch uses should be used in the round in which the spell is cast? No (or the spell has some real problem), so it don't fulfil the requirement of a spell that can be used to deliver multiple touches.
Originally (2nd ed.) chill touch had a duration in rounds. As 2nd edition casters had 1 attack/round (unless they were multiclassed) it wasn't a problem.
3ed. spellcaster will always have multiple attacks if their level is high enough, so (I suppose) someone decided to limit the number of attacks to 1/level to control the power of the spell. But the spell is still based on the idea of using it for multiple touches in multiple rounds. Making it a held charge degrade it from a mediocre spell to a bad one.
The key part is that you can't touch multiple targets with a held spell. So your opinion is that you can use chill touch against only one opponent?
Chill touch is discharged after 1 touch? No. But both set of rules about holding a charge assume that a hold spell is discharged after the first successful touch.
There's unclear wording in the Holding the Charge section. It would be better if they used Deliver and Discharge separately.
Deliver: Spell effect triggers on target
Discharge: Spell effect ends as result of being used up
Dissipate: Spell effect ends as result of casting another spell
You can deliver a chill touch (caster level) times before it is discharged. If it is not discharged during the round in which it was cast, you can hold the charge, and continue making attacks and delivering the spell until it is discharged, or dissipates as a result of casting another spell.
Basically, if you haven't used up the spell, you hold the charge until you use it up, or dissipate it. Chill Touch (and spells like it) don't function otherwise.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The key part is that you can't touch multiple targets with a held spell.
Of course you can. You can touch whatever you want. If you're holding the charge of a chill touch, and you have two touches left, the spell doesn't end until you deliver those touches or cast another spell.
So your opinion is that you can use chill touch against only one opponent?
Per attack? Yeah.
Example:
Round 1: Level 3 draconic sorcerer casts Chill Touch (CL3). He makes a touch attack as a free action, hits, and delivers the spell, dealing 1d6 damage and maybe a point of strength damage. Since he hasn't discharged (ended) the spell, he holds the charge.
Round 2: He grows claws and makes a full-attack. His first claw hits, against normal AC, and he deals normal claw damage, and delivers the spell for another 1d6 damage and maybe strength damage. His second claw misses. Since he hasn't discharged (ended) the spell, he continues to hold the charge.
Round 3: The claws are hard to hit with, so he makes a touch attack as a standard action. If he hits, he delivers the spell, and it's finally discharged. If he misses, he can continue to hold the charge until it hits or he casts another spell.