|
I like that the Magus is the most seamless mix of casting and combat I've seen in the system so far. They have a fun mesh of abilities and resource management, and the class allows you to hit a fairly wide array of fantasy tropes.
Our group has had a Magus assassin who utilized their Vanish spells and other abilities to move in and out of combat dropping massive hits and setting up flanks, a magus Hellknight who served as party tank, and a staff magus who was one part Taoist monk and 1 part Gandalf.
I'm a huge fan of battlefield control casters but I've come to accept that it doesn't do much without a finishing move. Damage has to be done somehow.
We play a gestalt game with a small group and were short on damage dealers for a while. Between opponents with resistances, damage reduction and other abilities we would occasionally be fighting 10+ round combats.
My wizard is picking up some magus levels to help plug the gap and do some direct damage once the battlefield control & buffing tasks are done. Having some nova capacity would have been a huge help in the last fight after the fighter/monk failed a saving throw and succumbed to a blindness spell in the showdown with the Big Boss.
Wow.
Thanks everybody. That helps a lot.
I have an idea in my head for a homebrew archetype styled after the modern day Commando, only fantasy based of course somewhere in Golarion. I don't want to multi class with a rogue. I wanted some kind of good War Wizard and I am thinking the Magus is the way to do it.
By the way, what does Gish refer to?
A gish is a spellcaster who is also a warrior. The term comes from dungeons and dragons fluff. I think it's a Gith word?
What I liek about the magus is it attacks and casts hella fast, it benefits from having an open hand, it's an arcane caster who isn't physically weak and gets stuck in, you can have a talking sword and you can do very impressive things right from first level.
|
"Gish" was an album by the 90s alt band Smashing Pumpkins. It became slang for a fighter/caster hybrid once it became common knowledge that band-driver Billy Corgan is both a master of kenjitsu and an actual warlock.
People will feed you some BS about some other origin of the term. Don't listen to their lies.
My experience with the magus is limited, as I've never played one or been in an ongoing game with one.
But for a one-shot con game I created and ran several times, I needed to replace the main villain (a fighter/hexblade) when I switched to PFRPG, and after some experimentation I settled on a hexcrafter magus.
My experience in running the game several times is that, because of the ability to nova, they are incredibly powerful ... for one encounter. By "incredibly powerful," I mean a 10th-level magus (and minions) being able to provide an exciting fight to six 8th-level PCs.
Obviously, when the BBEG only has to fight once, it pretty severely limits what I can intelligently say about the class in more standard ongoing play, so take it for what it's worth.
Fiend Folio dates to 1981, dude. Check out the "Githzerai" entry. There's a mention of "Gish" as being fighter/magic-users, but Billy Corgan isn't mentioned once!
Edit: Oops! Its the Githyanki, not Githzerai. I also find it interesting that one guy created most of my favorite monsters from that book - Charles Stross.
Yup. And Russ Nicholson drew' em.
Solspiral watches as Jeff' well intentioned joke sails over LazzarX's head and narrowly misses Experiment 626.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Solspiral watches as Jeff' well intentioned joke sails over LazzarX's head and narrowly misses Experiment 626.
Narrowly misses? That joke sailed around Pluto then returned.
Here's why I play a MagusBe honest... it's why you play a Bladebound.
Elric really isn't a good example of a magus. He doesn't really cast that much. But then again Moorcock really doesn't map well into D20.
I think the Stormbringer rules do the Young Kingdoms so much more justice.
Plus,.....heh heh,......that which passes for a "wizard" in Stormbringer,......there is absolutely no plausible argument against the "wizard" being broken compared to the other classes......
I always think about Stormbringer whenever "game balance or lack thereof" is bemoaned.
The magus is a total rock star class. For me, the lure of the magus was the difficulty of building an effective one and using all their weird rules. Two-weapon fighting with a spell and knowing how to most effectively and creatively combo and chain your spells and attacks can be very challenging.
