So I've been looking in the forums up and down and on other rules websites etc for a ruling on how spellstrike works 2 handed?
I've seen a lot of contention about people interpreting the rules different ways but really i'm looking for the official ruling on this (by the way what is RAW?).
Also how does being a staff magus and having the quarterstaff master feat fit into all of this. This feat allows me to use my weapon one or two handed each turn, however I have to decide whether I use it one or two handed before each turn. Does that mean that the feat actually stops you from spellstriking 2 handed as you can't use a "free" action to switch hands as specifically stated in the feat?
Weird, so does that mean that someone without that feat has an advantage over someone with it?
Thanks for your help!
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
dkeller wrote: So I've been looking in the forums up and down and on other rules websites etc for a ruling on how spellstrike works 2 handed?
I've seen a lot of contention about people interpreting the rules different ways but really i'm looking for the official ruling on this (by the way what is RAW?).
The "official ruling" is what's written in the rulebooks. That's as official as it gets.
And in the Core Rulebook, it says that non-light weapons can be wielded two-handed. Nothing in the Spellstrike class feature provides any kind of exception to this. So that's all there is to it.
(Note that Spell Combat, which is very different from Spellstrike, DOES prohibit two-handed wielding. If you've found arguments/contention on the topic, it's probably mostly the result of people getting the two confused.)
Theoretically, "RAW" is an acronym for "Rules As Written," but most people use the term to mean something more like "an interpretation that isn't specifically called out as untrue," which is subtly (but significantly) different. For instance, if someone made the claim that druids aren't allowed to use metal weapons, that would not be something supported by "rules as written", but it is something that the rules don't specifically call out as being untrue. People very often defend stances like that as being "RAW", all while thinking they're talking about "rules as written".
Quote: Also how does being a staff magus and having the quarterstaff master feat fit into all of this. This feat allows me to use my weapon one or two handed each turn, however I have to decide whether I use it one or two handed before each turn. Does that mean that the feat actually stops you from spellstriking 2 handed as you can't use a "free" action to switch hands as specifically stated in the feat?
Weird, so does that mean that someone without that feat has an advantage over someone with it?
Normally, a quarterstaff is always a two-handed weapon, making it impossible to attack with it at all if you're not using both hands.
This came up in a topic of mine and it was said two handed spell strike is doable but spell combat is not doable with two handing. I know nothing about the specifics of a staff magus tho.
Spell Combat requires a one-handed or light weapon. Quarterstaff Master exists, for the Staff Magus, to enable that, by allowing a quarterstaff to be wielded as a one-handed weapon.
Spellstrike can be used with every melee weapon under the sun. Use it however you like.
That said, if you're using the two in conjunction, you can't switch grips to wield the staff in two hands while you Spellstrike, because Spell Combat demands a one-handed weapon.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
It is a free action to hold the weapon in one hand. You can cast a spell then (free action) regrip the weapon Two Handed to spell strike with it.
Using the quarterstaff as a one handed weapon allows you to use spell combat, which you can't do with a two handed weapon.
Of course, I am not official, but it is something that is being gone over in another thread.
dkeller wrote: So I've been looking in the forums up and down and on other rules websites etc for a ruling on how spellstrike works 2 handed?
I've seen a lot of contention about people interpreting the rules different ways but really i'm looking for the official ruling on this (by the way what is RAW?).
Spellstrike can be used with any weapon. It says so in the description. You can use 2 hands if you like. It is Spell Combat that can't be performed while wielding a weapon with two hands.
dkeller wrote: Also how does being a staff magus and having the quarterstaff master feat fit into all of this. This feat allows me to use my weapon one or two handed each turn, however I have to decide whether I use it one or two handed before each turn. Does that mean that the feat actually stops you from spellstriking 2 handed as you can't use a "free" action to switch hands as specifically stated in the feat? You're going to have to be more clear here. Are you trying to use Spell Combat and Spellstrike in the same round, or just use Spellstrike?
dkeller wrote: Weird, so does that mean that someone without that feat has an advantage over someone with it?
Thanks for your help!
No. Someone without the feat can't use a quarterstaff one-handed at all. Having the feat opens up options. It doesn't close any.
