Round 1: Using Spell Combat you cast (defensively) Chill Touch.
You may now make a free touch attack as part of the casting. You may use Spellstrike to make a regular melee attack that adds Chill touch on top of any weapon damage. Assuming that you hit you have 2 charges left
You may now continue Spell Combat and make your regular melee attack. This attack also can be used to deliver the Chill Touch. Assuming that you hit you have 1 charge left.
Round 2: Using Spell Combat you attack first and then cast your spell. Assuming that you hit you have expended your last charge. Now you cast another spell. Note that casting another spell eliminates any remaining charges of Chill Touch.
Spellstrike treats your weapon like your hand in all ways for purposes of delivering spells. The only difference is that if you use the weapon you have to deal with the target's regular AC as opposed to merely the touch AC.
|
Spellstrike lets you attack with a touch spell using your weapon. It is part of the casting of the spell when you cast it, but if you have a charge held, it is its own action. Chill Touch is different than most in that you get multiple charges, so there are held charges left over even if you use it.
Thorin's example was actually quite sophisticated. Round 1, use spell combat, cast first, attack with the free attack as part of casting with a charge. Attack again with the normal attack from spell combat, using another charge. 2 potential hits there. Round 2, with another held charge, use spell combat again. Attack first this time, with the held charge remaining from chill touch, using the normal attack. -Then- cast your spell for the round, and use the free attack from the casting. You can get two attacks with shocking grasp in the same round this way.
Question - If you're higher level than 3 (say 5), on round 2, can you use two weapon fighting (either with or without the feat) to touch attack with your off hand (considered armed from having a held charge, so no AoO), then use spellstrike through your primary weapon instead? Then try to use another charge utilizing your primary (main hand) attack? What would the penalties be for this with the TW feat - just the normal -2?
Spellstrike - Whenever you would normally be allowed to make a melee touch attack, you can instead make a regular melee attack and the spell effect comes along for the ride.
Also, any time you make an attack with your weapon normally... if you are holding a chage, you can discharge it through your weapon.
Round 1 Use Full Action - Spell Combat
Cast Chill Touch - Get 3 charges, and 1 free touch.
Use Spellstrike to switch touch attack to regular attack - attack (-2 from spell combat) dealing weapon damage + chill touch. 1 charge used.
Make regular attack - using spell strike to add chill touch charge. Attack at -2 from spell combat, and deal weapon damage plus chill touch. 1 charge used (only 1 left)
Round 2 Use Full Action - Spell Combat
Make regular attack - using spell strike to add chill touch charge. Attack at -2 from spell combat, and deal weapon damage plus chill touch. 1 charge used (none left)
Cast Chill Touch - Get 3 charges, and 1 free touch.
Use Spellstrike to switch touch attack to regular attack - attack (-2 from spell combat) dealing weapon damage + chill touch. 1 charge used.
Round 3
This round is tricky, because you could either make a regular attack, and be left with charge left, or you could spell combat again, but you'd waste some chill touch charge. (I personally like the TWF option for this, so you can maintain full attacks with extra hits even when not casting, and still deliver your multiple charges)
Question - If you're higher level than 3 (say 5), on round 2, can you use two weapon fighting (either with or without the feat) to touch attack with your off hand (considered armed from having a held charge, so no AoO), then use spellstrike through your primary weapon instead? Then try to use another charge utilizing your primary (main hand) attack? What would the penalties be for this with the TW feat - just the normal -2?
You sorta can, but you'd actually need to make that extra TWF attacking with the offhand. So, either an actual touch attack, or an unarmed attack... or somehow draw an actual offhand weapon.
Ideally, you have a cestus, so you can simply use an armed unarmed strike. Plus, a cestus gives your unarmed strike a 19-20 crit range, so... that isn't the worst option in the world. (Other weapons that make your unarmed attacks armed are okay, but less effective) And this won't interfere with your normal attacks, casting, or anything important.
Question - If you're higher level than 3 (say 5), on round 2, can you use two weapon fighting (either with or without the feat) to touch attack with your off hand (considered armed from having a held charge, so no AoO), then use spellstrike through your primary weapon instead? Then try to use another charge utilizing your primary (main hand) attack? What would the penalties be for this with the TW feat - just the normal -2?You sorta can, but you'd actually need to make that extra TWF attacking with the offhand. So, either an actual touch attack, or an unarmed attack... or somehow draw an actual offhand weapon.
