Specifically if a monk/magus that has two weapon fighting and improved two weapon fighting uses spell combat does he get an iterative attack with his offhand weapon (unarmed strike since he is a monk this can be any limb.)
His weapon of choice is a rapier so can use spell combat no problem. His BAB is higher than 6 so he gets a second attack with his rapier when using spell combat. The question is can he also take the extra iterative attack that two weapon fighting (improved) would give him?
And would it be at a -2 or a -4 to all attacks if he choose to do so?
not with spell combat...the "other" weapon you are wielding is the spell itself
Why not. Yes his first set of attacks are spell the rapier the rapier iterative attack but why couldn't he then take an iterative attack with another limb (since he is a monk he can used unarmed strike with any limb not just the hand that was casting the spell.
And what if it is a spell that has multiple charges (a touch spell with per level uses for example)
Again this is an edge case build - he is actually a fighter/ monk/rogue/magus so lots of feats and abilities that are combining here (he could for example be getting sneak attacks - part of why I'm curious how many attacks he could get in a spell combat round)
When using TWF...you have a main hand weapon and an off hand weapon...thats it 2 weapons (unless you have natural weapons to use as secondary attacks
When using spell combat you are using a spell as your off hand weapon and then your actual weapon is your main hand weapon
You can't declare you are using TWF and spell combat both, they are different, spell combat acts like TWF but it is not itself TWF, the same as FoB is not TWF, it is an ability that acts like TWF
attacking using multiple limbs to actually gain extra attacks is multiweapon fighting or multiattack, neither of which can be used with spell combat
As for "Why not" ask your GM...if he rules it that way then woohoo for you, you get away with it but nowhere in spell combat does it say you CAN get extra attacks with another weapon
Quote: Spell Combat (Ex)
At 1st level, a magus learns to cast spells and wield his weapons at the same time. This functions much like two-weapon fighting, but the off-hand weapon is a spell that is being cast. To use this ability, the magus must have one hand free (even if the spell being cast does not have somatic components), while wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand. As a full-round action, he can make all of his attacks with his melee weapon at a –2 penalty and can also cast any spell from the magus spell list with a casting time of 1 standard action (any attack roll made as part of this spell also takes this penalty). If he casts this spell defensively, he can decide to take an additional penalty on his attack rolls, up to his Intelligence bonus, and add the same amount as a circumstance bonus on his concentration check. If the check fails, the spell is wasted, but the attacks still take the penalty. A magus can choose to cast the spell first or make the weapon attacks first, but if he has more than one attack, he cannot cast the spell between weapon attacks.
This is for PFS play (and frankly I'm as often as not the DM - I DM more than I play actually these days) so "asking the DM" doesn't really apply (asking Mike Brock on the other hand...)
And as I noted this specific character is a very strange one - he's a fighter (why so many combat feats), a Maneuver Master monk (so actually doesn't have flurry of blows at all), a rogue (so has some sneak attacks dice) and now is looking at adding Magus to the mix. Understanding his options when using Spell Combat (and later potentially Spellstrike) is what I'm trying to understand.
His BAB is over 6 so he gets at least one iterative attack on a full attack.
He has Two weapon Fighting and Improved Two Weapon Fighting so usually if he is attacking he would use his rapier attacks as his primary attacks and an unarmed strike as his secondary attack (assuming he is using his buckler - if he isn't he might dual wield rapiers occasionally) .
Often he would Flurry of Blows so would open with a combat maneuver (such as dirty trick his speciality to blind or otherwise cripple the enemy( then follow up with attacks.
Adding spell combat (and later spellstrike) obviously further complicates things:
now if he does spell combat he can open with either an attack (at a minimum his primary and iterative attacks with his rapier or with an unarmed strike if he hasn't drawn a weapon yet) and then the spell - including resolving any melee touch attacks of that spell as necessary.
When he has spellstrike he can resolve any touch attack from the spell with his weapon (including I think an unarmed strike but not limited to unarmed strikes).
The question(s) then come up - if he takes this with his rapier (for the nice crit range...) does he still ALSO get the full BAB attack with that rapier and his iterative attack with that Rapier (all at -2 due to spell combat)? If he was also under the influence of Haste would he get the free spellstrike attack, his usual attacks and the full BAB bonus attack from Haste?
The initial question I had was if he has a feat that would let him usually take a second iterative second hand attack (Improved Two Weapon Fighting) would he get this when using Spell Combat? Could he combine Spell Combat and Two Weapon Fighting?) Does it matter if the spell is one that would usually allow for multiple touch attacks? (i.e. a touch attack spell that has multiple charges like Chill Touch or Frostbite)
Another reason why it won't work, TWF is a Full attack action(i think, not 100% sure about that though). A Magus spell combat is a specific full-round Action. The two of them don't mix.(strictly RAW, a Magus using spell combat doesn't even get an extra attack from Haste.)
