First of all, I understand how the Magus' spell combat and spell strike work so I don't need the link to Grik's thread :D
I am confused about a line in Spell Strike:
Quote:
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. 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.
I have read several threads. I think one suggests that the character is not directly in front of the target and then casts his touch spell (thus not needing spell combat?). Once the spell is cast on the sword, he takes a 5ft step and attacks.
This doesn't make sense. As far as I know Spell Strike is a part of Spell Combat.
A player in my current group is playing a Magus. He has used Spell Strike without Combat casting while in Melee and the GM let him.
What am I missing?
Spellstrike is not a part of Spell Combat. It modifies the touch spell rules, allowing you to stab someone with Shocking Grasp instead of slapping them with it.
You still need to make Concentration checks to cast in melee, but casting Shocking Grasp as a Standard outside of threatened range, walking up to a foe as a Move, then hitting them with your longsword as a Free in place of the usual touch attack is legit.
ngc7293 wrote: First of all, I understand how the Magus' spell combat and spell strike work so I don't need the link to Grik's thread :D
I am confused about a line in Spell Strike:
Quote:
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. 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.
I have read several threads. I think one suggests that the character is not directly in front of the target and then casts his touch spell (thus not needing spell combat?). Once the spell is cast on the sword, he takes a 5ft step and attacks.
This doesn't make sense. As far as I know Spell Strike is a part of Spell Combat.
A player in my current group is playing a Magus. He has used Spell Strike without Combat casting while in Melee and the GM let him.
What am I missing?
Spell Combat wrote: At 1st level, a magus learns to cast spells and wield his weapons at the same time. This functions much like two-weapon fighting, but the off-hand weapon is a spell that is being cast. To use this ability, the magus must have one hand free (even if the spell being cast does not have somatic components), while wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand. As a full-round action, he can make all of his attacks with his melee weapon at a –2 penalty and can also cast any spell from the magus spell list with a casting time of 1 standard action (any attack roll made as part of this spell also takes this penalty). Spell combat lets you cast and attack in the same full round action. You don't need to do that to use Spellstrike. Spellstrike just lets you do the "touch" part of casting a touch spell through your weapon. In some cases, you might not want or be able to use Spell Combat. You might want to avoid the -2 TWF penalty. More likely, you might need a move action to reach your target. With Spellstrike, you could cast, move up and then make your free attack with your weapon.
ngc7293 wrote: s far as I know Spell Strike is a part of Spell Combat. Not at all. They are completely separate abilities that can be used in combination.
ngc7293 wrote: I think one suggests that the character is not directly in front of the target and then casts his touch spell (thus not needing spell combat?). Once the spell is cast on the sword, he takes a 5ft step and attacks. That is perfectly valid, just as it would be perfectly valid for a wizard to cast shocking grasp, take a 5-foot step, and deliver it. The same would work with casting, moving, and delivering, whether with an ordinary touch attack or with spellstrike. There's an FAQ that explains it fairly well.
ngc7293 wrote: He has used Spell Strike without Combat casting while in Melee and the GM let him. As long as he wasn't adjacent to anyone at the time he cast the spell, that's perfectly fine. Delivering a touch spell, spellstrike or no, does not provoke an attack of opportunity.
Okay, I think I got it. The sentence I bolded is for situations where the Magus has to be in Melee and can't step away.
Yes... or any other time the magus would rather cast, spellstrike, and full-attack than just cast, move, and spellstrike.
I mean, take the magus in your example. Since spell combat allows you to cast before you make your attacks, they would have been perfectly capable of entering spell combat, casting a touch spell while safe from provoking, 5-foot stepping adjacent to their enemy, delivering their touch spell with a weapon attack through spellstrike, then making their normal melee attacks from spell combat. The bolded sentence just means that their spellstrike attack takes a -2 penalty from spell combat like all the others.
In fact, the only reasons why you wouldn't want to use spell combat whenever you're using spellstrike are if you really need a move action or if you really don't need a full-attack. Or if you're limited to a standard action, such as when staggered or in a surprise round. But at times like those, spellstrike works perfectly fine on its own.
ngc7293 wrote: Okay, I think I got it. The sentence I bolded is for situations where the Magus has to be in Melee and can't step away. I think you're still missing something. I'm not sure what though, since you're not entirely clear. Neither Spell Combat nor Spellstrike have anything specifically to do with being in melee range or provoking attacks of opportunity, which it sounds like you're thinking about.
Spell combat lets you cast and attack in the same full round action. Much like two-weapon fighting this gives you a -2 with any attacks in that action.
When you cast a touch attack spell, Spellstrike lets you make the free attack that comes with it with your weapon rather than as a bare handed touch attack.
You can do both together, if the spell you cast with Spell Combat is a touch attack spell, but you don't have to. The sentence you bolded just reiterates that if you're using Spell Combat the free attack from the touch attack spell that Spellstrike lets you use your weapon for also gets that -2 penalty.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
