First off, I believe you only discharge the held charge of a spell if the spell you cast after it is ALSO a melee touch spell. This is because that's the only type of spell that has held charges. Now, to questions:
A) By RAW, no. Spell combat requires you have one hand free while the other grasps the appropriate type of weapon.
B) Yes. Point 3 makes this clear.
C) Yes, Spellstrike is meant for just that purpose.
D) Yes.
E) Probably. It's three 5th level spells, the magus should be allowed to melt the face off the dragon for that kind of resource expenditure.
|
Casting two spells in one round always is iffy, for this reason:
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.
A. You can't attack with your offhand while using spell combat, it's busy casting spells.
B. Yes, unarmed strikes will release the spell, spell strike at level 2 especially ensures this.C. As part of the normal attacks? Yes, technically. Here's a quote from the FAQ (which might have answered some of the questions for you)
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.
So, when you cast the spell, you get a free action to attempt to discharge it through your weapon. If you miss, you can still discharge it by hitting them with your weapon later on.
D. This gets to be a bit tricky. Yes... and there's some ground for No. Yes, because you would do all of your attacks, as required by spell combat, and then cast a spell (which you get a free melee attack instead of a touch attack with). Your just adding another casting of a spell, but the language on spell combat clearly states "Whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of touch".
However, that brings into question a few other things, such as: Would the penalty of spell combat of -2 to attacks increase to -4? Does spell combat even allow or multiple castings?
Other than that, as far as I can tell, it should be possible...
E. Yes, and no. For round one, there's three spots of acid. Round two, there's 3 larger spots of acid. But for round 3 the entire person is covered anyways... so it probably would not stack. Heck, stage two might stack into 2 rounds of stage three.
But you could also argue that the acid is more plentiful, and so abundant that it's getting into the victims throat, eyes, ears etc... So it depends on what your GM thinks.
Hope this all helps!
|
First, I recommend reading For more info on I recommend Grick's Guide.
a. Yes, a hand holding nothing is still considered "free" even if you're performing unarmed strikes with it (otherwise a lot of monk abilities that require a free hand would be less useful).
b. Yes, UAS can deliver a touch charge (even without Spellstrike)
c. Yes, a magus can deliver a held charge through a weapon.
d. I think so but let me break that down more clearly to make sure you're saying what I think you're saying.
The magus gets all the damage from her full attack progression, whether using UAS or sabre.
Assuming at least one attack in the above hit, the magus delivers the Corrosive Consumption held from Round 1.
The magus then gets an additional attack with the Corrosive Consumption cast as part of spell combat in Round 2. This deals spell damage and also weapon damage if delivered through Spellstrike.
The magus can then get another Corrosive Consumption attack (with weapon damage if using Spellstrike) by casting Quickened. Note that if the previous attack missed, you lose the charge from that casting of the spell.
e. So up to a total of full attack weapon damage + 2x weapon damage + 3x Corrosive Consumption damage. That's assuming that Corrosive Consumption stacks with itself - which I actually don't think it does. It's not an instantaneous effect and you normally don't stack a non-instantaneous magic effect with itself.
EDIT: Looks like a few other people posted before me and I've got to respond to two things.
D. This gets to be a bit tricky. Yes... and there's some ground for No. Yes, because you would do all of your attacks, as required by spell combat, and then cast a spell (which you get a free melee attack instead of a touch attack with). Your just adding another casting of a spell, but the language on spell combat clearly states "Whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of touch".
However, that brings into question a few other things, such as: Would the penalty of spell combat of -2 to attacks increase to -4? Does spell combat even allow or multiple castings?
Other than that, as far as I can tell, it should be possible...
This is a full-round action (Spell Combat) + Swift Action (Quickened Spell). Since Spell Combat doesn't specifically say you can't cast Quickened spells in the same round, it's absolutely possible and you don't take increased penalties.
Lastly, regarding Corrosive Consumption, nothing indicates that multiple uses of the spell don't stack
There's the general rule I linked to above.
I think I will revoke my answer to (a) though on the grounds that while an UAS normally doesn't prevent a hand from being 'free' Spell Combat does specifically say that your spell is your off-hand weapon, which means that you don't just need a 'free' hand, but that Spell Combat is actively occupying that hand for the entire length of your turn (which makes it a little different from Deflect Arrows).
|
|
Ahhh! an unannounced edit!