Ideally, you have a cestus, so you can simply use an armed unarmed strike. Plus, a cestus gives your unarmed strike a 19-20 crit range, so... that isn't the worst option in the world. (Other weapons that make your unarmed attacks armed are okay, but less effective) And this won't interfere with your normal attacks, casting, or anything important.
Interesting - you can't channel that off hand touch attack using spellstrike to your main hand weapon? You think it's possible to channel it into a newly-drawn off hand weapon? That sounds kind of weird, never considered that.
Interesting - you can't channel that off hand touch attack using spellstrike to your main hand weapon? You think it's possible to channel it into a newly-drawn off hand weapon? That sounds kind of weird, never considered that.
You've misunderstood.
You can spellstrike through ANY melee weapon. Main hand, off hand, two handed weapon. Doesn't matter so long as it is a melee weapon. You don't hold a change in a specific hand, you simply hold a charge. Then any melee attack can use spellstrike you discharge it, or a touch attack without spellstrike to discharge it.
Well im no sure about the offhand part, but Magus can draw new weapons and apply spellstrike to them. I think there was a faq somewhere mentioning it.
When we did Jade regent i played a magus, i think once hasted it was..
Chill Touch (1 charge)
3 attacks (3 charges)
next round
3 attacks (3 charges)
Assuming everything hit at this point i used 7 charges, and will either not do spellstrike in the second round Or will switch tactics.
You don't hold a change in a specific hand, you simply hold a charge.
I'm not so sure of that due to a couple lines in the various Magus FAQs (bolding mine).
"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."
If the charge isn't "stuck" in that particular hand, why would this be the case ?
You don't hold a change in a specific hand, you simply hold a charge.I'm not so sure of that due to a couple lines in the various Magus FAQs (bolding mine).
"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."If the charge isn't "stuck" in that particular hand, why would this be the case ?
Its an unfortunate wording of the FAQ.
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.
No references to specific hands here, and references to natural attacks which might be a bite, a stinger on a tail, claws on feet, knees or headbutt from a monk (unarmed attacks), would all discharge it.
Does all this imply that a Magus with a held charge on chill touch can TWF and attack twice with his main hand - once for the main hand attack (expending a use of chill touch if available) and once for his off-hand touch attack?
|
Kwauss also said 'with a held charge' - however, conceptually, all Spellstrike does is allow any melee attack you would normally make to discharge a touch spell. It does not give extra attacks as such, or transfer the attacks from one hand to another. The only 'transference' allowed is taking the touch attack normally made as part of casting a touch spell, and allowing one to make it with a melee weapon instead.
Think about someone WITHOUT Spellstrike - if they are holding a charge, could they use TWF to touch attack with both hands? Yeah, sure. If they were holding a weapon in the off-hand, could they choose to TWF both times with the main hand? No. Same when Spellstrike is in use.
Delivery: Delivering a touch spell normally takes a touch attack. You can always make a touch attack as a Standard action. You can make one as a Free action in the turn in which you cast a touch spell.
You can make a touch attack as an attack, not as a standard action. You might use your standard action to make an attack, but you might also deliver your touch through an AoO, full attack, or some other means of gaining an attack. (Or did I miss a rule somewhere on that?)
Okay, it sounds like it's possible:
Round 2 (after casting chill touch, with 5 touches, 2 used):
Attack using full round action with TWF (not spell combat) - primary hand can deliver a touch with weapon (at -2 if you have the TWF feat), and off hand can delivery a touch attack (at -2 w/feat), but can now deliver through main hand weapon instead (at -2) due to spellstrike? Presumably if you had more attacks due to iterative or other TWF feats you can also use those through the main weapon /off hand (spellstrike through main weapon) at the same penalty as they would normally use?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No references to specific hands here, and references to natural attacks which might be a bite, a stinger on a tail, claws on feet, knees or headbutt from a monk (unarmed attacks), would all discharge it.
But once you deliver one charge with a tail-slap, wouldn't any remaining charges ALSO have to be delivered with the tail-slap ? If you can just move the charge around at will, then how would you EVER be restricted by the "can't touch anything or you'll discharge" provision ?
Attack using full round action with TWF (not spell combat) - primary hand can deliver a touch with weapon (at -2 if you have the TWF feat), and off hand can delivery a touch attack (at -2 w/feat), but can now deliver through main hand weapon instead (at -2) due to spellstrike?
