Yet another Spell Combat question

[Bigdaddyjug]

So I have a magus that I play in PFS that I finally got to play at level 2 the other day, so I was very much looking forward to being able to use Spell Combat with my prepared shocking grasp spells. Well, the first time I tried, I cast the spell, then moved in and whiffed on the attack.

So I'm sitting there, holding the charge on a shocking grasp when my turn comes around again. I have another shocking grasp prepared, and I'm wondering if it would be legal for me to declare Spell Combat, make my melee attack and discharge the shocking grasp, and then cast another shocking grasp and make the free melee attack associated with its casting via Spellstrike.

Then I read the Spell Comnat description and it says that I cannot cast a spell in-between melee attacks, and I'm not sure if they are referring to itertives, or if this is an absolute rule. Since I wasn't sure, I decided not to try and cast the second shocking grasp, but I am still curious about this.

If I begin my turn holding the charge on a touch spell, can I declare Spell Combat, make my normal melee attack and discharge the held spell, then cast another touch spell and make the free melee attack granted by that spell via Spellstrike?

[_Ozy_]

Yes.

Edited to add: Also, if you 'whiff' again and still are holding the charge, you don't actually need to cast it again and waste a spell slot, though you still of course have taken the -2 to hit for declaring spell combat (and you won't get the free attack).

[Nefreet]

Grick's Guide to Touch Spells and Spellstrike covers all these options in great detail.

It's one of the most "liked" documents in all of the Paizo Forums. It's good stuff.

[Bigdaddyjug]

See, I thought I was correct in thinking I could, but I didn't want to bog the game down in a rules discussion so I just decided to do a normal attack and deliver my held spell.

[Nefreet]

The Magus, to non-Magus players, seems to be a complicated mess, but once you sit down and make one, and play it for a few levels, it becomes as basic as any other class.

I played a Dwarf Magus in PFS to level 12. His primary weapon was a Dwarven Waraxe. During one game, after utterly destroying an encounter, the GM looked at me and said (something to the effect of), "Wait, I thought you had to be wielding a scimitar for Spell Combat".

There is much misinformation out there.

[Bigdaddyjug]

Oh I understand the class. It was more of a question of whether that one phrase in Spell Combat is absolute or relative. I can see it being deciphered either way and I didn't want to slow the game down.

[claudekennilol]

Nefreet wrote:

During one game, after utterly destroying an encounter, the GM looked at me and said (something to the effect of), "Wait, I thought you had to be wielding a scimitar for Spell Combat".

There is much misinformation out there.

*facepalm*

[Cyrad]

If you have iterative attacks, you have to do all of them before casting the spell for the second shocking grasp. However, this will not stop you from getting the free action attack granted by the spell and spellstrike.

So, yes. You can attack, proc shocking grasp's charge, cast shocking grasp, and attack again

[claudekennilol]

Cyrad wrote:

If you have iterative attacks, you have to do all of them before casting the spell for the second shocking grasp. However, this will not stop you from getting the free action attack granted by the spell and spellstrike.

So, yes. You can attack, proc shocking grasp's charge, cast shocking grasp, and attack again

Asked and answered. We've already moved on to how barely anyone except those that have played a magus actually know how they work.

[Cyrad]

claudekennilol wrote:

Cyrad wrote:

If you have iterative attacks, you have to do all of them before casting the spell for the second shocking grasp. However, this will not stop you from getting the free action attack granted by the spell and spellstrike.

So, yes. You can attack, proc shocking grasp's charge, cast shocking grasp, and attack again

Asked and answered. We've already moved on to how barely anyone except those that have played a magus actually know how they work.

That's true for content creators, as well, which is why we get terrible archetypes like the Myrmidarch with abilities that don't work because the creator had no idea how the magus works.

Honestly, I think the issue is that people seem seldom aware of the technical details of touch spells, despite subconsciously knowing you get a free melee touch attack. So when spellstrike refers to these technical mechanics, it raises questions.

[Jiggy]

Yeah, anyone who truly understands touch spells won't have much trouble with the magus. Unfortunately, most people don't understand touch spells. We have official FAQs that affirm the magus' ability to do things that the Core Rulebook already explicitly allows every spellcaster to do, because there were so many people who were so clueless about touch spells but didn't realize it until the magus arrived.

