RSS Facebook Twitter Email
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice

Why is Mage's Sword a 7th Level spell?

Advice

Search Thread

Search this Thread:

4 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

Can someone please explain to me why Mage's Sword is a 7th level spell? It is wildly under powered and here's why:

1. It only gets 1 attack each round. At 7th level it should get iterative attacks.

2. It takes a standard action to move it. If the subject of the spell moves, the sword has to follow and therefore cannot attack that round.

3. You have to roll to hit each round as a straight up melee attack, not a touch attack.

4. If you don't beat SR the spell is wasted.

I thought this spell was wicked cool before I wasted my one 7th level spell slot on it (I'm a 14th level sorcerer). What a let down.

1. Look at it this way - it gives the caster an extra attack at full base attack bonus and treats their casting stat as Strength for the purpose of hitting.

Typical 14th level sorcerer's to-hit: 7 BAB + (maybe) 1 Strength = +8/+3
Sword's typical attack cast by 14th level sorcerer = 14 BAB + (probably) 6 Charisma = +20

2. It does not take a standard action to move it - the spell says "Each round after the first, you can use a standard action to switch the sword to a new target. If you do not, the sword continues to attack the previous round's target."

If your target moves, the sword follows - unless it would move outside the range of the spell (60' at level 14) or out of your line of sight, in which case it floats back to you awaiting new target designation.

3. Yes, you roll a melee attack against regular AC - but it is with a pretty large bonus. If we follow the above example numbers, your sorcerer likely has +23 to hit with the sword's attack.

That hits the average AC of a CR 17 monster on a 9+, which is pretty accurate.

4. The same is true of every spell that allows spell resistance, so I don't see why you are holding that against Mage's Sword.

Lastly, as for what makes this a 7th level spell rather than some other level - it is a damage dealing spell, which means the amount of damage it might inflict is what sets the level (i.e. a 3rd level spell can do around 10d6 maximum unless there are limiting factors built in, 5th level spells can do up to 15d6, etc.).

4d6+3 every round for 13-20 rounds is a lot of potential damage (80d6+60, specifically) - that is more damage than even meteor swarm (24d6) which means that, without the limitations of needing to make repeated attack rolls, affecting only one target at a time, short range, and spell resistance applying that it would likely be a 9th level spell instead of just 7th level.

1. It strikes at your CL+Int+3 for one attack compared to Spiritual weapon which strikes at the Clerics Bab+Wis. At level 15 Mage's sword is getting one attack at 18+Int, Spiritual weapon is getting 3 attacks, starting at 11+Wis. Arguably, MS is better, but 5 spell levels better?

2. Standard action to move vs Move action to move. Advantage SW, no contest.

3. 4d6+3 damage (avg. 17dam) vs. 1d8+5 (avg. 9.5dam). 7.5 damage swing for 5 spell levels.

4. Close range vs. Medium range. SW wins

Overall, this spell is marginally better than Spiritual weapon yet it's a 7th level spell vs a 2nd level spell. I suppose the significantly higher to hit would help against high AC creatures, perhaps enough to bump this up to a 4th or even a 5th level spell, but 7th? I just don't see it.

Well a wizard or sorc. are going to be putting out more damage in the rounds following mage sword than a cleric will be after spiritual weapon, so its probably not quite fair to compare the two. Even if spiritual weapon is marginally more powerful for a 2nd level spell than mage sword is a for a 7th level spell, to say one is better than the other is taking it out of context from what the caster can do.

If you compare it to the 4th-level spell spiritual ally, it gets even worse.

SA gets iterative attacks, MS doesn't.
SA can flank and make AoOs, MS can't.
SA can be moved as a swift action, MS as a standard action.

The only benefits I see for MS is the ability to hit ethereal creatures (which isn't specified for SW & SA, while incorporeal is specified for all three), slightly higher to-hit, and slightly higher damage.

None of that warrants a 5-level increase compared to SW, or a 3-level increase compared to SA, however. Probably, Paizo simply wanted an effect of this type for arcane casters, and didn't want it to be anywhere near as good as similar effects for divine casters.

Quantum Steve - comparing Wizard spells to Cleric spells is not a good evaluation of what level something should be.

There are intentional differences in the capabilities of Cleric magic vs. Wizard magic - such as cleric spells having a whole lot more healing than wizard magic does, and allowing weapon-like attacks a lot easier/earlier than wizard magic does.

Further, spiritual weapon (unless you don't have a deity) takes the shape of your deity's favored weapon, so it isn't always 1d8 damage.
Sovereign Court

For a wizard to cast a cleric spell she needs to use limited wish at a minimum.

