...
1) TWF(unarmed strike + longsword) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword)
AFAICT, TWF mechanics only apply during the attack, so changing your grip afterwards doesn't run afoul of "hands of effort".
2) TWF(unarmed strike + longsword) + SW(quickened shocking grasp) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword) + FA(spellstrike attack)
Likewise, TWF doesn't impact actions after the full attack, so casting, changing grip and attacking is legit.
3) Spell Combat(shield + longsword) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword)
Spell combat just requires a free hand during the action, so changing grip afterwards is legit.
4) Spell Combat(shield + longsword) + SW(quickened shocking grasp) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword) + FA(spellstrike attack)
Likewise, hands of effort only applies during spell combat, so this is fine.
5) Spell Combat(shocking grasp + longsword) + FA(spellstrike attack)
This is the standard Spellcombat+Spellstrike routine, so yes, it's fine. I am assuming you are doing the attack routine first and the spell last, though.
6) Spell Combat(shocking grasp + longsword) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword) + FA(spellstrike attack)
Assuming you cast the shocking grasp last so you are still holding the charge after the entire attack routine and are no longer bound to hands of effort, you are fine.
7) Spell Combat(shocking grasp + longsword) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword) + FA(spellstrike attack) + FA(change grip to 1-hand longsword) + SW(quickened shocking grasp) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword) + FA(spellstrike attack)
Spell combat's handedness restrictions don't apply afterwards, and everything else in that sequence appears to be legit, so it's fine.
I'd say yes to all but 6 & 7.
Reason is for spell that ur using in spell combat cannot be delivered with a 2 handed. Casting a spell and using a 2 handed to deliver is fine, but not if that spell if the one ur casting in spell combat.
dot
In order to clarify some issues, I thought I would get opinions as to what the rules say regarding the use of free actions (and swift actions) after full attack actions.
According to the rules, as I understand them, free actions can be taken before, during, or after other actions, including full attack actions.
Which of the following examples, if any, would be illegal, and why?
Let's assume the DM doesn't impose a restriction on the number of FA (free actions). Assume a Magus character. In each case, the FA, or SW (swift action) is supposed to take place after the designated full-attack action.
1) TWF(unarmed strike + longsword) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword)
2) TWF(unarmed strike + longsword) + SW(quickened shocking grasp) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword) + FA(spellstrike attack)
3) Spell Combat(shield + longsword) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword)
4) Spell Combat(shield + longsword) + SW(quickened shocking grasp) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword) + FA(spellstrike attack)
5) Spell Combat(shocking grasp + longsword) + FA(spellstrike attack)
6) Spell Combat(shocking grasp + longsword) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword) + FA(spellstrike attack)
7) Spell Combat(shocking grasp + longsword) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword) + FA(spellstrike attack) + FA(change grip to 1-hand longsword) + SW(quickened shocking grasp) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword) + FA(spellstrike attack)
My synopsis:
1. Yes. There is a FAQ that says you can switch grips as a Free Action, and that you can both apply and remove a grip on a weapon once per round, which is what the FAQ states as a guideline, providing an example with a Wizard using a Quarterstaff who wishes to cast a spell. Now, if said Wizard was casting a Melee Touch Spell, he would have to successfully discharge the spell, otherwise if he tried to regrip the Quarterstaff with the spell effect still remaining, the spell would inadvertantly discharge onto the Quarterstaff. He would otherwise still threaten with the Touch Spell, as he's holding the charge.
Of course, in the original example, this is presuming that the unarmed strike is made with a hand, which isn't necessary. Since elbows, knees, feet, and headbutts are likewise possible limbs to carry out an unarmed strike, which don't require a hand (in the literal sense), doesn't break the unwritten rule, it lets you carry something in that hand while still legally performing TWF (including a touch spell, if so desired). The only requirement would be that you carry out all of your unarmed strike attacks with the limb you originally designated, and that you don't switch grips or anything at any point during the TWF action. After your TWF is completed? You're game to have whatever grip-change you like.