Edit: Beaten by a swarm of ninja's!
Quarterstaff Master lets you treat a Quarterstaff as a 1-h weapon instead of a 2-h weapon. But even a 1-h weapon can be wielded in two hands for extra Str to damage. You still can't use it as a double weapon if you've decided to treat it as 1-h for that round, but that doesn't prevent you from using it as a 1-h weapon wielded in two hands.
So you can spellcombat a spell in your off hand, then two hand your longsword and whack someone with it? This doesn't violate 'hand economy'?
Kwauss wrote: So you can spellcombat a spell in your off hand, then two hand your longsword and whack someone with it? This doesn't violate 'hand economy'? Spell Combat requires the hand to be free throughout the duration so no, you couldn't do that. However, if you were not using Spell Combat, you could cast, say, Shocking Grasp just as a Standard Cast a Spell action with a weapon held in one hand (1-h or 2-h, it doesn't matter) and then two-hand it for the delivery.
Jiggy wrote: The "official ruling" is what's written in the rulebooks. That's as official as it gets.
And in the Core Rulebook, it says that non-light weapons can be wielded two-handed. Nothing in the Spellstrike class feature provides any kind of exception to this. So that's all there is to it. END QUOTE
---------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the information Jiggy. Sorry I don't think I was asking the right question. So yes, Spellstrike can be used 2 handed as you mentioned, but can it be used as follows and in one turn?:
1. Hold 2-handed weapon one handed
2. Cast spell using free hand (casting any spell that has somatic components requires a free hand)
3. Grab weapon 2-handed again
3. Utilize spellstrike to deliver spell with two-handed weapon
In many posts there were arguments about whether it is RAW (thanks for clarifying that by the way!) to do that in one turn, i.e. use a free action to go from 2 to one handed with the weapon.
Does it make a difference if the weapon you are holding is 1 or 2 handed or if you have the quarterstaff master feat and are wielding a staff?
For that particular set of actions? No, it doesn't make a difference. You're good.
One-handed weapon/Quarterstaff Master is a requirement for Spell Combat, but you can Spellstrike away with a two-hander to your heart's content. It's a bad idea, mechanically, but you can do it.
But can you do all of that in one turn?
What i'm wondering though is how I can complete all those actions in one turn?
Casting a spell is typically a standard action and I'll need one hand free to do that (if it has somatic components which most spells do).
After casting the spell, I'll need to put the weapon back in both hands, which I"m not allowed to do according to the quartermaster feat (i.e. you must choose to wield your staff two or one handed at the beginning of your turn).
Based on that feat, how I am able to switch hands with the weapon during my turn?
Kazaan wrote: Quarterstaff Master lets you treat a Quarterstaff as a 1-h weapon instead of a 2-h weapon. But even a 1-h weapon can be wielded in two hands for extra Str to damage. You still can't use it as a double weapon if you've decided to treat it as 1-h for that round, but that doesn't prevent you from using it as a 1-h weapon wielded in two hands. I think it does prevent that. The feat doesn't say that it lets you "treat a Quarterstaff as a 1-h weapon" in all respects. What it does is let you "wield a quarterstaff as a one-handed weapon" with some specific restrictions on what that means.
Ultimate Magic wrote: Quarterstaff Master (Combat)
You can wield a quarterstaff as either a two-handed or one-handed weapon.
Prerequisites: Weapon Focus (quarterstaff), base attack bonus +5.
Benefit: By employing a number of different stances and techniques, you can wield a quarterstaff as a one-handed weapon. At the start of your turn, you decide whether or not you are going to wield the quarterstaff as a one-handed or two-handed weapon. When you wield it as a one-handed weapon, your other hand is free, and you cannot use the staff as a double weapon. You can take the feat Weapon Specialization in the quarterstaff even if you have no levels in fighter.
Ordinarily a one-handed weapon can be wielded with two hands to get the 1.5x Str bonus (rapiers and whips being exceptions), but in this case it specifically states that "[w]hen you wield it as a one-handed weapon, your other hand is free." If your other hand is free, then you can't hold the staff with both hands, anymore than you can use both ends.
