|
Hi all,
Sorry that I have been asking so many rules questions. I appreciate your help!
So Card Caster Magus modifies spellstrike and lets you used ranged weapons:
"Harrowed Spellstrike: Beginning at 2nd level, a card caster can invest a single thrown weapon with a single touch or ranged spell as part of the spell's normal casting time. The spell must target a single creature, and the spell's range changes to match the thrown weapon's range increment. This ability otherwise functions identically to spellstrike, except it can only be applied to thrown ranged weapons instead of melee attacks."
The problem is that the base Magaus spell combat ability requires melee weapons:
"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). If he casts this spell defensively, he can decide to take an additional penalty on his attack rolls, up to his Intelligence bonus, and add the same amount as a circumstance bonus on his concentration check. If the check fails, the spell is wasted, but the attacks still take the penalty. A magus can choose to cast the spell first or make the weapon attacks first, but if he has more than one attack, he cannot cast the spell between weapon attacks."
So I honestly think that this is basically a problem that Pathfinder is too complicated and so no single developer really understands what the hell is going on. But--that said--what would you say about the following:
* We have a cardcaster magus.
* Who has a dagger in one hand. Note that a dagger is a MELEE weapon.
* They cast a touch spell and using "Harrowed spellstrike" (dagger is ranged) and basic Spell Combat (dagger is melee weapon as well) cast the spell and throw the dagger to inflict the spell on the recipient of the dagger.
Is this okay?
Points to consider:
(1) The developer who created card caster didn't know what the f*ck they were talking about and would have modified spell combat if they had a clue.
(2) A dagger is a melee weapon. So the spell combat condition of needing a melee weapon in one hand and the other hand free is satisfied.
I don't think there is any problem at all. The Card Caster Magus archetype modifies the normal Spellstrike class feature so that you can only use it with thrown ranged weapons.
If it is a thrown ranged weapon, and you have one hand free while using it, then you can use it with Harrowed Spellstrike. Simple as that.
|
|
Thanks Wonderstell!
No other takers? Cowards!
I think this is another case of RAI not being in line with RAW. Obviously, they wanted card casters to be able to have spell combat.
Luckily, however, RAW daggers are melee weapons. Even if--later--you throw them.
So, does anyone else want to take this on?
|
Spell combat and spell strike are two different abilities. As you have stated, raw is that spell combat isn't modified, so you can use spell combat with a melee weapon. If you want to cast a touch spell via harrowed spell strike in the same round you spell combat, you have two options.
1.You can spell combat making melee attacks with the dagger first, and then cast your touch/ranged touch spell, throwing your dagger after you made melee attacks. Note that if you are still in melee you might trigger two AoOs: one for casting and one for making a ranged attack.
2. Cast the spell and make your dagger throw first, and then quick draw or ricochet toss the dagger and make your melee attacks.
The better option is to house rule spell combat to work with ranged attacks, but that is between you and your GM, and won't work for pfs.
I might have to side with the notion that if you are throwing the dagger, you are using it as a ranged thrown weapon, rather than a melee weapon. So, throwing it doesn't qualify as "attacks with a melee weapon", and thus interferes with Spell Combat.
Though I am certainly in favor of using exact word technicalities to bring an archetype to where it's supposed to be. It feels like the right kind of Lawful Good.