2. This one is the same as the first, except allowing a Quickened Spell. It's slightly more tricky, but based on this FAQ allowing a given spellcast to be delivered via Spellstrike as if you were delivering a spell normally, even if you can move and such, it's a non-issue, even with the free action grip change. Since the inclusion (or exclusion) of a move action (or in this example, a 5-foot step) doesn't create a causal disconnect between the two actions any more than if it wasn't necessary to move in range, it should still be fine.
3. Effectively the same as #1.
4. A combined effort of #3 and part of #2. Since Shield will (presumably) be automatically cast on yourself, Shocking Grasp being cast as a Swift Action is practically a non-issue. The thing is that the Quickened Spell can be both cast and discharged during Spell Combat. The issue here then stems from the factor that Spell Combat requires your spell-hand be free for the entirety of the action, meaning attempting a grip-change at that juncture is impossible. In addition, you'd have to be careful with the Shield Spell; if you decided to Quicken a Shocking Grasp, miss with your free and regular attacks, and then proceeded to cast your Shield spell, the Shocking Grasp spell that you have cast will dissipate.
5. This is basically the same as #3, except instead of casting Shield, you cast Shocking Grasp, and instead of the grip-change action, you perform the Free Touch Attack. Anyone who doesn't allow this clearly doesn't know how Spell Combat is intended to function.
6. This is the same as #5, but including the grip-change action before performing the Free Touch Attack. Obviously, if you attempted to discharge the spell during Spell Combat (i.e. before you committed to your regular weapon attacks), you couldn't perform the grip-change action, since your hand must be free for the entirety of the Spell Combat activity, but once it's completed, you have free reign to do so.
7. This is tacking the addendums listed in #2 and #4 onto the end of #6, and for the most part pose no extra issues in the chain of causality. I will however, note that the entire combination is only possible because of you stating the GM doesn't impose a limitation on Free Actions. Based on the FAQ in #1 stating a fair guideline for GMs to enforce (one release and re-grip), it's very reasonable for a GM to rule that you couldn't deliver one of the two spells you cast as a two-handed Spellstrike (the Quickened or the regular Shocking Grasp, depending on order), as you're breaching the "one release and re-grip" guideline stated within the FAQ. Other than that, basically everything works within that final chain.
So in other words, my synopsis would render (practically) all of these options, as written, to be legal.
Either way, it sets a guideline on both sides of the spectrum, no less than one release/re-grip, and no more than one release/re-grip, and at most tables (especially PFS), it would cause issues.
I'd say yes to all but 6 & 7.
Reason is for spell that ur using in spell combat cannot be delivered with a 2 handed. Casting a spell and using a 2 handed to deliver is fine, but not if that spell if the one ur casting in spell combat.The point of the exercise is that those attacks are free actions taken outside of the Spell Combat full-attack action, so the restriction on the hand being free no longer applies, just like the restriction on 'hands of effort' doesn't apply for TWF in #2 after the full-attack action is finished.
And if you think the 'free hand' restriction lasts for the entire turn, that would invalidate #3 & #4 as well.
Thanks. [/QUOTE
I don't think delivering the first cast of the spell with the spell combat with spell strike in 6 is outside the full attack action though but part of it. I'm of the thought that the Melee attacks and casting AND delivering the spell with spell strike if in the same round is part of the full attack action of spell combat. Now u could hold the charge for next round and spell strike with a 2 handed it be kosher with me, but that's my reading of the rules. I maybe wrong though.
Spell combat is a full round action, not a full attack action,if used the off hand must remain free for the full round.
Spell combat is a full round action, not a full attack action,if used the off hand must remain free for the full round.
