I put it on a google document in order to make it easier to edit so that people can see original post.
The idea stemmed from me wanting an archetype that works with vital strike, and this is what I came up with in regards to replacing spell combat, which does not in any way work with vital strike.
Thoughts?
Vital Strike should not work with spell combat because the entire point of the feat is to deal burst damage with a standard action attack. Just because it's not compatible with spell combat does not mean it's ueless.
I think it's way too powerful to allow Vital Strike to work with any attack. The Mystic Charge ability is ridiculous as it lets you charge as a free action.
Vital Strike should not work with spell combat because the entire point of the feat is to deal burst damage with a standard action attack. Just because it's not compatible with spell combat does not mean it's ueless.
I think it's way too powerful to allow Vital Strike to work with any attack. The Mystic Charge ability is ridiculous as it lets you charge as a free action.
This archetype doesn't get Spell-Combat.
My thoughts on this archetype are that it doesn't seem like it has much synergy.
They get Vital Stike feats earlier than they should, but they can't use that with their spells.
They get a free charge with their spells, but they can't use their Vital-Strike when in the same round that they cast ... It basically lets them deliver their touch-range spells from further away ... if they have a straight line to charge.
Without spell-combat this seems like a slightly whacky ELDRITCH KNIGHT.
EDIT: Just re-read this, they get their Vital-Strike damage on a charge. This makes charging super important for this build.
I'm not sure exactly, I still feel like this doesn't quite mesh together ...
My thoughts on this archetype are that it doesn't seem like it has much synergy.
They get Vital Stike feats earlier than they should, but they can't use that with their spells.
They get a free charge with their spells, but they can't use their Vital-Strike when in the same round that they cast ... It basically lets them deliver their touch-range spells from further away ... if they have a straight line to charge.
I tried to write the "mystic charge" ability so that it's optional. Essentially, they also get vital strike on any free touch attack granted by touch spells, is the idea. The basic idea is that the class gives up a little bit of action economy in exchange for high mobility. 60 feet away and you can either:
1) charge right into the enemy, apply your vital strike if you're level 6 because the specifics of the ability allows vital strike on any attack, once per round.
2) Cast a buff spell, benefit from spell hurricane as well, move 30 feet. Next round, cast a touch spell, benefit from stacked spell hurricane, charge 30 feet and make vital strike + buffs + spell
And, in a battlefield filled with enemies who tend to spread out, this character would get more utility than a base magus, thanks to the fact that his damage isn't dependent on sitting still and getting a full attack in.
I think it's way too powerful to allow Vital Strike to work with any attack. The Mystic Charge ability is ridiculous as it lets you charge as a free action.
Overall, mystic charge turns your turn into:
Standard: cast a touch spellMove: move 30 feet
Free: charge 30 feet, make one attack
which is pretty much the equivalent of "charge 60 feet and make a melee attack" and "cast a spell", but with certain baked in limitations. With that being weaker than spell combat at its core, it seemed fine to include.
Mystic charge also allows you to:
- Full-attack (full-round action)
- Cast a quickened spell (swift action)
- Charge 30 feet and make a melee attack (free action)
Or:
- Cast a spell (standard action)
- Charge 30 feet and make a melee attack (free action)
- Cast a quickened spell (swift action)
- Charge 30 feet and make a melee attack (free action)
If that's too strong, how would you decide to replace spell combat? I'm having trouble figuring out a way to make this archetype at somewhere resembling the same power level of the base magus.
Spell combat is the soul of the magus class. Taking that out is like... removing the fighter's weapon proficiencies. or his 1BAB/level.
You don't necessarily need to remove it. All you want is a magus archetype that uses Vital Strike, correct? The whole point of Vital Strike is that you can deal good damage when not full-attacking. I don't see why you would need to remove spell combat.
What would I trade, then? Either to encourage the user to use vital strike, or to make it so that this isn't basically just a base magus + vital strike synergy?
Bump. Hoping for alternatives and/or suggestions.