As I read the feat, it only allows the character to treat the quarterstaff as a one-handed weapon when you have declared that you will wield it as a one-handed weapon that turn and when you are actually wielding it in one hand. Of course this is exactly what you need for Spell Combat, but it would preclude you getting the 1.5x Str bonus while you have declared that you are wielding it as a one-handed weapon.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
You don't want to spellstrike two handed even as a staff magus.
You want to stay one handed, do your spell combat, and spellstrike, and get that extra spell enhanced attack on top of your normal iteratives. Especially if you're goosing your attack damage with Arcane Strike on each hit.
dkeller wrote: What i'm wondering though is how I can complete all those actions in one turn?
Casting a spell is typically a standard action and I'll need one hand free to do that (if it has somatic components which most spells do).
After casting the spell, I'll need to put the weapon back in both hands, which I"m not allowed to do according to the quartermaster feat (i.e. you must choose to wield your staff two or one handed at the beginning of your turn).
Based on that feat, how I am able to switch hands with the weapon during my turn?
In the case you are describing, you would declare that you will wield your staff as a two-handed weapon.
You remove one hand and cast the spell (which any caster can do.)
You put your formally free hand back on your staff.
You use Spellstrike to deliver the spell through a two-handed blow from your staff.
As LazarX points out, it isn't a great strategy, but you are capable of doing it.
If, however, you are still carrying multiple charges from a Frostbite spell cast in the previous round, delivering them with a two-handed full attack can be nice.
dkeller wrote: What i'm wondering though is how I can complete all those actions in one turn?
Casting a spell is typically a standard action and I'll need one hand free to do that (if it has somatic components which most spells do).
After casting the spell, I'll need to put the weapon back in both hands, which I"m not allowed to do according to the quartermaster feat (i.e. you must choose to wield your staff two or one handed at the beginning of your turn).
Based on that feat, how I am able to switch hands with the weapon during my turn?
You are wielding you quarterstaff as a two-handed weapon. That means it functions like every two-handed weapon-- which means you can take a hand off of it.
What you can't do is attack with a hand off it without invoking Quarterstaff Master. But you're not attacking with it, you're casting a spell.
LazarX wrote: You don't want to spellstrike two handed even as a staff magus.
You want to stay one handed, do your spell combat, and spellstrike, and get that extra spell enhanced attack on top of your normal iteratives. Especially if you're goosing your attack damage with Arcane Strike on each hit.
It's a decent trick at low-levels, especially if you need to stay mobile. Not a default strategy though.
Gisher wrote: As LazarX points out, it isn't a great strategy, but you are capable of doing it. First, it's a pretty good trick to do after moving, second a Blade Adept can get Spellstrike without having access to Spell Combat or anything else that would make him want to use one hand instead of two.
NikolaiJuno wrote: Gisher wrote: As LazarX points out, it isn't a great strategy, but you are capable of doing it. First, it's a pretty good trick to do after moving, second a Blade Adept can get Spellstrike without having access to Spell Combat or anything else that would make him want to use one hand instead of two. A Blade Adept probably doesn't want to be anywhere near Spellstrike though. Or... their blade.
Great stuff everyone, thanks for the insight. I agree, it's probably not something I want to specialize in, but could be helpful when I don't have a full round attack available when I have to move to close anyways.
Overall, I see it's use somewhat limited to those kind of situations but then it's not bad (although I might be better to just cast some stuff at range in that case!).
Gisher wrote: Kazaan wrote: Quarterstaff Master lets you treat a Quarterstaff as a 1-h weapon instead of a 2-h weapon. But even a 1-h weapon can be wielded in two hands for extra Str to damage. You still can't use it as a double weapon if you've decided to treat it as 1-h for that round, but that doesn't prevent you from using it as a 1-h weapon wielded in two hands. I think it does prevent that. The feat doesn't say that it lets you "treat a Quarterstaff as a 1-h weapon" in all respects. What it does is let you "wield a quarterstaff as a one-handed weapon" with some specific restrictions on what that means. Six of one, a half dozen of the other. "Treat a Quarterstaff as a 1-h weapon" and "wield a quarterstaff as a one-handed weapon" functionally mean the same exact thing. Granted, you still can't wield it as a 1-h weapon in 2 hands during Spell Combat because of SC's specific limitations, but after you finish your Spell Combat action, you can use your other hand and you're, effectively, wielding a 1-h weapon with two hands, meaning you get 1.5x Str on AoOs (and higher Power Attack bonus if you're using Power Attack). That's the only real benefit and it's an insignificant one at best; but it is most certainly valid.