It's not like you're trying to cast, say, a Summon Monster spell, which takes 1 round to cast, and has a specific clause that says you're casting the spell until the start of your next turn. Same goes for casting metamagic-enhanced spells like Empowered Fireball, which turns the casting time into a Full Round Action; by that logic, if I was casting an Empowered Fireball while holding a Quarterstaff, I couldn't follow up with a Quickened Fireball because the hand I would use to cast the Quickened Fireball was likewise used for the Empowered Fireball.
It's just plain silly.
Also, take a look at this TWF FAQ.
While Spell Combat has a "like TWF" clause, I'm not bringing the FAQ up because of that (simply because the likening to TWF is a misnomer).
I'm bringing it up because actions such as TWF only apply their restrictions and limitations for as long as you are performing the action. In other words, once the full attack is done, the TWF restrictions and limitations don't apply. Same would go for features like Spell Combat, which let you cast a spell and make a full attack normally, or feats like Hammer the Gap, which augment the damage you deal in a given full attack for each consecutive hit you make.
In both of those instances, it doesn't all-of-a-sudden extend to Attacks of Opportunity since they're both applied as part of a Full Round Action, whereas feats like Power Attack specifically state that its restrictions apply outside of the normal attacks you make, and lasts for a duration longer than the action you take to apply Power Attack's benefits.
In short, because Spell Combat doesn't say its free hand requirement extends until the start of your next turn (or possesses similar language), assuming that it requires a free hand for instances outside of performing Spell Combat is not supported by the rules.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dotting.
I figure at this rate it's only a matter of time until at least 50% of the rules forum is "questions about what the magus is doing with his hands".
Also, my contention is that the swift spell must definitely is NOT part of spell combat, and therefore doesn't get the -2 on the attack. Disagree?Strongly disagree.
What makes the -2 from Spell Combat apply to a Swift Spell that can be done regardless of if Spell Combat is being done or not? Because he's taking Spell Combat?
Read the entry again:
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).
Bolded the relevant activities that the -2 penalty applies to.
So, the spell you cast with Spell Combat, and the melee attacks you make from the full attack allotted from Spell Combat.
And, the Swift Action Spell counts as either of those, how, exactly?
It should apply to any attack made during his turn while using spell combat.Also, my contention is that the swift spell must definitely is NOT part of spell combat, and therefore doesn't get the -2 on the attack. Disagree?Strongly disagree.
What makes the -2 from Spell Combat apply to a Swift Spell that can be done regardless of if Spell Combat is being done or not? Because he's taking Spell Combat?
Read the entry again:
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).Bolded the relevant activities that the -2 penalty applies to.
So, the spell you cast with Spell Combat, and the melee attacks you make from the full attack allotted from Spell Combat.
And, the Swift Action Spell counts as either of those, how, exactly?
Maybe. Maybe not.
But that's not what the ability says you apply the penalty to. So at best, it's conjecture.
It should apply to any attack made during his turn while using spell combat.Also, my contention is that the swift spell must definitely is NOT part of spell combat, and therefore doesn't get the -2 on the attack. Disagree?Strongly disagree.
What makes the -2 from Spell Combat apply to a Swift Spell that can be done regardless of if Spell Combat is being done or not? Because he's taking Spell Combat?
Read the entry again:
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).Bolded the relevant activities that the -2 penalty applies to.
So, the spell you cast with Spell Combat, and the melee attacks you make from the full attack allotted from Spell Combat.
And, the Swift Action Spell counts as either of those, how, exactly?
This isn't true. If the Magus forces an opponent to draw an AoO, the AoO does not suffer the -2 penalty, even if it interrupts the full attack.
yep. and may have been what I was thinking to start withSo, just to clarify the issue from you and Volkard:
if the 'off-hand' must be free for the full round, this would eliminate ANY quickened spells from being cast by the Magus in the same round that he uses Spell Combat. Is this your understanding?
Furthermore, if the Magus started the round with both hands on his weapon, he could not as a free action remove his grip and start Spell Combat.
Do you concur with both of these statements?
Casting a spell with a somatic component requires a free hand, but does not occupy a hand.