Essentially, what I'm trying to do is make the class work with vital strike. However, because of the way vital strike works and the way it's usually used, it's inherently incompatible with full-round actions. This archetype as I have it focuses on touch spells while still attempting to make it worthwhile to cast another spell in that round, and it also puts an emphasis on the mobile battle style that building around vital strike usually offers.
I'm just afraid that if you make this into a base magus with vital strike working with the free action touch attack, then you'll have a "well why WOULDN'T you take this archetype?" situation.
I'd give this Diminished Spellcasting.
Free action Charges are silly. I'd rewrite the ability that the magus can cast a spell with a range of "touch" and a casting time of 1 standard action or less as part of making a charge.
I'd give this Diminished Spellcasting.
Free action Charges are silly. I'd rewrite the ability that the magus can cast a spell with a range of "touch" and a casting time of 1 standard action or less as part of making a charge.
I thought about that, but the issue I had with that is mechanically, an actual charge has its own attack, and then the touch range spell would give an additional attack on top of that, and you'd end up with what amounts to spell combat with a charge baked into it. Allow vital strike on THAT and you end up with something more powerful than the base magus.
The free action charge is actually how I figured to solve that without actually outright saying "but you don't get the free touch attack". Is there any specific reason why free action charges are silly? I can't seem to find any other way to make the concept work mechanically.
EDIT: I must have read this post a little incorrectly the first time around.
Mystic charge also allows you to:
- Full-attack (full-round action)
- Cast a quickened spell (swift action)
- Charge 30 feet and make a melee attack (free action)Or:
- Cast a spell (standard action)
- Charge 30 feet and make a melee attack (free action)
- Cast a quickened spell (swift action)
- Charge 30 feet and make a melee attack (free action)
I've baked in some limitations based on this. Vital strike can't ever be used in the same round as a full-attack, and the free action charge can only happen once per round.
I thought about that, but the issue I had with that is mechanically, an actual charge has its own attack, and then the touch range spell would give an additional attack on top of that, and you'd end up with what amounts to spell combat with a charge baked into it. Allow vital strike on THAT and you end up with something more powerful than the base magus.I'd give this Diminished Spellcasting.
Free action Charges are silly. I'd rewrite the ability that the magus can cast a spell with a range of "touch" and a casting time of 1 standard action or less as part of making a charge.
Two attacks at the end of a charge is not the same thing as Spell Combat. Even if one of them is a Vital Strike. Remember, a Magus can start pumping out as many as 4 attacks a round by 8th level using Spell Combat + Spellstrike.
The free action charge is actually how I figured to solve that without actually outright saying "but you don't get the free touch attack". Is there any specific reason why free action charges are silly? I can't seem to find any other way to make the concept work mechanically.
and the free action charge can only happen once per round.
Free action movement can, and will, be abused by anyone willing to put in the effort. For example, cast a spell, Charge and deliver + Vital Strike, then spend your Move Action to move away from an opponent to spoil their ability to full attack. Or, another example, using a swift action spell to trigger the charge and then following that with a full-attack.
I thought about that, but the issue I had with that is mechanically, an actual charge has its own attack, and then the touch range spell would give an additional attack on top of that, and you'd end up with what amounts to spell combat with a charge baked into it. Allow vital strike on THAT and you end up with something more powerful than the base magus.I'd give this Diminished Spellcasting.
Free action Charges are silly. I'd rewrite the ability that the magus can cast a spell with a range of "touch" and a casting time of 1 standard action or less as part of making a charge.
Two attacks at the end of a charge is not the same thing as Spell Combat. Even if one of them is a Vital Strike. Remember, a Magus can start pumping out as many as 4 attacks a round by 8th level using Spell Combat + Spellstrike.
That's a good point. So is movement + 1 vital strike + 1 attack still worth less than no movement + 3 attacks, 4 if haste invested?