Kazaan wrote: Gisher wrote: Kazaan wrote: Quarterstaff Master lets you treat a Quarterstaff as a 1-h weapon instead of a 2-h weapon. But even a 1-h weapon can be wielded in two hands for extra Str to damage. You still can't use it as a double weapon if you've decided to treat it as 1-h for that round, but that doesn't prevent you from using it as a 1-h weapon wielded in two hands. I think it does prevent that. The feat doesn't say that it lets you "treat a Quarterstaff as a 1-h weapon" in all respects. What it does is let you "wield a quarterstaff as a one-handed weapon" with some specific restrictions on what that means. Six of one, a half dozen of the other. "Treat a Quarterstaff as a 1-h weapon" and "wield a quarterstaff as a one-handed weapon" functionally mean the same exact thing. Granted, you still can't wield it as a 1-h weapon in 2 hands during Spell Combat because of SC's specific limitations, but after you finish your Spell Combat action, you can use your other hand and you're, effectively, wielding a 1-h weapon with two hands, meaning you get 1.5x Str on AoOs (and higher Power Attack bonus if you're using Power Attack). That's the only real benefit and it's an insignificant one at best; but it is most certainly valid. I was talking about the restriction from Quarterstaff Master, not the one from Spell Combat. But I agree with you that it probably won't come up often enough to matter.
This situation just came up in a PFS scenario that I played in. It's kind of amusing, as the Staff Master Magus was lv.5, and was still confused on how to play with Spellstrike. Basically, he wanted to move to an enemy, cast shocking grasp, enchant his weapon, and smack the enemy with the quarterstaff, delivering the spell. It seemed very complicated to him, but once the explanation of how to do all this came out, it was actually pretty simple to understand.
1) he cast the spell.
2) he moved adjacent to the enemy.
3) he enchanted his weapon.
4) he clobbered the bejessus out of the enemy, dealing 1d6+1+1.5x STR with the quarterstaff, 1d6 points of electricity damage via his shock enchantment, and a further 5d6 points of electricity damage from the shocking grasp.
The next round, he decided to throw spell combat into the mix, as the BBEG moved up to attack him. He declared that he was using the staff 1-handed, then cast his spell defensively. He then proceeded to attack the BBEG twice (at-2 for spell combat), striking for 1d6+1+STR +1d6 electricity +spell effect on the first attack, then 1d6+1+STR +1d6 electricity on the second attack.
Gisher wrote: Kazaan wrote: Gisher wrote: Kazaan wrote: Quarterstaff Master lets you treat a Quarterstaff as a 1-h weapon instead of a 2-h weapon. But even a 1-h weapon can be wielded in two hands for extra Str to damage. You still can't use it as a double weapon if you've decided to treat it as 1-h for that round, but that doesn't prevent you from using it as a 1-h weapon wielded in two hands. I think it does prevent that. The feat doesn't say that it lets you "treat a Quarterstaff as a 1-h weapon" in all respects. What it does is let you "wield a quarterstaff as a one-handed weapon" with some specific restrictions on what that means. Six of one, a half dozen of the other. "Treat a Quarterstaff as a 1-h weapon" and "wield a quarterstaff as a one-handed weapon" functionally mean the same exact thing. Granted, you still can't wield it as a 1-h weapon in 2 hands during Spell Combat because of SC's specific limitations, but after you finish your Spell Combat action, you can use your other hand and you're, effectively, wielding a 1-h weapon with two hands, meaning you get 1.5x Str on AoOs (and higher Power Attack bonus if you're using Power Attack). That's the only real benefit and it's an insignificant one at best; but it is most certainly valid. I was talking about the restriction from Quarterstaff Master, not the one from Spell Combat. But I agree with you that it probably won't come up often enough to matter. I just did a careful re-reading of the Core description of double-weapons, and I think you were right in the first place.