Quickened has no impact on this, with or without spell combat.
This is how it works for TWF, I'm surprised that people think Spell Combat is fundamentally different.
To be fair, Spell Combat referencing TWF is a major misnomer, since Spell Combat is fully quantified as an ability of its own, independant from general TWF mechanics. Referencing TWF as a means to quantify something when it already has its own quantifications is a little silly.
So yes, I wouldn't be surprised if people say it's fundamentally different from TWF, because both the mechanics, and the stand-aloneness of Spell Combat, make it so. After all, that's what I say; that it is fundamentally different from TWF, for the reasons I've said above.
But I guess you're saying that you could do a Quickened Spell + 2-H Spellstrike before Spell Combat, but not after?
Why can't you do it during? If Spell Combat requires that the hand is free, casting a Quickened Spell doesn't invalidate that the hand is free.
If you argue that a Quickened Spell invalidates having a free hand, then the act of casting the spell allotted through Spell Combat likewise invalidates the free hand clause (since you're likewise using that hand to fulfill the somatic components of the spell you're casting through the action), and therefore Spell Combat fails upon itself.
Why can't you do it during? If Spell Combat requires that the hand is free, casting a Quickened Spell doesn't invalidate that the hand is free.
If you argue that a Quickened Spell invalidates having a free hand, then the act of casting the spell allotted through Spell Combat likewise invalidates the free hand clause (since you're likewise using that hand to fulfill the somatic components of the spell you're casting through the action), and therefore Spell Combat fails upon itself.
Quickened spell + 2H Spellstrike
So, using both hands on the longsword to deliver the quickened shocking grasp. If done before Spell Combat, one could release as a free action and start Spell Combat.
During Spell Combat would depend on whether people thought a swift action operated completely outside of the confines and restrictions of the full-attack action even if done concurrently with it. I thought before and/or after would be less controversial.
Oh, forgot the two-hand part.
I thought they were arguing that you couldn't do a Quickened Spell whatsoever in Spell Combat...
...Whoops...
|
#5, #6, and #7 do not work, because the free attack is granted as part of casting the spell. It can't be taken outside of the Spell Combat Full Round Action. Spellstrike is not what is granting the free attack. It is only allowing you to make the free attack that the spell grants using your weapon.
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.
Once your full-round action has ended, the Magus is no longer casting the spell. so you can't take the free attack granted by the spell outside of the full-round action of Spell Combat, and you can't two-hand a weapon during the full-round action of Spell Combat.
#5 is trickier than 6 and 7, because of the normal rules about being able to move in between casting the spell and making the touch attack. But I think there's enough there to support the idea that with Spell Combat, you must choose either to make your normal attacks first, then cast the spell (and resolve everything associated with it, including the free attack), or cast the spell first (and resolve everything associated with it, including the free attack), then make your normal attacks.
That being said, I'm trying to think of a situation where it makes a difference. Possibly in the choice of which opponent to attack. Take, for example, an 8th level Magus casting Shocking Grasp. +6/+1 BAB, so two attacks normally. If #5 is allowed, you could end up with something like this:
Begin Spell Combat
Cast Shocking Grasp
First Attack +6 BAB against Opponent #1 (Heavily armored fighter)
Iterative Attack +1 BAB against Opponent #2 (Lightly armored caster)
Free Attack +6 BAB against Opponent #1
When what should happen is one of either:
Begin Spell Combat
Cast Shocking Grasp
Free Attack +6 BAB against Opponent #1
First Attack +6 BAB against Opponent #1 (Heavily armored fighter)
Iterative Attack +1 BAB against Opponent #2 (Lightly armored caster)
or
Begin Spell Combat
First Attack +6 BAB against Opponent #1 (Heavily armored fighter)
Iterative Attack +1 BAB against Opponent #2 (Lightly armored caster)
Cast Shocking Grasp
Free Attack +6 BAB against Opponent #1
I'll admit, I'm not sure how much or what tactical advantage would be gained, but there could be one.