Free action can, and will, be abused by anyone willing to put in the effort. For example, Cast a spell, Charge and deliver + Vital Strike, then spend your Move Action to move away from an opponent to spoil their ability to full attack. Or, another example, using a swift action spell to trigger the charge and then following that with a full-attack.The free action charge is actually how I figured to solve that without actually outright saying "but you don't get the free touch attack". Is there any specific reason why free action charges are silly? I can't seem to find any other way to make the concept work mechanically.
and the free action charge can only happen once per round.
For spending the move action, I don't really think that's much of a problem because to move after is to invite an attack of opportunity, which seems fine. Plus, you're taking a penalty to AC so you would want to provoke even less.
For the swift action, I also don't see a problem with spending a level 5 or higher spell on a max 6th level caster to do what the base magus can do as a 2nd level spell. Yes you also get 5d6 damage, but again this is happening at level 13 at the earliest, and even then you can only do it once per day and give up your other level 5 spells.
I feel that your approach in writing this is too narrowly focused.
Conceptually, a Magus using Vital Strike is perfectly viable (albeit not optimal) so there isn't too great a niche to fill.
Ranks in acrobatics are plenty to ignore an AoO, and even so taking 1 attack to spoil a full-attack is a great trade.
Also, no 2nd level magus spell lets the caster move, deliver two attacks, and follow it with a full-attack. There's a decent number of ways to get a swift actions spells without necessarily using quicken spell that I seriously caution against you using this wording right now.
I think what is best now would be to take a look at this archetype and decide on how to make some of these abilities a little more interesting, as well as polish the writing a little more to make it clear what can and can't be done, as well as bringing it in-line with the language that Pathfinder typically uses.
I feel that your approach in writing this is too narrowly focused.
Conceptually, a Magus using Vital Strike is perfectly viable (albeit not optimal) so there isn't too great a niche to fill.
The base magus can't use any of his abilities in the same round he uses vital strike, was the problem I ran into when thinking "Can I build a vital strike magus?". I'm just wanting to make this work better with vital strike and also be an archetype that offers trade-offs, instead of just handing a magus vital strike and saying "go nuts". Right now, I feel that giving up spell combat and focusing on vital strike to make it a more unique archetype and playstyle is a good way to do it, and it offers a big change in playstyle while still being compatible with many other magus archetypes. I'm definitely welcome to suggestions how to do it better, but I also don't think narrow is necessarily a bad thing, when I'm only really trying to change one thing.
Ranks in acrobatics are plenty to ignore an AoO, and even so taking 1 attack to spoil a full-attack is a great trade.
I'm just not convinced it's really a bad thing, again emphasizing the mobile playstyle of this archetype and the emphasis on fewer blows. I think I should note that without spell combat, there's nothing preventing this magus from doing everything with a two-hander which in my mind makes vital strike + hit better in power level than the free action charge solution I currently have.
Also, no 2nd level magus spell lets the caster move, deliver two attacks, and follow it with a full-attack. There's a decent number of ways to get a swift actions spells without necessarily using quicken spell that I seriously caution against you using this wording right now.
"mystic charge" allows you to cast a 5th level spell to move 30ft in an unhindered straight line, make one attack, and then you may choose to make a full attack after, total 3 attacks, 4 with haste(assuming level 8 even though you don't have 5th level spells). Meanwhile, the magus has "bladed dash", which allows you move 30 ft without caring about positions or attacks of opportunity, make an attack at any point of that 30ft including the end, not suffer an AC penalty, and then make a full attack after via spell combat, total 3 attacks, 4 with haste. The base magus can also follow that up with an additional swift action to cast shocking grasp and get another attack.
So again I'm not really seeing the problem with this specific example of letting a level 13 do a better version of what a level 4 can do without any feat investment.
I think what is best now would be to take a look at this archetype and decide on how to make some of these abilities a little more interesting, as well as polish the writing a little more to make it clear what can and can't be done, as well as bringing it in-line with the language that Pathfinder typically uses.
How can I improve the writing? I usually try to write these things in the same general style with the same general terms. Is there anything specific that's unclear?