The free Spellstrike attack should be able to be done two handed because the free attack is not related to the two-weapon fightingness of Spell Combat, especially if the spell casting is done last.
galahad2112 wrote: This situation just came up in a PFS scenario that I played in. It's kind of amusing, as the Staff Master Magus was lv.5, and was still confused on how to play with Spellstrike. Basically, he wanted to move to an enemy, cast shocking grasp, enchant his weapon, and smack the enemy with the quarterstaff, delivering the spell. It seemed very complicated to him, but once the explanation of how to do all this came out, it was actually pretty simple to understand.
1) he cast the spell.
2) he moved adjacent to the enemy.
3) he enchanted his weapon.
4) he clobbered the bejessus out of the enemy, dealing 1d6+1+1.5x STR with the quarterstaff, 1d6 points of electricity damage via his shock enchantment, and a further 5d6 points of electricity damage from the shocking grasp.
The next round, he decided to throw spell combat into the mix, as the BBEG moved up to attack him. He declared that he was using the staff 1-handed, then cast his spell defensively. He then proceeded to attack the BBEG twice (at-2 for spell combat), striking for 1d6+1+STR +1d6 electricity +spell effect on the first attack, then 1d6+1+STR +1d6 electricity on the second attack.
Yep. That's the way to do it. My Staff Magus is also a Hexcrafter with a familiar and armor glamoured to look like regular clothes. I like to stay about 20 from a group of enemies casting spells and piling on hexes until they decide to close in and shut down that annoying "witch." I love hearing the cries of "He's not a witch! Run away!" when my staff starts swinging. :)
NikolaiJuno wrote: The free Spellstrike attack should be able to be done two handed because the free attack is not related to the two-weapon fightingness of Spell Combat, especially if the spell casting is done last. To be clear, Spellstrike doesn't give you a free attack. Casting the spell is what gives you the free attack. If you use that attack during the full-round action that is Spell Combat, then you have to abide by the "one hand must be free" restriction.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Attacking twice? You mean once with the staff and once with the spell, right?
@ thaX
ummmm.... Who are you talking to?
If you're talking to me about the second round of attacks in my example, the Magus attacked twice with his quarterstaff, and one of those attacks (the first one to hit) delivered the effects of the spell.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Being one handed, the quarterstaff can't be use as a double weapon that round. Spell Combat hits with the weapon once and the spell once. Being 5 level, he does not have a BAB high enough for iterative attacks. I don't believe you can use Spell Combat and Spell Strike at the same time, can you?
I will admit, I am not well versed on the Magus, but it does seem to be two separate abilities.
Not to stir the pot, but what about a magus with more than 2 hands, either through class features or race choice. Could a 3 or 4 handed magus wield his one handed weapon with two hands during spell combat?
They are indeed 2 separate abilities.
They can be used independently OR together.
Spell Combat lets you cast a spell AND get an attack.
Spellstrike lets you deliver a touch spell with a melee attack.
When a Magus casts a touch spell, using Spell Combat, he gets 2 attacks, one to deliver the touch spell via Spellstrike, and one as a regular attack that he is entitled to from using the Spell Combat action.
Even a level 1 Magus WITHOUT Spellstrike will make 2 attacks when casting a touch spell with Spell Combat. One attack will be a touch attack that originates with the casting of a touch spell. The other will be his regular attack from using Spell Combat.
The only thing that Spellstrike does is modify HOW the free attack, that ANY caster of a touch spell gets from casting a touch spell, is delivered.
Spellstrike does NOT grant a free attack. Casting a touch spell DOES.
Gisher wrote: To be clear, Spellstrike doesn't give you a free attack. Casting the spell is what gives you the free attack. Yup, completely true, and not in contradiction to what I said.
Gisher wrote: If you use that attack during the full-round action that is Spell Combat, then you have to abide by the "one hand must be free" restriction. You can cast at the end of spell combat and the free attack from the spell doesn't have to be done inside the action that granted it.
thaX wrote: Being one handed, the quarterstaff can't be use as a double weapon that round. Spell Combat hits with the weapon once and the spell once. Being 5 level, he does not have a BAB high enough for iterative attacks. I don't believe you can use Spell Combat and Spell Strike at the same time, can you?