Not quite. After the first free attack, Spellstrike only allows you to deliver the touch attack with a weapon at a time when you are actively using that weapon. That means that if you are using TWF, you would deliver the spell with whatever weapon you are using during that specific single attack. Your main hand attack could be a spellstrike using the weapon in your main hand. Your offhand attack is with an empty hand, so you cannot use spellstrike and therefore it would be a normal touch attack. If you happened to pull out another weapon into your offhand before that point, then you could use that offhand weapon for spellstrike (well, this part is a bit vague in terms of RAW, but I would allow it). You can't however, use your off hand to attack using a weapon in your main hand (unless its a double weapon, I suppose, but that's more semantics than anything).
Attack using full round action with TWF (not spell combat) - primary hand can deliver a touch with weapon (at -2 if you have the TWF feat), and off hand can delivery a touch attack (at -2 w/feat), but can now deliver through main hand weapon instead (at -2) due to spellstrike?Not quite. After the first free attack, [BOLD]Spellstrike only allows you to deliver the touch attack with a weapon at a time when you are actively using that weapon. That means that if you are using TWF, you would deliver the spell with whatever weapon you are using during that specific single attack. Your main hand attack could be a spellstrike using the weapon in your main hand. Your offhand attack is with an empty hand, so you cannot use spellstrike and therefore it would be a normal touch attack.[/BOLD} If you happened to pull out another weapon into your offhand before that point, then you could use that offhand weapon for spellstrike (well, this part is a bit vague in terms of RAW, but I would allow it). You can't however, use your off hand to attack using a weapon in your main hand (unless its a double weapon, I suppose, but that's more semantics than anything).
Can you point me to the rule where the above (bold) is listed? I'm having trouble following.
Spellstrike (Su): At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through [BOLD] any[/BOLD] weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack. Instead of the free melee touch attack normally allowed to deliver the spell, a magus can make one free melee attack with his weapon (at his highest base attack bonus) as part of casting this spell. If successful, this melee attack deals its normal damage as well as the effects of the spell. If the magus makes this attack in concert with spell combat, this melee attack takes all the penalties accrued by spell combat melee attacks. This attack uses the weapon's critical range (20, 19–20, or 18–20 and modified by the keen weapon property or similar effects), but the spell effect only deals ×2 damage on a successful critical hit, while the weapon damage uses its own critical modifier.
Doesn't the bold indicate either weapon?
|
With spellstrike you need to have a hand free to cast the spell in the first place. So you have a weapon in one hand and you have cast the spell with the off-hand. So would not any attempt to draw a new weapon, with said off-hand, discharge a charge of the spell after, since any actual touch discharges a charge of a touch spell?
Sorry, I'm a bit lazy sometimes when it comes to citing.
Spellstrike (Su): At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack. Instead of the free melee touch attack normally allowed to deliver the spell, a magus can make one free melee attack with his weapon (at his highest base attack bonus) as part of casting this spell.
Right there in bold, it shows that the delivery through any weapon is only for the first free touch attack you get as part of casting the spell. You can also perform a touch attack as a standard action later (since spellstrike follows the rules of a touch spell unless otherwise noted), but since you can't use TWF as part of a standard action that is irrelevant.
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.
This segment basically means to me that the charge doesn't transfer to the weapon until the attack actually connects. It still doesn't prove or disprove that you can transfer the charge between hands between two attacks, but it does tell us that touching a weapon does not discharge the spell, so in my games I would allow it.
If I cast a spell that allows multiple touch attacks, can I deliver all of those spell touches through my weapon?
Yes. For example, if you cast chill touch (which allows multiple touch attacks), you could use spellstrike to cast and deliver the spell through your weapon, and in later weapon attacks you could use your weapon to deliver the remaining spell touch attacks (one spell touch attack per weapon attack).
If you have multiple attacks per round with that weapon (such as from having a BAB of +6 or higher), you can use the weapon to deliver multiple spell touch attacks per round, so long as you have uses of that spell touch attack remaining.
And this in essence says that you can only use spellstrike to deliver the spell using the same weapon you are currently attacking with. If it isn't an attack with that weapon, the initial free touch attack, or the standard action touch attack, you can't use spellstrike.