The base magus can't use any of his abilities in the same round he uses vital strike, was the problem I ran into when thinking "Can I build a vital strike magus?". I'm just wanting to make this work better with vital strike and also be an archetype that offers trade-offs, instead of just handing a magus vital strike and saying "go nuts". Right now, I feel that giving up spell combat and focusing on vital strike to make it a more unique archetype and playstyle is a good way to do it, and it offers a big change in playstyle while still being compatible with many other magus archetypes. I'm definitely welcome to suggestions how to do it better, but I also don't think narrow is necessarily a bad thing, when I'm only really trying to change one thing.
A Magus can use Spellstrike to deliver spells via Vital Strike. Again, perfectly functional, just not optimal.
Here is another example of an ability that I think does not fit well: Arcane Hurricane. Why does this archetype have this ability at all? The Magus already provides a low-level damage booster via Arcane Pool. Additionally, they're already more accurate than the normal Magus simply because they don't take the penalty from Spell Combat.
I'm just not convinced it's really a bad thing, again emphasizing the mobile playstyle of this archetype and the emphasis on fewer blows. I think I should note that without spell combat, there's nothing preventing this magus from doing everything with a two-hander which in my mind makes vital strike + hit better in power level than the free action charge solution I currently have.
Pathfinder encounter designs breaks in the face of high-mobility. I also don't think this is really a high-mobility archetype, it just has high-mobility as a consqeuence of not having to rely on full-round actions. Maybe you could consider giving this archetype fast movement?
"mystic charge" allows you to cast a 5th level spell to move 30ft in an unhindered straight line, make one attack, and then you may choose to make a full attack after, total 3 attacks, 4 with haste(assuming level 8 even though you don't have 5th level spells). Meanwhile, the magus has "bladed dash", which allows you move 30 ft without caring about positions or attacks of opportunity, make an attack at any point of that 30ft including the end, not suffer an AC penalty, and then make a full attack after via spell combat, total 3 attacks, 4 with haste. The base magus can also follow that up with an additional swift action to cast shocking grasp and get another attack.
So again I'm not really seeing the problem with this specific example of letting a level 13 do a better version of what a level 4 can do without any feat investment.
Look, you've gotten feedback from a couple different people saying that Mystic Charge needs to be reworked.
I don't think it's a good ability as written. Messing with the action economy is always risky business. Another example, a Catfolk can use this archetype to make an uber-charger capable of delivering 2 full attacks plus the vital strike damage plus the spellstrike. So can a Kitsune, or really anything with Pounce.
Change the wording, change the ability, but it needs to be a full-round action or something.
That said, if you still think it's fine then more power to you. It's your homebrew, write it however you want to.
How can I improve the writing? I usually try to write these things in the same general style with the same general terms. Is there anything specific that's unclear?
Just as an example: does the Magus get to ignore the prerequisites of Vital Strike? Because they get it before they would qualify.
Or, another example: "This bonus stacks with the bonus from any remaining duration and resets the duration" is a weirdly worded sentence. I think it could be clarified, possibly broken into multiple sentences.
A Magus can use Spellstrike to deliver spells via Vital Strike. Again, perfectly functional, just not optimal.
Yes, but not in the same round that they cast the spell, because the attack action is a specific type of standard action. This was the trigger that made me want to make something that makes vital strike something the magus wants to do instead of a waste of space.
Here is another example of an ability that I think does not fit well: Arcane Hurricane. Why does this archetype have this ability at all? The Magus already provides a low-level damage booster via Arcane Pool. Additionally, they're already more accurate than the normal Magus simply because they don't take the penalty from Spell Combat.
I admit it's weird, but I'm trying to work within the design principles of the magus; a blending of magic and spell. Take away spell combat and you'd need to replace it with something else. What to replace it with, then?
Pathfinder encounter designs breaks in the face of high-mobility. I also don't think this is really a high-mobility archetype, it just has high-mobility as a consqeuence of not having to rely on full-round actions. Maybe you could consider giving this archetype fast movement?