I will admit, I am not well versed on the Magus, but it does seem to be two separate abilities.
Spellstrike isn't even an action. You can use it with basically anything you want. If you cast a touch spell--with or without Spell Combat--then you get a free action to deliver that spell. Spellstrike modifies that delivery to be done with a melee weapon. That's all it does. "Your weapon can deliver touch spells".
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
OK, just re-read it. It makes sense now.
I was thinking the extra 1d6 electrical damage was the spell effect.
It wasn't the droid I was looking for... moving on... moving on......
NikolaiJuno wrote: Gisher wrote: To be clear, Spellstrike doesn't give you a free attack. Casting the spell is what gives you the free attack. Yup, completely true, and not in contradiction to what I said.
Gisher wrote: If you use that attack during the full-round action that is Spell Combat, then you have to abide by the "one hand must be free" restriction. You can cast at the end of spell combat and the free attack from the spell doesn't have to be done inside the action that granted it. Oh, yes. Everything you said was correct. I wasn't disagreeing with you. I was trying to add to your statement for those people here who are still struggling to understand how Spell Combat and Spellstrike interact. I should have addressed my post to the OP. Sorry.
NikolaiJuno wrote: You can cast at the end of spell combat and the free attack from the spell doesn't have to be done inside the action that granted it. Ok this is very very intereesting (would love to do this with my magus), but i would like to question this to make sure that I correctly understand what you mean and see if this is valid. When exactly would you use this attack?
CRB p.187:
Full-Round Actions
A full-round action requires an entire round to complete.
Thus, it can’t be coupled with a standard or a move action,
though if it does not involve moving any distance, you can
take a 5-foot step.
So since a full round action such as spellcombat takes the entire round to complete, when exactly would you take this attack?
thanks
Cuttler wrote: NikolaiJuno wrote: You can cast at the end of spell combat and the free attack from the spell doesn't have to be done inside the action that granted it. Ok this is very very intereesting (would love to do this with my magus), but i would like to question this to make sure that I correctly understand what you mean and see if this is valid. When exactly would you use this attack?
CRB p.187:
Full-Round Actions
A full-round action requires an entire round to complete.
Thus, it can’t be coupled with a standard or a move action,
though if it does not involve moving any distance, you can
take a 5-foot step.
So since a full round action such as spellcombat takes the entire round to complete, when exactly would you take this attack?
thanks You could take the attack in the same manner in which a character could make a full-attack with their Temple Sword wielded in both hands and then remove one hand as a free action to have a free hand for the purpose of Catch Arrows or other rules elements that require having one hand free.
There are a couple of ways to play this. The spell cast during the Spell Combat full-round action can be either before the attack(s) or after. So at level 8, a Magus has a BAB of +6/+1 and could have Spell Combat as follows: First attack at +6, then second attack at +1, then cast a spell (and resolve another attack at +6 if it's a touch spell). OR he could choose to first cast a spell (and resolve accordingly), then take his first attack at +6, and finally his second attack at +1.
He specifically CANNOT make his first attack at +6, then cast a spell, and finish by making his second attack at +1.
The free attack granted by a touch spell must come in the same round as the casting of the spell. However, it does NOT need to be used in the same action. When talking about a full-round action, though, things get complicated, since we are now talking about both a unit of time AND a specific type of action. Kind of like a kilowatt-hour or a foot-pound. It's a little complex.
Usually, what this means is that you can cast a spell as a standard action, do whatever else you can with the remaining actions available to you (move, smite evil, activate a style feat, spend a ki point, stand up, whatever), and THEN take your free attack to end your turn.
With the Spell Combat full-round action, the best you could really do is take all of your attacks from BAB, then cast a spell, then 5-foot step, take a swift action (smite, activate arcane strike, use an arcane pool point, etc), maybe some free actions (give a blistering rap, and drop the mic), and THEN take your free attack.
Should you choose not to take the free attack during the same round in which you cast the touch spell, you will NEVER get the opportunity to do so. You will continue to hold the charge on the spell until you discharge it (usually via a successful attack), but the free attack granted as part of casting the spell is gone forever.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