Yes, it doesn't spell out word-for-word what happens with a magus using Spellstrike and TWF, but I feel the intention of TWF itself is pretty clear that you can't use your offhand attack to attack using your mainhand weapon, and Spellstrike doesn't have enough to support that it would be the exception.
But once you deliver one charge with a tail-slap, wouldn't any remaining charges ALSO have to be delivered with the tail-slap ?
No. Because if it was locked in to your tail then touching something else, even accidentally, wouldn't necessarily discharge the spell as your tail may or may no be the part of your body touching something. But the rule on the held charge is touching anything else discharges it.
If you can just move the charge around at will, then how would you EVER be restricted by the "can't touch anything or you'll discharge" provision ?
It is understood that anything you are currently holding/wearing won't discharge the spell. Nor will talking around and 'touching' the ground. Grab a new weapon (for a non magus) or retrieve an item, open a door, pick up a stone from the ground - any of these will discharge it.
I'm conjecturing for the rest of this based on how the above works, this isn't strictly RAW, but rather my opinion and view of it. The charge isn't held in a given location - the charge is held by the body. This satisfies the ability to make any form of attack (touch, unarmed, natural) while also satisfying the 'touch anything and discharge' condition.
With spellstrike you need to have a hand free to cast the spell in the first place. So you have a weapon in one hand and you have cast the spell with the off-hand. So would not any attempt to draw a new weapon, with said off-hand, discharge a charge of the spell after, since any actual touch discharges a charge of a touch spell?
Replace that with Spell Combat. Understanding the distinction between these two is critical, and many people get them mistaken. Spellstrike has nothing to do with casting except that you have to had cast a spell sometime before making an attack. Whether that was this same round or 5 rounds ago and having a charge you have not yet delivered.
Spellstrike (Su): At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack. Instead of the free melee touch attack normally allowed to deliver the spell, a magus can make one free melee attack with his weapon (at his highest base attack bonus) as part of casting this spell.Right there in bold, it shows that the delivery through any weapon is only for the first free touch attack you get as part of casting the spell. You can also perform a touch attack as a standard action later (since spellstrike follows the rules of a touch spell unless otherwise noted), but since you can't use TWF as part of a standard action that is irrelevant.
Incorrect. It isn't restricted to only the round you cast the spell being allowed with any weapon. It is always ANY (melee) weapon.
If I cast a spell that allows multiple touch attacks, can I deliver all of those spell touches through my weapon?
Yes. For example, if you cast chill touch (which allows multiple touch attacks), you could use spellstrike to cast and deliver the spell through your weapon, and in later weapon attacks you could use your weapon to deliver the remaining spell touch attacks (one spell touch attack per weapon attack).
If you have multiple attacks per round with that weapon (such as from having a BAB of +6 or higher), you can use the weapon to deliver multiple spell touch attacks per round, so long as you have uses of that spell touch attack remaining.
This is from the perspective of a magus only holding one weapon (by far the common condition). The spellstrike description gives us the correct understanding.
...he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack...
And for reference for anyone wanting a better understanding of the magus, spell combat, and spellstrike. Grick's guide
Incorrect. It isn't restricted to only the round you cast the spell being allowed with any weapon. It is always ANY (melee) weapon.
If I cast a spell that allows multiple touch attacks, can I deliver all of those spell touches through my weapon?
Yes. For example, if you cast chill touch (which allows multiple touch attacks), you could use spellstrike to cast and deliver the spell through your weapon, and in later weapon attacks you could use your weapon to deliver the remaining spell touch attacks (one spell touch attack per weapon attack).
If you have multiple attacks per round with that weapon (such as from having a BAB of +6 or higher), you can use the weapon to deliver multiple spell touch attacks per round, so long as you have uses of that spell touch attack remaining.
Notice it says weapon attacks, not touch attacks. It then specifically says with that weapon.
Also,
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon.
With TWF, you get an additional attack with the weapon in your off hand. It is not intended that you can use TWF to get an additional attack with your main hand.
Does Grick's guide address TWF and spellstrike?
Does Grick's guide address TWF and spellstrike?
How about read it then come back with your additional questions? :0
I've read through Grick's guide twice, and I'll ask the same thing: does it address TWF and spellstrike?
If it does, I totally missed it somehow, as well as totally missing any way in which it disagrees with what I've said. Melvin delivers spellstrike using either the free action from the spell, or an attack that he would normally get with his main weapon. There is no mention of him getting additional attacks with his main weapon due to using a touch attack with his off hand.