@Drakkiel: Natural attacks can't be used in TWF can they, thought those where sort of outside the Manufactured weapons "system" and where done as secondary natural attacks at full BAB -5.
Yes...spellstrike is a free attack you get, so you ALSO get ALL of your attacks, so BAB +6/+1 would get 3 attacks using spell combat and spellstrike at +4/+4/-1 since they all take a -2
As for haste their are arguments on that already on many threads, I am on my phone and cannot find them quickly so I will see what I can do with that for you
For the feat question about Improved TWF I already answered that...no you do not get any more extra attacks, no you cannot combine the two, for spells that get multiple touch attacks you can spellstrike with it the FIRST time since it is when you cast it, however after that round you are no longer "casting" that spell when you use the ability so spellstrike cannot be used for it
Natural attacks can be used if they are used as secondary attacks and do not come from the same limbs as you other attacks...so an orc with a bite attack can TWF and bite, but his bite is at a -5 to hit since its a secondary attack and also only get 1/2 your str for damage
EDIT:I mentioned Multiattack and such to avoid those people that will undoubtedly post things about alchemists and having more arms or tentacles to get more attacks (its usually unavoidable in threads about TWF or having anything to do with more attacks)
I would interpret the Haste spell as giving a Magus an extra attack.
Quote: When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with one natural or manufactured weapon. The attack is made using the creature's full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. (This effect is not cumulative with similar effects, such as that provided by a speed weapon, nor does it actually grant an extra action, so you can't use it to cast a second spell or otherwise take an extra action in the round.) Spell Combat is a type of full attack action. Thus I would say they should get the extra attack (and yes Haste is very good as I'm sure we can all agree).
Rycaut wrote:
The initial question I had was if he has a feat that would let him usually take a second iterative second hand attack (Improved Two Weapon Fighting) would he get this when using Spell Combat? Could he combine Spell Combat and Two Weapon Fighting?) Does it matter if the spell is one that would usually allow for multiple touch attacks? (i.e. a touch attack spell that has multiple charges like Chill Touch or Frostbite)
Yes, your question was quite clear originally. RAW, no. The wording of spell combat:
"At 1st level, a magus learns to cast spells and wield his weapons at the same time. This functions much like two-weapon fighting, but the off-hand weapon is a spell that is being cast."
This sentence makes it incompatible with two weapon fighting. You can't have more than one off-hand weapon. Being able to attack with your knees makes no difference.
From SKR:
"In other words, once you decide you're using two-weapon fighting to get that extra attack on your turn (which you have to decide before you take any attacks on your turn), that decision locks you in to the format of "my primary weapon gets my main attack and my iterative attack, and my off hand weapon only gets the extra attack, and I apply two-weapon fighting penalties."
If you are declaring your unarmed attack as your off-hand weapon for that round, you cannot then declare your spellstrike as an additional off-hand weapon. It's one or the other.
re the spells with multiple touchs however it should be noted that if you cast the spell first (and take that attack with spellstrike) the effect would actually discharge on any further successful hits you make that round as well (since you can discharge touch spells via regular attacks not just via taking a melee touch attack).
This specific character doesn't (yet) have any primary or secondary natural attacks so those aren't an issue here.
Rycaut wrote: I would interpret the Haste spell as giving a Magus an extra attack.
Quote: When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with one natural or manufactured weapon. The attack is made using the creature's full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. (This effect is not cumulative with similar effects, such as that provided by a speed weapon, nor does it actually grant an extra action, so you can't use it to cast a second spell or otherwise take an extra action in the round.) Spell Combat is a type of full attack action. Thus I would say they should get the extra attack (and yes Haste is very good as I'm sure we can all agree).
No, spell combat is a type of full round action.It is not a 'full attack action' RAW. Letting haste work with it is sensible, but just pointing out that you need to read the specific wording very carefully... RAW is not always RAI.
Let's put this another way. Spring attack is also identically worded as a 'full round action'. Would you allow haste to stack with spring attack?
No you get to "discharge" the spell once during a spellstrike...after the spell is cast and discharged the effect of a spell like chill touch only applies to any further "melee touch attacks" not to any other attacks that you do with your weapon, again its only on the spellstrike
For natural attacks I was answering Mucronis
No I would not but that's because Spring Attack is a special form of Full Round Action - and specifically calls out the single attack it allows and how it functions.