F. Yes, spell storing would work with all of this. So technically, if you prepared ahead of time and was willing to blow aton of your resources in one go you could:
Do unhasted full attack, 3 spells, and 1 spell level 3 or lower all in one round.
Heck, if you did shocking grasp with all of those, intensified with a scimitar...
(1d6 * number of attacks you get) + 40d6 + your weapon damage modifiers... All without landing a critical hit.
Once again, alot of resources to blow in one turn though O.o
To address something from Cerberus Seven's post: Casting any other spell while holding one or more charges from any touch spell dissipates those charges; the newly-cast spell does not have to be a touch spell.
So if you have a Shocking Grasp 'held' and you cast Fireball, the Shocking Grasp still dissipates without effect.
|
|
If you read the larger section it clearly isn't only discussing bonuses. Firstly, the main introduction reads:
Several other general rules apply when spells or magical effects operate in the same place:
Note general phrasing - this isn't limited to bonuses/penalties.
Second, there's a section on multiple cases of mental control:
Multiple Mental Control Effects
Sometimes magical effects that establish mental control render each other irrelevant, such as spells that remove the subject's ability to act. Mental controls that don't remove the recipient's ability to act usually do not interfere with each other. If a creature is under the mental control of two or more creatures, it tends to obey each to the best of its ability, and to the extent of the control each effect allows. If the controlled creature receives conflicting orders simultaneously, the competing controllers must make opposed Charisma checks to determine which one the creature obeys.
If the second paragraph you cited was meant to indicate that the entire section only applied to bonuses and penalties to rolls or attributes, then this paragraph would be out of place since mental control effects generally don't modify your rolls, they determine your actions. Thus the second paragraph isn't meant to indicate that the following material is only applicable to bonuses/penalties.
Finally:
Spells with Opposite Effects
Spells with opposite effects apply normally, with all bonuses, penalties, or changes accruing in the order that they apply.
This paragraph indicates that spells creating changes that are not bonuses or penalties are under discussion, and damage over time is a change.
Thus the earlier passages about "Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths; Same Effect with Differing Results" can be taken to apply to any magical effects, not just ones that provide bonuses/penalties. This rule as applied to Resist Energy is discussed here (note particularly the last post which is particularly descriptive).
Personally, I'd stack ongoing damage anyway since I think it makes more sense and it's not more powerful than stacking shocking grasp, but I wanted to point out that the rules don't actually work that way.
|
Assuming the following as truth:
1. Casting a spell while holding charge of a touch spell will have the charge gone.
2. Using a touch attack while holding a charge, in a subsequent round after the spell was cast, uses a standard action.
3. Touching a target, even by accident, will trigger the spell effect while holding a charge.Round 1: "Magus" moves into melee range and casts Corrosive Consumption. She is proficient with both unarmed strikes and with a saber, that she wields in one hand. She tries to hit the target with Spellstrike, be she misses.
Round 2: Magus spends a full-round action in order to use her spell combat. First, she deliver all her unarmed blows. Then, she casts a spell with a cast time equivalent to a standard action, such as Corrosive Consumption. Finally, she quickens another Corrosive Consumption through quickened magic.
"Quickened Magic (Su): The magus can cast one spell per day as if it were modified by the Quicken Spell feat. This does not increase the level of the spell. The magus must be at least 15th level before selecting this magus arcana."
Questions:
a. Can the magus cast spells while wielding a one handed weapon if she uses this free hand to perform unarmed strikes? If not, pretend she isn't even carrying the saber for the moment.
b. Will these unarmed strikes unleash Corrosive Consumption upon her foe?
c. Assuming the answer for "b" is "YES", since she has Spellstrike, could the magus discharge Corrosive Consumption through her Saber as part of her normal attacks?
d. Would, then, the magus deal: all her attacks, touch spell damage, regular cast spell damage, and quickened spell damage in a single round?
e. Assuming "d" is "YES", would these 3 consecutive effects stack on her foe?
f. If able to perform these while wielding a weapon with spell storing ability, could one of these attacks (with the weapon) place slow on the target, for example?Early thanks for anyone who can shed some light on this topic (magus' ability to defy laws of proportional reason...
A: IF you were a MONK(1 level) you could then use an IUS with any part of your body while you're doing your thing(headbutt!). You would be allowed to attack with any part of your body instead of using your currently occupied hands.