So for a wizard to cast Spiritual Weapon, it costs her 1500gp and a 7th level slot.

Mage's Sword reduces that cost by quite a bit by making it a 250gp foci and then improves it by using the stats most arcane spell casters tend to favour.

The wizard list is enough better than the cleric list to justify a 1/4 BAB difference between the cleric and the wizard. This isn't something like a healing spell that's supposed to be part of the cleric's niche. If anything dealing damage with magic is supposed to be the wizard's niche.

Even taking SW out of the picture, MS is not on par with other 7th level arcane spells. It is not even on part with divine spells of the same level. I have always wanted to take it because of how I envisioned it, but I can't really do it considering what else is available. Even if I was playing a game where I made less optimal character I can't pick this spell up.
Yeah it does a lot of damage over 13 to 20 rounds but so does any damage spell, not that most fights last 13 rounds so it does not really matter.
Morgen wrote:

For a wizard to cast a cleric spell she needs to use limited wish at a minimum.

So for a wizard to cast Spiritual Weapon, it costs her 1500gp and a 7th level slot.

Mage's Sword reduces that cost by quite a bit by making it a 250gp foci and then improves it by using the stats most arcane spell casters tend to favour.

This is a spectacularly unuseful way to analyze spell power. I mean, by the same token, a 7th level spell which cost 1499gp to cast and healed 1d8+6 damage would be a fair and reasonable spell for a wizard, since it's 1gp cheaper than limited wish, and can heal one more point of damage than cure light wounds.

A sorc/wiz combat spell being barely better than, or possibly not even as good as, a second level damage spell from a cleric, is broken.
1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Probably, Paizo simply wanted an effect of this type for arcane casters, and didn't want it to be anywhere near as good as similar effects for divine casters.

This is a very old spell (one of Mordenkainen's). It could probably use a look or two like a number of very old and higher level spells to both clarify and enhance its usefulness. The damage as I recall hasn't changed (much?) since its original writing ... the game has by quite a bit. In particular consider a typical wizards health vs the dps of the Sword then and now (i.e the Sword, back in the day of its creation, was more than capable of slaying a 14th level Wizard in 3 rounds, by comparison today it might need all those 13+ rounds to kill them). The choices for 7th level wiz/sor spells since then have also grown enormously. It wasn't awesome sauce back then but pretty much every offensive spell added to the arsenal since then has effectively moved it further down the list.

Wow, everyone. Thanks for all the comments. I didn't expect to get anywhere near that many.

All I was saying is that MS is an under powered 7th level spell. Arcane cannon is even a better choice at that level.

The 6th level spell Elemental Asses deals 4d6 for 1d6 rounds after its initial damage and you only have to roll one touch attack. Thats a better spell at one level lower.

Hungry Pit, a 5th level spell, deals 4d6 each round after the damage dealt by the fall, and it deals the damage for longer than MS (1 round+1 round/level)

It also worth mentioning that it's a 'fire and forget' spell. While it's beating the bad guy about the head and shoulders you're free to do other unspeakable things to him.

The sword is mobile, can't be attacked mentally and has a lot of other immunities, and does decent damage for a long time. It is old, and might not quite be up to par today, but it is an iconic spell, and has its uses.
Dark Archive
Speaker for the Dead wrote:
It also worth mentioning that it's a 'fire and forget' spell. While it's beating the bad guy about the head and shoulders you're free to do other unspeakable things to him.

That's a good point. Cast it on the first round at a big brute or enemy caster, then proceed to cast some really nasty spells.

Still not worth a 7th level slot. Spiritual weapon and spiritual ally are also fire and forget. So are summon monster spells, if you want to use them that way.

Maybe a 5th level slot, and yeah I know it is an iconic spell. I used it in Baldur's gate. :)
Sissyl wrote:
The sword is mobile, can't be attacked mentally and has a lot of other immunities, and does decent damage for a long time. It is old, and might not quite be up to par today, but it is an iconic spell, and has its uses.

Being iconic doesn't have to mean being useless, and in this case while not useless it's clearly not worth the 7th level slot.

Grand Lodge
Quantum Steve wrote:

1. It strikes at your CL+Int+3 for one attack compared to Spiritual weapon which strikes at the Clerics Bab+Wis. At level 15 Mage's sword is getting one attack at 18+Int, Spiritual weapon is getting 3 attacks, starting at 11+Wis. Arguably, MS is better, but 5 spell levels better?

2. Standard action to move vs Move action to move. Advantage SW, no contest.

3. 4d6+3 damage (avg. 17dam) vs. 1d8+5 (avg. 9.5dam). 7.5 damage swing for 5 spell levels.