Does Grick's guide address TWF and spellstrike?How about read it then come back with your additional questions? :0
Thanks, it was rhetorical.
I'm kind of torn as to whether off hand TWF works for main hand spellstrike - on one hand game balance dictates that holding a charge should be both hands (or you could pick up things in the other hand and hold the charge long term) making 'hand' irrelevant for TWF with a held charge touch attack. On the other hand, taking out a second weapon to use TWF and chill touch through each makes some sense.
What kind of action is switching a weapon from hand to hand?
I've read through Grick's guide twice, and I'll ask the same thing: does it address TWF and spellstrike?
If it does, I totally missed it somehow, as well as totally missing any way in which it disagrees with what I've said. Melvin delivers spellstrike using either the free action from the spell, or an attack that he would normally get with his main weapon. There is no mention of him getting additional attacks with his main weapon due to using a touch attack with his off hand.
I think we've been misunderstanding each other.
Spellstrike lets you deliver your spells/held charges through a melee weapon attack. That might be a main hand attack, or an off-hand attack.\
Thanks, it was rhetorical.I'm kind of torn as to whether off hand TWF works for main hand spellstrike - on one hand game balance dictates that holding a charge should be both hands (or you could pick up things in the other hand and hold the charge long term) making 'hand' irrelevant for TWF with a held charge touch attack. On the other hand, taking out a second weapon to use TWF and chill touch through each makes some sense.
What kind of action is switching a weapon from hand to hand?
Restate your question then please, cause I'm not clear what you are asking at this point.
Does spellstrike let you TWF and get two attacks with your main hand? No. TWF is still TWF. One attack with main hand (or more with iteratives) one attack with off hand (or more with ITWF/GTWF). Are you making an attack with a melee weapon in any of those? If yes, spellstrike applies.
Spellstrike changes one thing, and one thing only. You can now deliver your spells/held charges by attacking with a melee weapon. Which melee weapon, what form of attack, any of of that is all irrelevant - but still follows all the normal rules for making a melee attack.
So does it address TWF and spellstrike? What specifically are you looking for it to address? Can a magus TWF? Yes, he can. If he is second level or higher he can use spellstrike during the TWF - but spellstrike doesn't change which weapons he attacks with during TWF, or how many attacks he gets.
If instead you mean can he use spell combat and TWF? No he can't. Both are full round actions.
Switching a weapon from one hand to another is a free action. FAQ This doesn't address that exact question, but the type of action is the same. But this also doesn't matter for spellstrike. Held charges are not assigned to a specific hand.
Ack. Yall are seriously trying to overcomplicate this.
Spellstrike. If you hit a dude with a weapon, while you hold a charge, you can hit im with a charge too.
TWF. You get an extra attack with your offhand when you full attack.
So... if you are holding a multi touch spell, and you full attack TWFing style, each weapon attack can be used to deliver a charge.
That simple.
|
|
Remy is saying it nice and clearly - you don't get to somehow use TWF to generate extra main-hand attacks or translate off-hand to main-hand attacks, just because you want to spellstrike. Instead, you get to use the spellstrike on any of the attacks you already have. The one and only exception is for the single free attack you generate when you actually cast the spell in the first place.
Even then, you could, in theory, take that free attack with either you main hand, off-hand (if you used Quick Draw to draw an off-hand weapon between casting and attacking), or even a natural attack or unarmed attack if you wanted to.
Even then, you could, in theory, take that free attack with either you main hand, off-hand (if you used Quick Draw to draw an off-hand weapon between casting and attacking), or even a natural attack or unarmed attack if you wanted to.
Actually you couldn't quick draw and make an off-hand attack with it in the turn you cast the spell. Both spell combat and TWF require a full round action. Aside from the action economy conflict your casting hand must be free for the entire duration of spell combat.
I think we've been misunderstanding each other.
Yes, apparently we have been. I was trying to address Kwauss' question of whether you could use your off hand to cast a touch attack during TWF, but then suddenly use your main hand weapon to deliver it for that attack due to spellstrike. Glad it seems that's been cleared up now and I think we've reached a reasonable conclusion.
The one and only exception is for the single free attack you generate when you actually cast the spell in the first place.
Even then, you could, in theory, take that free attack with either you main hand, off-hand (if you used Quick Draw to draw an off-hand weapon between casting and attacking), or even a natural attack or unarmed attack if you wanted to.