That's an idea. What would fast movement replace?
As an aside, though, I think "can still move just as much as anyone else while still doing almost all his damage" is a lot longer to say than "high mobility".
Look, you've gotten feedback from a couple different people saying that Mystic Charge needs to be reworked.
I don't think it's a good ability as written. Messing with the action economy is always risky business. Another example, a Catfolk can use this archetype to make an uber-charger capable of delivering 2 full attacks plus the vital strike damage plus the spellstrike. So can a Kitsune, or really anything with Pounce.
Change the wording, change the ability, but it needs to be a full-round action or something.
That said, if you still think it's fine then more power to you. It's your homebrew, write it however you want to.
What if I changed it so that the charge still replaces the free action attack, but if you choose to charge is a move action instead of a free action? This way you're only getting one attack, can't move after, and even if you swift action you can't follow up with a full(or multiple in the case of pounce) full-attacks? And to maintain the movement, append the charge to the normal "double your speed".
Just as an example: does the Magus get to ignore the prerequisites of Vital Strike? Because they get it before they would qualify.
This post is my basis for not needing to state that you skip the prerequisites, is why I didn't include it. I didn't want to be unnecessarily verbose.
Or, another example: "This bonus stacks with the bonus from any remaining duration and resets the duration" is a weirdly worded sentence. I think it could be clarified, possibly broken into multiple sentences.
I'm not sure how to split that up without injecting possible confusion. Perhaps "This ability stacks with itself"? But the problem I see there is people might think you have to track the duration of uses separately.
An aside, I do acknowledge that there's a problem with the free action charge, it's just that the only alternative I've seen is something that appears even more powerful to me, in more widely applicable situations. I'm hoping to come to a solution that isn't somehow broken, but still a suitable replacement for spell combat and encouraging of the kind of playstyle that vital strike is recognized for.
Yes, but not in the same round that they cast the spell, because the attack action is a specific type of standard action. This was the trigger that made me want to make something that makes vital strike something the magus wants to do instead of a waste of space.
This is off-topic, but holding charges and multitouch spells are the way to go with that. I did a build for it on occasion with a Bloodrager VMC Magus.
I admit it's weird, but I'm trying to work within the design principles of the magus; a blending of magic and spell. Take away spell combat and you'd need to replace it with something else. What to replace it with, then?
If it were me: a full-round charge/spell-cast would be a perfectly find replacement in my view.
However, replacing spell combat with a damage/accuracy booster isn't a good trade. Magus already deals a crapton of damage, I don't get why the archetype should be throwing in more damage.
That's an idea. What would fast movement replace?
If it were me: I'd give the class Diminished Spellcasting, Drop medium and heavy armor proficiency, then throw in fast movement.
Also, if it were me, I'd explore options expanding on other standard action feats that usually get passed up like Cleave.
What if I changed it so that the charge still replaces the free action attack, but if you choose to charge is a move action instead of a free action? This way you're only getting one attack, can't move after, and even if you swift action you can't follow up with a full(or multiple in the case of pounce) full-attacks? And to maintain the movement, append the charge to the normal "double your speed"
I still think it should be a full-round action. Why would casting a spell and charging be a more efficient action then just charging?
Also, the example I gave at the ends were just examples. I think overall I'd like to just see a second draft once you decide what changes you wish to incorporate.
I figure that the action economy of spell combat is worth damage. I'll write a second draft though and see how it compares.I admit it's weird, but I'm trying to work within the design principles of the magus; a blending of magic and spell. Take away spell combat and you'd need to replace it with something else. What to replace it with, then?If it were me: a full-round charge/spell-cast would be a perfectly find replacement in my view.
However, replacing spell combat with a damage/accuracy booster isn't a good trade. Magus already deals a crapton of damage, I don't get why the archetype should be throwing in more damage.
I'll want to do some DPR testing of a base magus with this archetype before I decide to do diminished spellcasting, but I like the idea of offering those other "standard action" feats. Maybe I'll do an "add these arcana to the list of arcana the magus could take" type deal.