Spell Combat on the other hand notes that it is "like two-weapon fighting" and that it is a full round action. But I would interpret that as being a full attack action (which is a term that is only loosely defined and seems to be used interchangeably with phrases like an attack that is a full round action)
Actually discharging a "held" touch spell is more complicated than you make out. Here is the section (in Combat rules not in Magic though it really should be in both places)
Quote: 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. It is the "if the attack hits the spell discharges" bit that is key. And where things get confusing if you are attacking with a melee weapon.
This ruling (see below) from Paizo implies that Magus' with spellstrike can indeed deliver touch attacks with their weapon (i.e. if they miss with the spellstrike attack):
Quote: Can a magus use spellstrike to cast a touch spell, move, and make a melee attack with a weapon to deliver the touch spell, all in the same round?
Yes. Other than deploying the spell with a melee weapon attack instead of a melee touch attack, the magus spellstrike ability doesn’t change the normal rules for using touch spells in combat. So, just like casting a touch spell, a magus could use spellstrike to cast a touch spell, take a move toward an enemy, then (as a free action) make a melee attack with his weapon to deliver the spell.
On a related topic, the magus touching his held weapon doesn’t count as “touching anything or anyone” when determining if he discharges the spell. A magus could even use the spellstrike ability, miss with his melee attack to deliver the spell, be disarmed by an opponent (or drop the weapon voluntarily, for whatever reason), and still be holding the charge in his hand, just like a normal spellcaster. Furthermore, the weaponless magus could pick up a weapon (even that same weapon) with that hand without automatically discharging the spell, and then attempt to use the weapon to deliver the spell. However, if the magus touches anything other than a weapon with that hand (such as retrieving a potion), that discharges the spell as normal.
Basically, the spellstrike gives the magus more options when it comes to delivering touch spells; it’s not supposed to make it more difficult for the magus to use touch spells.
Yes if he is still "holding the charge" once you cast that particular spell and actually connect with it, the other charges are not under the same rules as holding a charge...for instance lets say a lvl 4 magus so you are getting one attack, two if you spellstrike
If you are holding the charge of shocking grasp...spellstrike with it, miss, get disarmed, you are still "holding the charge"...but if you cast another spell while doing that you LOSE shocking grasp
Same situation but use chill touch, you don't miss, you connect and deal damage with it, on your second attack you miss, you get disarmed on the enemies turn, your turn if you cast a spell you DO NOT LOSE the effects from chill touch, the effect has been expelled but just happens to have an effect past the first round, you are not "holding the charge" of chill touch after it is used the first time...after the initial attack (whether spellstrike or not) the effects only apply as the spell says, to your melee touch attacks
Nowhere does it state that you can use your weapon to make touch attacks whilst holding the charge, only that you can use your free touch action as part of casting to attack with the weapon. However, the FAQ ruling certainly does set a precedent for allowing this in successive rounds. Although I think you are going a little out on a limb, I agree that the RAI is probably to allow you to use your weapon in future rounds to deliver the touch.
It gets a bit more tricky with chill touch/frostbite because there aren't actually any rules written up for multiple held touch attacks at all. RAW the touching is a free action so you could probably even interpret that, in the case of frostbite, you can take every touch attack against one target in a single round. Obviously this is pretty silly and not RAI. But what IS RAI isn't very clear at all.I don't think it would be unfair to allow successive strikes to be used to discharge this spell, but I can't find any RAW to refer to at all.
Chill touch is even murkier. The touch attack effects 1 creature/level. Does this mean you get a touch attack against every target in range? Can you target the same opponent twice? What about in successive rounds? I honestly don't know what they were going for here.
Might be worth opening a new thread specifically asking for multiple target touch attack clarification. I would FAQ such a thread.
That's not how I've seen it ruled, nor how I would rule it.
If you cast another spell and you have held charges of a current spell I would usually rule you lose it.
Furthermore if you make an attack with an unarmed strike or a natural attack you discharge any held "touch" spells you have active (with that limb).
For a magus if you have used spellstrike and then hit again and still have charges of a spell my interpretation of the rules and what Paizo has said about how this stuff works would be that you also discharge one more "charge" of that held spell.
If you cast another spell you lose that earlier spell UNLESS it is a specific special case that says you can cast spells and keep the earlier spell (i.e. Call Lightening)
But with touch spells you technically discharge them if you TOUCH anything (the magus is getting a special ruling to allow them to wield or even draw a weapon without discharging a held spell).
Casting a spell with a material component would - I would rule - discharge that earlier spell via touching that spell component pouch etc.
Definitely an area of the game that is far from clear - not least of which being that the touch spells where this is a possible case are each formatted differently and not everyone realizes that there are touch spells that have multiple "charges"
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