[claudekennilol]

Jiggy wrote:

Yeah, anyone who truly understands touch spells won't have much trouble with the magus. Unfortunately, most people don't understand touch spells. We have official FAQs that affirm the magus' ability to do things that the Core Rulebook already explicitly allows every spellcaster to do, because there were so many people who were so clueless about touch spells but didn't realize it until the magus arrived.

I recently had to correct a PFS GM with multiple stars that posted saying that you can't snidely cast a spell then 5' step up then deliver the spell via spellstrike because you have to do it in the same action as casting the spell.

Not that "being PFS" makes him more official or anything, I'm just saying that he was definitely an experienced GM.

[Cyrad]

claudekennilol wrote:

Jiggy wrote:

Yeah, anyone who truly understands touch spells won't have much trouble with the magus. Unfortunately, most people don't understand touch spells. We have official FAQs that affirm the magus' ability to do things that the Core Rulebook already explicitly allows every spellcaster to do, because there were so many people who were so clueless about touch spells but didn't realize it until the magus arrived.

I recently had to correct a PFS GM with multiple stars that posted saying that you can't snidely cast a spell then 5' step up then deliver the spell via spellstrike because you have to do it in the same action as casting the spell.

Not that "being PFS" makes him more official or anything, I'm just saying that he was definitely an experienced GM.

That's incredibly baffling because the rules explicitly say that casting and delivering are not the same action and that you can move in between them.

[Bigdaddyjug]

I think the biggest issue is that the majority of people decline to read any of the rules or mechanics that don't affect their characters. I find that the people who understand the rules the best are the ones that have the most characters, because they have to have a broad understanding of the rules.

[claudekennilol]

Cyrad wrote:

claudekennilol wrote:

Jiggy wrote:

Yeah, anyone who truly understands touch spells won't have much trouble with the magus. Unfortunately, most people don't understand touch spells. We have official FAQs that affirm the magus' ability to do things that the Core Rulebook already explicitly allows every spellcaster to do, because there were so many people who were so clueless about touch spells but didn't realize it until the magus arrived.

I recently had to correct a PFS GM with multiple stars that posted saying that you can't snidely cast a spell then 5' step up then deliver the spell via spellstrike because you have to do it in the same action as casting the spell.

Not that "being PFS" makes him more official or anything, I'm just saying that he was definitely an experienced GM.

That's incredibly baffling because the rules explicitly say that casting and delivering are not the same action and that you can move in between them.

That's exactly what I pointed out to him ;).

Bigdaddyjug wrote:

I think the biggest issue is that the majority of people decline to read any of the rules or mechanics that don't affect their characters. I find that the people who understand the rules the best are the ones that have the most characters, because they have to have a broad understanding of the rules.

I definitely agree. I haven't played a ton of different characters, but I've planned out a ton of different characters and have been amazed at how many more rules I pick up this way. Also reading the rules forum helps a bunch because you get insight on the misunderstood stuff.

For instance, from what I've seen, it appears that a lot of GMs in the PFS forum think that Improved Natural Attack and Strong Jaw stack because "size bonuses stack" while the majority on the rules forum think that it doesn't because of the FAQ saying "like bonuses don't stack".

As an aside, the lvl 7 hunter pregen's "cheat sheet" specifically says they stack. But that can't be taken as official..

[Bigdaddyjug]

I currently have 24 characters registered for PFS, plus the level 14 ninja I was playing in a home game. Granted, I've only got credit on about 13 of those PFS characters, but I still need to know the rules affecting the other 11.

[Ravingdork]

I can vouch for both errant PFS GMs (who often act as though they think they are better than normal GMs I find) as well as for how easy it is to pick up extra rules knowledge when making a variety of characters.

Nefreet wrote:

Grick's Guide to Touch Spells and Spellstrike covers all these options in great detail.

It's one of the most "liked" documents in all of the Paizo Forums. It's good stuff.

