Okay so I've been seeing threads about Magus and Arcane Mark. Most of the time the threads say how awesome or OP it can be but I simply cannot understand how a simple Zorro kind of spell makes the combo with Magus so OP. Maybe I'm just an idiot but can someone explain this to me in layman's terms?
Thanks :)
Some people consider it "cheesy" because it allows a Magus to use Spell Combat and Spell Strike to get his extra attack even without casting a real spell; those that feel that way do so because Arcane Mark isn't really an offensive spell yet a Magus can treat it as such for a benefit. I disagree about it being overpowered in anyway and it is a completely legal and valid tactic... though I wish Paizo had just given the Magus the cantrip Brand and saved some drama.
Some people consider it "cheesy" because it allows a Magus to use Spell Combat and Spell Strike to get his extra attack even without casting a real spell; those that feel that way do so because Arcane Mark isn't really an offensive spell yet a Magus can treat it as such for a benefit. I disagree about it being overpowered in anyway and it is a completely legal and valid tactic... though I wish Paizo had just given the Magus the cantrip Brand and saved some drama.
Okay but how does it work? I don't see how Arcane Mark does this for a Magus. Again I must be an idiot xD.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nah don't worry about it. Magus confuses a lot of people when they first read it.
1. The Spell Combat ability lets you cast a spell and make all of your attacks.
2. Spell Strike lets you trade out the "free" touch attack that you get with casting a spell for a weapon strike.
3. Hence, you Spell Combat and get your attacks plus a spell. You cast Arcane Mark and can deliver it through a weapon strike.
4. Result = you got an extra attack by using a cantrip in an "unintended" way.
It's really not that powerful of an effect, especially because all of your attacks take a negative to hit as specified by Spell Combat.
Nah don't worry about it. Magus confuses a lot of people when they first read it.
1. The Spell Combat ability lets you cast a spell and make all of your attacks.
2. Spell Strike lets you trade out the "free" touch attack that you get with casting a spell for a weapon strike.
3. Hence, you Spell Combat and get your attacks plus a spell. You cast Arcane Mark and can deliver it through a weapon strike.
4. Result = you got an extra attack by using a cantrip in an "unintended" way.It's really not that powerful of an effect, especially because all of your attacks take a negative to hit as specified by Spell Combat.
Okay so if I understand this correctly then its like this:
- First I can attack normally with my sword
- Second, I can attack with my spell using my spell infused sword dealing both melee as spell damage
But if it is just that and I use Arcane Mark as the spell for the extra melee attack, then why shouldnt I just use Shocking Grasp for even more damage? Or am I missing one extra spell attack?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You are correct. Shocking Grasp is obviously the superior option, but the appeal of using a cantrip is that you can get the extra free attack and possible extra damage without expending resources when the extra power of an actual spell isn't really needed. So if you were low on Shocking Grasps and didn't want to waste one on a goblin you could instead use Arcane Mark for the extra attack without using a spell slot.
It's an option, but nothing overpowered. Some people don't like it because they dislike the concept of using a spell that is intended for out-of-combat offensively, hence they see it as an "exploit."
You use it to be able to continue getting 2 attacks even after you have run out of 1st + level spells.
Also it's a way to continue adding extras to your attacks. For example, if you have the enforcer feat and use a sap for non-lethal damage you get a free intimidate, or if you've gone with the white haired witch you get a free grab etc. All based of a cantrip
A Hexcrafter gets brand as a cantrip and would use that instead.
You are correct. Shocking Grasp is obviously the superior option, but the appeal of using a cantrip is that you can get the extra free attack and possible extra damage without expending resources when the extra power of an actual spell isn't really needed. So if you were low on Shocking Grasps and didn't want to waste one on a goblin you could instead use Arcane Mark for the extra attack without using a spell slot.
It's an option, but nothing overpowered. Some people don't like it because they dislike the concept of using a spell that is intended for out-of-combat offensively, hence they see it as an "exploit."
I understand it entirely now. I figured the Arcane Mark would give extreme damage or something. It's a really good concept if you think about it. I'll definitely use that then whenever I don't want to waste a lvl 1 or higher spell on it. Also considering the extra spell infused melee attack might fail its attack roll and therefore let you lose the spell completely, you won't lose Arcane Mark since you can recast it.
Thanks for the help :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fun fact: If you miss with a touch spell it is not expended. Next time that blade hits it will deliver it, unless you cast another touch spell in which case it fizzles and is replaced.
Fun fact: If you miss with a touch spell it is not expended. Next time that blade hits it will deliver it, unless you cast another touch spell in which case it fizzles and is replaced.
Really? Where does it say that?
Th magic section unddr holding a charge.
I want to thank you folks as well. I've been doing the same, pouring over the threads trying to understand how the Arcane Mark concept worked. If I've gathered it right it's akin to the "Two Weapon" feat granting the extra attack with weapon without burning a higher level spell.
TrollingJoker, you're not the only duffus roaming the boards ;)
I want to thank you folks as well. I've been doing the same, pouring over the threads trying to understand how the Arcane Mark concept worked. If I've gathered it right it's akin to the "Two Weapon" feat granting the extra attack with weapon without burning a higher level spell.
TrollingJoker, you're not the only duffus roaming the boards ;)
It must be the amazing profile picture ^^
Just want to point out that any spell cast stops the held charges, not just touch spells.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, sure, I get one neat trick and everybody wants to replace me with Brand...
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Better branding.
|
The thing that bugs me most about Arcane Mark is that you can only inscribe your personal glyph(s). Why not just any glyph?
This just begs me to use a really tiny dot as my personal glyph, and print a lot of them. We'll call them pixels.
I allow the caster to change it when he memorize the spell. You memorize a specific glyph when you prepare Arcane mark and keep using that mark until you change it.
For a spontaneous spellcaster it become a bit more complicated a they don't prepare the spells, they only refresh their spell slots, but I would allow them to change the glyph when they refresh the spell.
- * -
For those interested in playing a magus, check the frosbite spell.
It give the extra attack only in the round in which it is cast, but it has a nice secondary effect and it last for several attacks.
If your GM, like mine, prefer the old interpretation of the interaction between spell combat and haste (i.e. that you don't get the extra attack from haste when using spell combat) it become a great spell.
- * -
Just for clarity, the latest FAQ say that a magus get the extra attack from haste when using spell combat.
Fun fact: If you miss with a touch spell it is not expended. Next time that blade hits it will deliver it, unless you cast another touch spell in which case it fizzles and is replaced.It's not a free hit though, it's a standard weapon strike at that point.
True, but you could choose to take your standard attacks first and hope you hit for it to trigger and then cast again... or miss and have the choice of wasting it and recasting or waiting to try again. Still better than nothing though not ideal.