Close...
You get a free touch attack to deliver the spell on the same round you cast it, this is default rules for touch spells. By using spellstrike, you can use that free attack as a weapon attack. And, as we know, anything you wack with a weapon can also deliver a charge.
The terminology mainhand/offhand is only used for TWF. And only while you TWF. So, even if you have two weapons out, and use the smaller one to deliver your free attack, it isn't called an offhand attack, it is just an attack. The same thing as AoOs for a TWFer type, he can take an AoO with his lighter weapon, and that isn't considered an offhand attack or anything, it is just an attack. He only makes "offhand/mainhand" attacks during the actual full attack action where he two-weapon fights.
So, to rephrase what you were getting at...
'You could, in theory, take that free attack with any weapon already drawn, or if you used Quick Draw to draw a second weapon (or draw as part of a move action) between casting and attacking this weapon could be used instead, or even a natural attack or unarmed attack if you wanted to. Essentially, any weapon you could possibly attack with could be used in place of the free touch attack.'
Edited for clarity.
|
ACtually, there is one non-TWF mode of attack that would let you get those extra attack(s) and use them on you rmain weapon. But you would have to have taken levels in Monk, since it would be using Flurry of Blows to deliver the extra attacks.
Magus 3, Monk 1+
Make your weapon a Monk weapon, so you can use it to Flurry with.
First round:
Spell Combat to cast spell, as though using TWF, Spellstrike to deliver teh free attack through your weapon.
Normal weapon attack.
Second round:
Spellstrike with your weapon, while using Flurry of Blows to make extra attacks as though TWF.
Would that work?
Would that work?
Those are attacks that you would still be able to perform normally with that weapon if you didn't have spellstrike, since you aren't actually required to use both hands for Flurry of Blows. As long as you aren't trying to perform Spell Combat and Flurry of Blows in the same round (since both are full round actions), I see no issue with using FoB to deliver spellstrikes in a later round.
Would that work?Those are attacks that you would still be able to perform normally with that weapon if you didn't have spellstrike, since you aren't actually required to use both hands for Flurry of Blows. As long as you aren't trying to perform Spell Combat and Flurry of Blows in the same round (since both are full round actions), I see no issue with using FoB to deliver spellstrikes in a later round.
Basically this.
Spellstrike doesn't ever give you extra attacks. Ever.
If you have attacks, those attacks can deliver touch spells with a weapon attack... that is all spellstrike does.
My point wasn't exactly that you have to only use one weapon or hand, but that you have to use the same weapon or hand that you are performing the current attack with. So the additional off hand attack you get with TWF can't be used to perform a spellstrike using the weapon in your main hand, but rather it has to be with a weapon in your off hand or an unarmed strike.
My point wasn't exactly that you have to only use one weapon or hand, but that you have to use the same weapon or hand that you are performing the current attack with. So the additional off hand attack you get with TWF can't be used to perform a spellstrike using the weapon in your main hand, but rather it has to be with a weapon in your off hand or an unarmed strike.
I understand it, and I'd love to see documentation to support it, but it feels a little off if a held charge is interpreted as not 'in a hand'.
At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack.
If the interpretation of this first sentence is that any held Magus touch spell can deliver through a weapon (rather than only newly cast spells), why is the word 'any' not an indication that an off hand charge can use a main hand weapon (at the off hand penalty)?
Round two you can deliver a charge with your main hand attack, then use TWF to touch with your off hand. If a held charge isn't in a hand, then it seems even more credible that you could replace it with a main hand attack (at the off-hand penalty, whatever that is). How does this interact with a double weapon? Do you have to attack with the off-hand end?
I see the logic, but don't see the rules text that enforces that logic. Is it because when you TWF you can't use a main hand swing and then a Gore or helmet attack in place of off-hand?
I already pointed out earlier how the text for Spellstrike says that you can only perform the free spellstrike with any weapon as part of casting the spell. After that I pointed out that in the FAQ, it talks specifically about delivering the spellstrike during an attack with that weapon, meaning that the weapon attack comes first.
If you read the rules as written literally, you get the free touch attack as part of the spell with any weapon. After that, the charge is delivered as part of a weapon attack, or unarmed strike.