I've played every class and they are all more consistently effective overall, but nobody looks as cool or inspires as many "whoa" moments as the magus. Your party cannot *depend* on your magus for damage, battlefield control, buffs/de-buffs, or whatever compared to a class that specializes. But if you're creative, you can fill all those rolls a little bit in every fight and always walk away having done something awesome that really helped the group.
Yeah, they are MAD as hell, but that always inspires the RPing aspects to me. With one magus, I dumped CHA to keep my physical scores decent and (naturally) loaded up on INT, so I played the character as a know-it-all autistic savant with no social skills. I put points into every Knowledge skill and, quite literally, ended up knowing something about everything we encountered. It was a lot of fun. That was one of my favorite characters.
They have that one elf army vibe. You can see one walking through the door of a tavern and not wonder how he or she survived the big, scary world. They can also be somewhat worldly with their Knowledge skills. For me, it harkens back to the bladesingers from previous editions.
|
|
I find that as well as having the ability to fight and/or cast, the whole variety of things that you can do with the arcane pool and the arcana you can learn really draws me in.
Things like applying energy types or bonuses to your weapon, or being able to recall a spell you have cast or adjusting your bonuses to defense or to-hit.
Its all about being able to react to the situation. Yes they are masters of burst single target damage, and can add a few battle field control spells as well - even some of the wizard ones by making the Expanded Arcana selection.
The ONLY thing I didnt like about the Magus is when they started introducing things like Holy/unholy and ghost touch in one of the Ultimate books, I feel that this should have been left for the more spiritual based characters - making my sword crackle with lightning or fire or whatnot is cool, but I dont see that a Magus should have been able to make it tap into "holy" energies.
Magi be ballin' yo.
I always wanted to do a Gish from lvl 1, and this class hit the nail on the head. The blending between martial prowess and arcane flourish that such characters would desire are given to you right from the get-go. Plus some of the magus-only spells add in a ton of flavor.
Go forth and conquer
I don't care what anybody says: "Gish" was the album that put the Smashing Pumpkins on the map, and it's darn good. The first song is amazing (my band covered it back in the day), though Bury Me is probably my favorite track. Good stuff, Whether Billy is a githyanki or not.
|
I like the mags. I chose the bladebound archetype, partially to offset the fact that i'll be needing to re-buy armor later on in the game. For now (level 7) it has worked wonderfully. My magus uses a falcata (i burned a feat for that, finaly a weapon worth taking as an exotic weapon) and currently wears a +2 breastplate. While he is not the strongest in armor and hp, he hits really hard (i focused on strength and constitution) and the ability to cast touch spells in melee is very, very useful.
My conclusions.
- Magus is not an ideal front line fighter.
- He will not out-damage a fighter with a 2-handed weapon, but will come damn close
- He will not out-cast a wizard or sorcerer, but will come damn close in matters of damage and battlefield control spells
- People who focus on dex are making a mistake. Focus on con instead.
- The blend of spellcasting and melee combat was done beautifully.
Here's why I play a MagusBe honest... it's why you play a Bladebound.
Elric really isn't a good example of a magus. He doesn't really cast that much. But then again Moorcock really doesn't map well into D20.
You can make a magus that isn't a bladebound kensai?
I like a Dervish Dancing Fire Based Magus(Spelldancer)... It is amazing.
I can stay as Mobile as can be while still being a BAMF.
i would like the magus except for the spell list, it's way too blasty/damage focused,
if it was more like the inquisitor spell-list minus the heal-y stuff and similar divine-focused spells,
but just had an even broader range of arcane 'utility' spells, that's what i would want.
for damage, i am happy for them to rely on physical combat, augmented by spells, but not relying on blast spells.
instead of blasting damage, magus' should use magic to keep the terms of battle favoring their side,
they don't need to worry about winning DPR contests as long as they keep the tables turned to their advantage.
Meh, I like that they are able to take a chunk out of their foes HP to help take them down quickly.