That's an idea. What would fast movement replace?If it were me: I'd give the class Diminished Spellcasting, Drop medium and heavy armor proficiency, then throw in fast movement.
Also, if it were me, I'd explore options expanding on other standard action feats that usually get passed up like Cleave.
What if I changed it so that the charge still replaces the free action attack, but if you choose to charge is a move action instead of a free action? This way you're only getting one attack, can't move after, and even if you swift action you can't follow up with a full(or multiple in the case of pounce) full-attacks? And to maintain the movement, append the charge to the normal "double your speed"I still think it should be a full-round action. Why would casting a spell and charging be a more efficient action then just charging
I figured that standard action + move action is basically the same as full-round action. Though I think I'll write a full-round action version of the ability and see how I like it.
I've made a second draft to be kept in a separate document for comparison.
I've done away with the free action charge in a manner that seems satisfactory to me, even though it's a bit awkward to outright state that the free action attack is lost. In addition, I've written the archetype specifically to support a wide variety of weapons and styles.
Any thoughts or suggestions based on version 2? How it compares to version 1? I'm particularly interested in additional suggestions for "style changing" arcana, but I couldn't think of much more than this.
I don't think Ranged Spellstrike fits, unfortunately.
Starting at 1st level, the mystic highlander learns to ride the currents of energy created by his spellcasting. As a full-round action, he can make a charge and cast a single magus spell with a casting time of one standard action or less as part of the charge. If the spell cast as part of making a mystic charge also had the range of "touch", he can use his attack at the end of his charge to deliver the spell in place of the normal free touch granted by the spell. He otherwise is treated as having charged as normal, including all of the normal restrictions and benefits of a charge.
Is how I would write it. Also, the benefit of Somantic components is kind of moot just because taking a hand off and on is a free action, and there are otherwise no other one-handed restrictions.
Rapid Charge could be simplified I think. Also, 10ft per spell level is way too much when your speed is already doubled during a charge. I'd probably throw +10 ft and maybe a scaling bonus that goes up to +30.
Cleaving Spellstrike?
I don't think Ranged Spellstrike fits, unfortunately.
yeah, I'm unsure about it as well, but I also don't want to make the single magus arcana lonely. Without ranged spellstrike or other "variation" magus arcana that still work on the base framework, it just feels a bit "tacked on" to me. I unfortunately couldn't find many feats that work similarly restrictive to cleave. I entertained the idea of a late-game arcana to give you the equivalent of whirlwind attack at the end of the charge instead of cleave or vital strike, but I'm not sure if that would be too powerful.
Also, the benefit of Somantic components is kind of moot just because taking a hand off and on is a free action, and there are otherwise no other one-handed restrictions.
Completely true, but I wanted to kinda make it clear that two-handed is an option for this class, as well as make it feel less like cheesing to do the release-cast-grasp thing. Plus, this specifically allows the magus to give up some of that extra damage via a two-hander and instead run a sword/shield build.
Rapid Charge could be simplified I think. Also, 10ft per spell level is way too much when your speed is already doubled during a charge. I'd probably throw +10 ft and maybe a scaling bonus that goes up to +30.
Do you mean that 60+(10x) is too much or 2*(30+10x) is too much? Because I meant the ability as the former. As the former, I think it's a good way to emphasize the magical influence on his movement, and at most doubling your movement with a 6th level spell didn't seem too powerful. I also didn't want to complicate it with "half spell level rounded up times 10" or similar language. What if I made it progress halfway for both aspects of the ability? At level 8, +5ft per spell level and +4 to AC against attacks of opportunity, and at level 14, +10ft per spell level and no provoking.
Cleaving Spellstrike?