Once your full-round action has ended, the Magus is no longer casting the spell. so you can't take the free attack granted by the spell outside of the full-round action of Spell Combat, and you can't two-hand a weapon during the full-round action of Spell Combat.
According to this FAQ, spellstrike does not actually change any of the rules of delivering a touch spell.
Because you can normally use a standard action to cast a spell, then use a move action, then deliver the spell with a free action(effectively meaning the free action is outside of the standard action), what is different about the magus waiting for spell combat to be over to deliver his spellstrike attack?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Spellstrike ability?
Here's the full ability.
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.
Bolding mine. The attack is part of the casting of the spell, and it must take all penalties accrued by spell combat melee attacks. Those lines would be meaningless if you could just wait until after spell combat is over to make the attack. Not being able to two-hand a weapon is part of the restrictions placed on the attack by spell combat. It is one of the penalties, as is the -2. If you can wait until after Spell Combat is over to make the free attack, then you would be able to get around both of those things.
That raises an interesting question. Do prerequisites count as penalties? From memory, the only thing I can think of that is referred to as a "penalty" are literal minuses to numbers.
|
|
If this were true, a caster also could not use the free action attack outside of the standard action to cast the spell normally. Yet, we know that a caster can use a standard action to cast shocking grasp, use a move action to move, and then use the free action granted by the spell to touch the enemy.I see nothing about a full-attack action, or spell combat, that changes this logic. The free action can take place outside of the action used to cast the spell, just like in the case with the standard action.
The caster can take the free action outside of casting the spell in that you could take a swift action in between, or 5-foot step, because those are actions you are allowed to do during spell combat. The FAQ says that Spellstrike doesn't alter anything about when you can normally deliver the free attack, but you cannot normally deliver the free attack in the same round that you make a full-attack. Spell Combat is what is letting you do that. So again, if you are using Spell Combat, then the free attack is part of Spell Combat. Maybe you could choose to take the free attack before or after your iterative, but it is still within the Spell Combat full-round action, and it still suffers the restrictions of that action (hand must be free and -2 to-hit).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To put it another way:
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.
You are making a full-round action in using Spell Combat. That action lasts your entire round. Whenever you take the free action, it is still during your round, so you are still performing the Spell Combat Full-Round Action. There's no way around that. Even when you perform a swift action, you are still in your combat round and still performing the Spell Combat action. I'm not sure where that leaves the other numbers on the list, but I'm fairly sure 6 and 7 do not work.
|
|
There is nothing about Spell Combat that removes the free action granted from casting a touch attack spell. There is nothing about Spell Combat that changes how actions work in Pathfinder.
All Spell Combat does is say that if you use the free attack granted by casting a touch spell, you apply the -2 penalty from Spell Combat to the roll.
That's it.
The entire ability changes how actions work in Pathfinder. It allows you to cast a spell and make a full-attack as part of the same full-round action. That is altering how the full round action normally works.
|
|
To put it another way:
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.You are making a full-round action in using Spell Combat. That action lasts your entire round. Whenever you take the free action, it is still during your round, so you are still performing the Spell Combat Full-Round Action. There's no way around that. Even when you perform a swift action, you are still in your combat round and still performing the Spell Combat action. I'm not sure where that leaves the other numbers on the list, but I'm fairly sure 6 and 7 do not work.Wait, so you're saying you can't do a swift action after a full-round action? Or a free action?
A full-attack action is also a full-round action. So after a full-attack you can't change grips? Cast a quickened spell?
I don't think anyone agrees with that limitation. Are you sure that's your argument? Pretty sure that invalidates the entire list.
What I am saying is that you can take a swift action during a full-round action. Not after. You can also take a 5-foot step during a full-round action. And you can take a free action during a full-round action. Even if those things happen after all of the attacks from a full attack are resolved, they are still happening during your round, and so they are still happening during the full round action.