They are meant to be Battle Mages. Blasting fits better as it means they can be Fire Support or a Heavy Hitter in combat.
Yeah I can understand why some might want something with more utility/control on their spells list but that just wasn't the role Magus was meant for. We already had a 3/4 BaB arcane class with that kind of spell list.
i understand that what i wanted/envisioned is different than the direction it was developed, but what i wanted doesn't really exist, bard is not it, it's spells while useful are not what i want and it also doesn't have a strong combat focus.
like i said, the inquisitor is closest to what i would have liked.
heck, i would probably have like a 1/2 caster arcane ranger/paladin equivalent, which is something totally missing from the game.
i understand that what i wanted/envisioned is different than the direction it was developed, but what i wanted doesn't really exist, bard is not it, it's spells while useful are not what i want and it also doesn't have a strong combat focus.
like i said, the inquisitor is closest to what i would have liked.
heck, i would probably have like a 1/2 caster arcane ranger/paladin equivalent, which is something totally missing from the game.
I can get behind that idea. Maybe someday. But I would also like to see a Magus archetype that gets something at least so-so in exchange for spell combat so I could work on an two handed Magus concept. Also a roguish archetype would be fun.
Though I disagree about bards not being combat focused. There are very good battle bard builds with archetypes like the dervishes. Still its not out of the box and you gotta jump through hoops.
Though while we are on a wish list something like unsanctioned knowledge for rangers would be great too.
Do you mean Psuedo-Caster or 1/2 Caster?
Paladin/Ranger is a Psuedo-Caster while Bard, Inquisitor, & Magus are 1/2 Casters.
No paladin and ranger are 1/2 casters. Bard, Inquisitor and Magus are 2/3 caster.
The numbers are not exact as 4 spell levels is not quite half of 9. But 6 is exactly 2/3 of 9. so calling them 1/2 caster makes no sense.
It is something left over from 3.5 Forums.
Most common Gish builds only got to 6th level spells. Alongside that Casting was only Half of their job. Hence they became known as Half-Casters do to idiots on the forums.
Paladin/Ranger spells were mostly used to increase their Martial Abilities and only "Pretended" to cast.
If you actually look and can find the descriptions laid out by a 3.5 Developer an Alchemist is just on the Cusp of Pseudo & Half Casting.
Heck, you can find them referenced as such through out this Forum.
Personally, I think it is kinda stupid. Though this is the first I have heard of them referred as you say...
Also the Magus are combat monsters, but no better than a Fighter out of combat. And it seems fitting.
I'd say the magus is broken, but not in the overpowered way. It just doesn't do its job. It's supposed to let you play a wizard/knight from level 1, but the spell list has almost no utilities on it. In combat they may be beasts, but out of combat they're useless. No rope trick, no see invisibility, no shrink item... They'd be a lot more functional with less flash and more clever wizard stuff.
And where exactly did you get the idea that they are somehow meant to be like a wizard? Perhaps that is what you wanted it to be but that is clearly not what it was designed to be.
They are a battle mage... As in a Mage of Battle. Not wizard-light with a sword.
Don't get me wrong you can like whatever you want but saying they messed it up because its not what you want? That's just flat arrogance.
They don't really add anything. They do the same burst DPR with no utility job that barbarians do.
Being disappointed with a class is fine but this is clearly speaking out of bias rather then reality. Even the magus cantrips (mage and hand detect magic for starters.)alone give them more utility then a barbarian. Then in first lvls spells there is lets see mount, Silent Image, Unseen Servant, and Keep Watch just at a glance.
You are trying to hard to push your biased opinion when it is clearly factually not true.
|
They don't really add anything. They do the same burst DPR with no utility job that barbarians do.
They have Use Magic Device so buy yourself some scrolls and wands if you want utility. You dont have to have those utility spells in spell slots for them to be useful.
In fact, because they have Use Magic Device, they are one of the top classes when it comes toutility . A wizard is great but Use Magic Device gives you access to "all" forms of magic. If I play a magus, I always have some cure wands just in case.