4. Close range vs. Medium range. SW wins

Overall, this spell is marginally better than Spiritual weapon yet it's a 7th level spell vs a 2nd level spell. I suppose the significantly higher to hit would help against high AC creatures, perhaps enough to bump this up to a 4th or even a 5th level spell, but 7th? I just don't see it.

It does considerably more damage, It's a Force spell, which makes it more of a bump, and it's a considerably higher combat powerup for the casting class using it. It turns a poor BAB caster to a full Fighter's BAB +Int striking weapon. More importantly, it's a fire and forget weapon which allows the casting wizard to do other things.

Remember the cleric is built as a partially martial class, so spiritual weapon is something that's closer to their resonance compared to the rather bookish wizard. At least that's pretty much the philosophy Gary Gygax had when he created the original version of this spell, Mordenkainen's Sword, which was also 7th level.
Silver Crusade

Bottom line: it's a legacy spell and just isn't very good at it's chosen level. If your wizard doesn't have something better to do with your seventh level slots, you're not doing the wizard thing right. It's hardly the only legacy spell that is wildly underpowered for it's level either. Acid arrow is another spell that doesn't perform we'll enough. (it would be a mediocre 1St level spell).the more interesting question is what level should Mage's sword be if you want it to be worth using? My off the cuff guess is that it would not be overpowered at5th level, would probably be good at 4th level, but could possibly be as low as 3Rd level without breaking the game.

Move earth? :-)

Here is my fix:

Instead of being limited to a single attack per round, it is treated as having a full Base Attack Bonus equal to the caster level, and is therefore able to make multiple attacks. It can benefit from relevant combat Feats that the caster might have, and it can also make Attacks of Opportunity.

The caster only needs to direct the Sword by using a move action when it will be changing targets, otherwise it will keep attacking that target and threatening the spaces within its reach. The caster still needs to be able to see it, and be able to detect whatever it will threaten, however.

Ok, Let's spell out some differences between Spiritual Weapon and Mage's Sword to see if it's worth a 5 spell level difference.

Range
SW - Medium
MS - Close

Spiritual weapon has a greater range

Component
SW - V,S,DF
MS - V,S,F (250 gp mini platinum sword)

Spiritual weapon can be used without costly focus.

To Hit
SW - BAB+Wis mod
MS - CL+Int/Cha+3

Safe to say that Mage's Sword is normally going to have a better to hit. Though a good warpriest build with a good BAB could give it a good run for it's money.

Damage
SW - 1d8+(1/3 caster levels)
MS - 4d6+3

Mage's Sword does do more damage per hit, but...

Atk/Round
SW - per BAB
MS - 1

Spiritual weapon can have multiple attacks per round, making it possible to have a higher damage output. One miss from MS means no damage for the round while SW can have another go.

Action to switch targets
SW - Move
MS - Standard

Spiritual Weapon can be re-directed and still leave you with the ability to cast another spell.

Final verdict, while Mage's Sword seems to have the better base damage and higher attack modifier, the ability to have multiple attacks give Spiritual Weapon a balancing factor. Couple that with the fact that it's a second level spell and you can more easily have multiple castings up, I think it's safe to say that the boost of 5 spell levels is something that has to be re-worked.
Dark Archive

It really should probably be a 4th or 5th level spell and get multiple attacks for a high BAB to be worth a slot. If you pick this to put in your spell book as a wizard, you wither don't know what you are doing or have run out other level 7 spells you want. If you pick it as your 7th level spell know as a sorcerer, you really shouldn't be playing a sorcerer.

Honestly, I think it's just because of tradition.

It was a 7th level spell in 2nd edition, was kept as such in 3e/3.5, an now it is also a 7th level spell in pathfinder.
Dark Archive

You are right. Many spells are a certain level because they "have always been that level". They should have been upgraded or had their level changed.
Shadow Lodge

Couple things....

The 250gp cost for MS is a focus so reusable.

SW make look like your dieties weapon but will only do 1d8 plus up to +5, crit threat is by what shape the weapon takes based on cleric diety.

MS is always 19-20/x2 and 4d6+3 damage.

SW does get more attacks based on bab of cleric.

Most other spell effects between the two spells are very close.

Wheather MS should still be 7th lv? shrug
Ral' Yareth wrote:

Honestly, I think it's just because of tradition.

It was a 7th level spell in 2nd edition, was kept as such in 3e/3.5, an now it is also a 7th level spell in pathfinder.