If you mean that as an arcana suggestion, the way the cleave arcana is written already works with spellstrike. If that's meant as a suggestion for the name, I decided to be more vague because the way it's written also allows it to be used at the end of the charge even if no spellstrike.
yeah, I'm unsure about it as well, but I also don't want to make the single magus arcana lonely. Without ranged spellstrike or other "variation" magus arcana that still work on the base framework, it just feels a bit "tacked on" to me. I unfortunately couldn't find many feats that work similarly restrictive to cleave. I entertained the idea of a late-game arcana to give you the equivalent of whirlwind attack at the end of the charge instead of cleave or vital strike, but I'm not sure if that would be too powerful.
What about an arcana that let's you deliver your spellstrike as a ranged attack via a melee attack, like a sharding weapon?
Do you mean that 60+(10x) is too much or 2*(30+10x) is too much? Because I meant the ability as the former. As the former, I think it's a good way to emphasize the magical influence on his movement, and at most doubling your movement with a 6th level spell didn't seem too powerful. I also didn't want to complicate it with "half spell level rounded up times 10" or similar language. What if I made it progress halfway for both aspects of the ability? At level 8, +5ft per spell level and +4 to AC against attacks of opportunity, and at level 14, +10ft per spell level and no provoking.
I think the math would work as 2*(30+10x) given how charge is normally written. I think +10, +20, +30 flat would be fine without getting into spell levels.
If you mean that as an arcana suggestion, the way the cleave arcana is written already works with spellstrike. If that's meant as a suggestion for the name, I decided to be more vague because the way it's written also allows it to be used at the end of the charge even if no spellstrike.
I mean allowing spellstrike to cleave along with the cleave attack could be cool. Or a damage bonus on the second attack or something, if you're worried about giving a free duplicate spell.
What about an arcana that let's you deliver your spellstrike as a ranged attack via a melee attack, like a sharding weapon?
Ohh, I really like that idea. Make the wording of the charge match the ranged charge if you use the sharding weapon method and specify that it can deliver spellstrike. Also possibly bake in some limitation; I'm thinking either "this doesn't work with vital strike" or "unlocked as a weapon special ability that you can use the arcane pool ability to gain". Maybe even a "if the attack misses, the spell charge is lost with the copy of the weapon" as well.
I think the math would work as 2*(30+10x) given how charge is normally written. I think +10, +20, +30 flat would be fine without getting into spell levels.
I'm unsure how to scale the progressive speed. The way base spell combat progresses, it improves at level 8 and 14, so I'm unsure how to maintain that framework. Unless I toss the general framework out, but that feels awkward.
I mean allowing spellstrike to cleave along with the cleave attack could be cool. Or a damage bonus on the second attack or something, if you're worried about giving a free duplicate spell.
Hmmm... That seems difficult to balance. Allowing the spell to fully cleave is right out, in my opinion, because that's essentially doubling the damage output of a base magus. Imagine if they both crit(little less than 10% chance to threaten on both), then you'd be rolling a total of 40d6 for the price of a single first level spell(typical magus build, achievable by level 8). Doing elemental damage of the same type as the spell is also awkward, because if you cast chill touch then the cleave will end up doing more cold damage to the second target than it did the first.
Hmmm... That seems difficult to balance. Allowing the spell to fully cleave is right out, in my opinion, because that's essentially doubling the damage output of a base magus. Imagine if they both crit(little less than 10% chance to threaten on both), then you'd be rolling a total of 40d6 for the price of a single first level spell(typical magus build, achievable by level 8). Doing elemental damage of the same type as the spell is also awkward, because if you cast chill touch then the cleave will end up doing more cold damage to the second target than it did the first.
Just bonus untyped damage, like gloves of arcane striking. That's how I would approach it.
I updated the archetype a bit along with some flat scaling speed, a rewording of mystic charge along the lines of the suggestion, a few updates for corner cases, and a new magus arcana to replace ranged spellstrike.
Unfortunately, cleaving spellstrike doesn't make much sense to me, except for one version that I'm not quite sure of its power. Said version would be an arcana you can only pick up at level 12, and allows you to cast another touch spell as an immediate action if your first cleave attack delivers a spell via spellstrike.