I would like to see a magus that uses divine spells.
Inquisitor feels close(spells, class abilities, proficient in combat), but I can't think of that many Divine spells I'd want to channel through a weapon aside from Cure(undead)/Inflict(living) Wounds spells, until much later levels.
|
|
I would like to see a magus that uses divine spells.Inquisitor feels close(spells, class abilities, proficient in combat), but I can't think of that many Divine spells I'd want to channel through a weapon aside from Cure(undead)/Inflict(living) Wounds spells, until much later levels.
Great on defense spells though. What I would do is create a magus that has access to arcane and divine. I would drop three spell levels of arcane and add three levels of divine. We would have a magus that can cast up to 3rd level arcane and 3rd level divine max.
Great on defense spells though. What I would do is create a magus that has access to arcane and divine. I would drop three spell levels of arcane and add three levels of divine. We would have a magus that can cast up to 3rd level arcane and 3rd level divine max.I would like to see a magus that uses divine spells.Inquisitor feels close(spells, class abilities, proficient in combat), but I can't think of that many Divine spells I'd want to channel through a weapon aside from Cure(undead)/Inflict(living) Wounds spells, until much later levels.
Sounds a lot like having all kinds of cake, and eating it too. You'd be a one-man party; melee, arcane spells, divine spells, etc. Just need Trapfinding and/or Evasion and you'd be all set.
It can be done as-is, but at the moment it'd require a hefty amount of multiclassing and would spread a character out really thin.
They have Use Magic Device so buy yourself some scrolls and wands...
In fact, because they have Use Magic Device, they are one of the top classes when it comes toutility .
A wizard is great but Use Magic Device gives you access to "all" forms of magic.
'They have Use Magic Device'? You mean, they get +3 to UMD but don't otherwise use CHA.
A magus is pretty much going to have a lower INT than a Wizard, so maxing UMD has more trade-offs for magus than wizard, and a wizard has less need of physical stats than a magus so is more able to increase CHA if they want to.Sure, go ahead and invest in UMD and use wands/scrolls with it, but it's not really anything special to Magus.
Anybody playing with Traits will be able to get a Class Skill bonus in whatever skill they want, it's hardly a unique class ability, and nobody is prevented from investing in non-Class Skills anyways.
The idea of 'UMD is a Class Skill' negating the need for spell list seems absurd.
Why not remove Heal and Cure spells from Cleric, those spells still exist abstractly, so they can just UMD them.
If people see/want to have certain spells with a class, they want to have those on the spell list, not get +3 to UMD for Class Skill.
But alot of people like Magus as-is, and it does what it does as-is pretty well.
Solspiral watches as Jeff' well intentioned joke sails over LazzarX's head and narrowly misses Experiment 626.Narrowly misses? That joke sailed around Pluto then returned.
Must...resist...NERDRAGE!
I would like to see a magus that uses divine spells.Inquisitor feels close(spells, class abilities, proficient in combat), but I can't think of that many Divine spells I'd want to channel through a weapon aside from Cure(undead)/Inflict(living) Wounds spells, until much later levels.
Have a look at the Chaplain from the Pure Steam beta, it might be close.
Samsarans - there's your divine spells.. Not many - just the important ones.
I just remembered, not exactly PF core but close to a divine Magus, could be the Ordained Champion PrC from 3.5e. It has a class ability that allows divine spells to be channeled into attacks just like the Duskblade/Magus, but is actually NOT limited to Touch spells; could be any divine spell you want from what I recall. I used to channel Flame Strikes into mine back in the day.
|
|
Don't you have two of those already in the game by name of Paladin and Ranger?I would still love to see a Full BaB 4 level divine caster (I thought the Ninja was a great opportunity missed for this...) but I think the Magus fills a role that was missing in the game.
Sorry, typo, means arcane. I though they could do a lot of interesting things with ninjas and a limited arcane spells set.