That really is a marvelous thread. Even taught me a few things. :D

(But it doesn't have nearly as many likes as my Character Emporium. ;P )

[Nefreet]

Hence why I said "one of" =P

[kinevon]

Cyrad wrote:

claudekennilol wrote:

Jiggy wrote:

Yeah, anyone who truly understands touch spells won't have much trouble with the magus. Unfortunately, most people don't understand touch spells. We have official FAQs that affirm the magus' ability to do things that the Core Rulebook already explicitly allows every spellcaster to do, because there were so many people who were so clueless about touch spells but didn't realize it until the magus arrived.

I recently had to correct a PFS GM with multiple stars that posted saying that you can't snidely cast a spell then 5' step up then deliver the spell via spellstrike because you have to do it in the same action as casting the spell.

Not that "being PFS" makes him more official or anything, I'm just saying that he was definitely an experienced GM.

That's incredibly baffling because the rules explicitly say that casting and delivering are not the same action and that you can move in between them.

Actually, it is related to an issue many GMs have, not understanding that you can make a 5' step in the middle of a full attack, as well as before or after it. Especially if you have multiple attacks during a full attack.

Then again, some GMs roll all an NPC's attacks at once, and just apply all the damage in bulk. Even when the PC would probably go unconscious after the first attack.

[claudekennilol]

kinevon wrote:

Then again, some GMs roll all an NPC's attacks at once, and just apply all the damage in bulk. Even when the PC would probably go unconscious after the first attack.

Trust me, I am intimately aware of that..

[blackbloodtroll]

I think the weirdest ruling I have had a PFS judge make, was that I could not attack an enemy who was grappling an ally, with a club, or bite, as I was told "You might hit your ally", and had to use a dagger, which I did not have. He even went so far, as to tell me, that my PC had "forgotten" a dagger I had(which I didn't).

I was so flabbergasted, I paused for for an uncomfortably long time, and just decided it wasn't worth arguing.

I just attacked with the dagger, that I didn't have.

[Ravingdork]

blackbloodtroll wrote:

I think the weirdest ruling I have had a PFS judge make, was that I could not attack an enemy who was grappling an ally, with a club, or bite, as I was told "You might hit your ally", and had to use a dagger, which I did not have. He even went so far, as to tell me, that my PC had "forgotten" a dagger I had(which I didn't).

I was so flabbergasted, I paused for for an uncomfortably long time, and just decided it wasn't worth arguing.

I just attacked with the dagger, that I didn't have.

I've found many PFS judges to be similarly hilarious. If I wasn't so lazy, I might actually consider becoming one just to set a higher standard.

[Jiggy]

Ravingdork wrote:

I've found many PFS judges to be similarly hilarious.

Out of what kind of sample size?

Quote:

If I wasn't so lazy, I might actually consider becoming one just to set a higher standard.

That's actually exactly what started The Legend of Doug Miles. He's now a somewhat famous 5-star GM, and I hope I get the chance to play under him someday. :)

[Ravingdork]

Jiggy wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

I've found many PFS judges to be similarly hilarious.

Out of what kind of sample size?

I've played under ~12 PFS GMs in Florida who have ranged from lots of fun and fairly competent to not really fun and totally clueless.

[kinevon]

Ravingdork wrote:

Jiggy wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

I've found many PFS judges to be similarly hilarious.

Out of what kind of sample size?

I've played under ~12 PFS GMs in Florida who have ranged from lots of fun and fairly competent to not really fun and totally clueless.

I have had home game GMs who can fit in that spectrum. I mean, what kind of GM gives the PCs the full set of Dragon Orbs when they are 8th and 9th level?

But, just as an FYI, I GM PFS, and try to do it right. Sometimes, if I have had a bad day, I can get a bit defensive, but I try not to. It also mainly happens when my players blindside me with some power that seems to be totally ridiculous.

Last time, it was the badly written rules for witches, where the target saves, gets a round of the bad effect anyhow, and then gets cackled into oblivion. Meh. Didn't help that the range on cackle is not where I saw it,... Worse, since it made wading into melee a bad idea for the bad guy, it made it tougher for me to avoid TPKing the party.

Shipyard Rats:

Level 1 & 2 PCs, against a level 3 negative channeling cleric, party has no channelers, themselves, their main healing is from a wand of cure light wounds. It was ugly.

[blackbloodtroll]

Just to be fair, I have had some pretty rad PFS Judges too.