If you don't interpret rules as they are written literally, then I can't give you documentation, and instead have to ask you to interpret the intent of the rules. My interpretation of the intent of the rules is that after the free touch attack you aren't meant to get additional free attacks with your main weapon beyond the attacks you normally get with that weapon.
I see the logic, but don't see the rules text that enforces that logic. Is it because when you TWF you can't use a main hand swing and then a Gore or helmet attack in place of off-hand?
Let me put it into an even better context so you can see what you are asking. If I am wielding a two-handed weapon*, can I use TWF to deliver an additional attack with that weapon? The weapon is in both my off hand and my main, so I should be able to use my off hand to attack with the weapon as well, right?
EDIT: *that's not a double weapon
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Kwauss, I think you are confused on the terminology.
Off hand specifically refers to when you are using the full attack action to two weapon fight. In no other scenarios is there an 'off-hand'.
If you are holding a single weapon it is just a weapon - it can be in either hand, but neither of those is the 'off-hand'.
If you are holding two weapons, but only make attacks with one of them, you are not making any off-hand attacks.
If you are holding two weapons, but only take the normal number of attacks bases off your BAB, and do not take the extra attack (or penalties for TWF), then none of your attacks are off-hand, though with a BAB of +6 you could attack once with each weapon - both considered main hand attacks.
If you are using TWF to get an extra attack though, your main attacks MUST come from the weapon in the hand you designate as your main hand, and your off-hand attack MUST come from the weapon you in your hand you designate as your off hand.
Discharging a spell through spellstrike doesn't have to be delivered by your 'off-hand'. It can be delivered through ANY melee weapon you are wielding. That might be your only weapon. It might be a two handed weapon. It might be your main hand weapon if you are doing TWF on round 2 after casting the spell. Or it might be your off hand weapon if you are doing TWF the round after you cast the spell. All of those are valid. It could also be a standard touch attack, unarmed strike, or natural weapon attack of any sort.
If you go back to Grick's guide, and read specifically how spellstrike works you will see this.
1) Did you cast a magus spell?
2) Are you making a attack with a melee weapon?
3) If yes to both, you can deliver the charge through spellstrike, regardless of all other factors about which weapon, which hand, etc.
Is it because when you TWF you can't use a main hand swing and then a Gore or helmet attack in place of off-hand?
When you TWF you can make your normal attacks with a main hand weapon. And your off-hand attacks with a different weapon. That might be a actual weapon, an unarmed strike, boot blade, armors spikes, etc. It doesn't necessarily mean something in your actual hand, but is a second weapon and is designated as the 'off-hand' weapon.
I already pointed out earlier how the text for Spellstrike says that you can only perform the free spellstrike with any weapon as part of casting the spell. After that I pointed out that in the FAQ, it talks specifically about delivering the spellstrike during an attack with that weapon, meaning that the weapon attack comes first.
If you read the rules as written literally, you get the free touch attack as part of the spell with any weapon. After that, the charge is delivered as part of a weapon attack, or unarmed strike.
If you don't interpret rules as they are written literally, then I can't give you documentation, and instead have to ask you to interpret the intent of the rules. My interpretation of the intent of the rules is that after the free touch attack you aren't meant to get additional free attacks with your main weapon beyond the attacks you normally get with that weapon.
My problem is this - the only text to support using spellstrike with a held charge is that first sentence (clarified by FAQ). The second sentence refers to the free attack you get from casting. Why is the word 'any' being ignored/invalidated?
I see from Grick's checklist an offhand attack can be used to spellstrike. What is the basis for limiting it to an attack from that hand? You get a touch attack with that hand for a held charge, why can't you replace it with spellstrike through your main hand weapon?
I don't think I can legitimately dispute that's how it's intended to work, but the rules don't add up to supporting it unless I'm missing something crucial.
My problem is this - the only text to support using spellstrike with a held charge is that first sentence (clarified by FAQ). The second sentence refers to the free attack you get from casting. Why is the word 'any' being ignored/invalidated?
I assume you're talking about this first sentence:
At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack.
This is the only sentence that has the word "any" in it as far as I can tell. Notice the part that also says "whenever a magus casts a spell". Is delivering a charge the same as casting a spell?
The FAQ clarifies that in addition to when you cast a spell, you can deliver charges through weapon attacks. The FAQ does not use the phrase "any weapon" for this part of spellstrike, instead it uses the phrase "that weapon", referring to the weapon you are already making a melee attack with.