It was a 7th level spell in Basic D&D, too. It was in the Companion Set.

SeeleyOne wrote:
Ral' Yareth wrote:

Honestly, I think it's just because of tradition.

It was a 7th level spell in 2nd edition, was kept as such in 3e/3.5, an now it is also a 7th level spell in pathfinder.

It was a 7th level spell in Basic D&D, too. It was in the Companion Set.

I thought that was the case, but I wasn't sure as I only started playing at the start of 2e.

Only time I could really push for the sword is if you maximized it. Average fight lasts 5 rounds, a maximized sword would do 27 damage per round, for a total of about 135. However this eats a 9th level spell, and honestly, meteor swarm would be a heck of alot better.

Spiritual weapon is better early on, but that ain't hitting anything at higher levels so it's kind of a silly comparison. +15/+10 at 13th level (assuming +6 wisdom)

An adult blue dragon CR 13 has 28 AC base, 36 with mage armor and shield (their normal buffs).

This means that a cleric has a 5%/5% chance to hit. While a wizard of equal level would swing at a +22, giving them a 30% chance to hit.

I mean honestly, you can't compare the two spells, ones cast against low level enemies the other against high. Spiritual weapon fills its roll as a low level damage dealing spell. Mages sword fails at filling its roll, but spiritual weapon ALSO fails at filling mages swords role. So in essence, vs a high level enemy, both suck.

It seems to me as though this old girl could use a tuning up for the latest generation. I'd be aboard the iterative attack wagon as a way of making this spell more useful. I love the fluff of Mage's Sword, but when it comes to actually having it on a character, I can't help but think I'm wasting a spell.

Hopefully, Paizo will see this and address this in an errata. Just because it's a legacy spell doesn't mean it can't change at all. As it is, it's sadly underpowered unless you're facing a tank without DR.
aceDiamond wrote:
Just because it's a legacy spell doesn't mean it can't change at all.

It has changed.

AD&D version: sword could attack like a fighter of half the wizard's level was wielding it - effectively a 13th level caster just getting the spell would have a +6 BAB with it.

It also did not add any enhancement bonus to the attacks or damage despite counting a +3 for damage reduction bypassing.

It did 5d4 (or 5d6 to larger opponents), and the focus for it cost 500 gp
...oh, and the wizard had to concentrate on it to make it attack, to the exclusion of all other activities besides movement.

The Companion Set version: wizard had to concentrate to get it to do anything beside float there, but it attacked twice per round... except it didn't attack any better than the wizard and only did the damage of a normal two-handed sword (which I think was 1d10 at the time, didn't take the time to check that one bit) even though the sword could bypass the damage reduction of creatures needing magic weapons to hurt.

Then the 3.5 & Pathfinder versions are basically the same.

In a practical sense, the current version is the best the spell has ever been.

Well. That shuts me up in that department.

Though still, it is a bit hard to find use for it when most encounters don't last nearly that long.
1 person marked this as a favorite.

Dude, I am super stoked that my first ever post on here has taken on such a life of its own. There are few things in life that make me happier than seeing a bunch of people debating the pros and cons of a spell. Awesome@

There was one thing I did realize that Mage's Sword has going for it. It does not say that only one Sword effect can exist simultaneously. So if you're willing to blow enough slots, you can cover yourself on magical swords to aim and shoot off at an enemy. This strategy would work well with Time Stop.

That being said, it's still a big investment to get that sort of effect off the ground for such a slight damage output per sword.

@aceDiamond-

Nice thought. That hadn't occured to me. I'm going to use that in the boss fight I have coming up on Saturday. Thanks for the advice!!!
thenobledrake wrote:

Quantum Steve - comparing Wizard spells to Cleric spells is not a good evaluation of what level something should be.

There are intentional differences in the capabilities of Cleric magic vs. Wizard magic - such as cleric spells having a whole lot more healing than wizard magic does, and allowing weapon-like attacks a lot easier/earlier than wizard magic does.

Further, spiritual weapon (unless you don't have a deity) takes the shape of your deity's favored weapon, so it isn't always 1d8 damage.

Always d8. Crit range and multiplier mods as weapon. But always d8.

Definitely agree cleric spells are a different kettle of fish.

Force damage is invaluable, its a great spell (goodbye constructs) even if power creep has made some spells of lower level equivocal none are force damage you can cast and forget-or turn invisible and kick back while your sword clears out trap rooms in tombs of their guardians.
Seraph Stormborn wrote:

Can someone please explain to me why Mage's Sword is a 7th level spell?

Clearly just to vex you.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Why is Mage's Sword a 7th Level spell? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Advice