Can a level 4 Magus do any of the following:
1. Full round attack action: First attack with sword, then second with sword + Shocking Grasp.
2. Full round attack action: First attack with sword + Shocking Grasp, second attack with just sword (and delivering the now-held Shocking Grasp if the first attack missed.)
3. (while holding the charge of a previously cast Shocking Grasp) Full round attack action: first sword hits, delivers held charge, then sword a second time with a NEW shocking grasp cast (as the second Spell Combat attack).
I think a person COULD interpret the rules to mean that you CANNOT make two attacks in the same round with the sword, but you MAY deliver one held shocking grasp then cast and attempt a second one (albeit with the bare hand).
That would sound something like this:
1A. Full round attack action: First attack with sword, second with bare handed Shocking Grasp. (this is essentially "regular" Spell Combat)
2A. Full round attack action: First attack with sword + Shocking Grasp, and if it misses, the charge is held briefly and discharged by the second attack with bare-handed Shocking Grasp. (This is essentially Spell Combat now with Spellstrike TM).
3A. (while holding the charge of a previously cast Shocking Grasp) Full round attack action: first sword hits, delivers held charge, then second attack with a NEW shocking grasp cast using the bare hand only.
I'm not saying the "1A, 2A and 3A" scenarios are "right" just that one could interpret the Magus rules that way. In any case, as a DM I wouldn't really consider the second weapon attack "broken" but very out of the ordinary. That said, a lot of effects give you a second attack at full BAB (Haste, Blessing of Fervor, Ninja ki pool, etc).
Yes to all 3 of those questions, with a minor pedantic correction. Using spell combat is not a full round attack action (e.g., it is not a full attack as defined in game turns). It is a full round action that gives you your iterative attacks + casting of a single spell.
And the second weapon attack is not out of the ordinary. What happens when any class gets BAB +6 and uses a single weapon? They get 2 attacks with that same weapon. And a third attack at BAB +11, and a fourth at BAB +16. At some point the realistic portion of combat brakes (especially firing a bow 4+ times in a six second period). But game mechanics wise it works just fine.
Do a search on these forums for Grick's magus thread that talks about spell combat, spellstrike, and so forth.
|
1) Yes - Main hand attack sword, Off Hand cast shocking grasp via spell combat and deliver with sword via spell strike
2) No - The first attack cannot be with shocking grasp as spell combat replaces an offhand attack not main attack.
3)Yes - Main hand attack hits delivering held shocking grasp via spell strike, Off hand cast shocking grasp via spell combat and deliver with sword via spell strike.
Even with normal TWF, the system doesn't care which you take first or how you alternate them so long as each hand obeys the "highest to lowest bonus" rule. If you have 2 iteratives at +6 and +1 and Improved TWF to allow you your normal off-hand at +6 plus an additional at +1, you could do any of the following:
1) Main-Hand +4, Off-Hand +4, Main-Hand -1, Off-Hand -1
2) Main-Hand +4, Off-Hand +4, Off-Hand -1, Main-Hand -1
3) Main-Hand +4, Main-Hand -1, Off-Hand +4, Off-Hand -1
4) Off-Hand +4, Main-Hand +4, Off-Hand -1, Main-Hand -1
5) Off-Hand +4, Main-Hand +4, Main-Hand -1, Off-Hand -1
6) Off-Hand +4, Off-Hand -1, Main-Hand +4, Main-Hand -1
Ok, but when you are doing normal TWF, you have to actually wield TWO weapons (one in each hand), and, as I understand it, if you're wielding a longsword and a dagger, you may not take ALL of your attacks (all 4 of them) with the longsword. With Spellstrike + Spell Combat, you are apparently allowed to take what would be your "offhand attack" with your "main hand" weapon, as long as you're using it to deliver a touch spell. That does seem a little strange, doesn't it?
I mean, I'm no stranger to the idea of a full round attack progression, or how TWF works, but neither of those would normally let you take two consecutive attacks in the same round with the same longsword you're wielding in just your right hand, (left hand empty) with full BAB on both (or even full BAB -2 for TWF), would they?
Ok, but when you are doing normal TWF, you have to actually wield TWO weapons (one in each hand), and, as I understand it, if you're wielding a longsword and a dagger, you may not take ALL of your attacks (all 4 of them) with the longsword. With Spellstrike + Spell Combat, you are apparently allowed to take what would be your "offhand attack" with your "main hand" weapon, as long as you're using it to deliver a touch spell. That does seem a little strange, doesn't it?I mean, I'm no stranger to the idea of a full round attack progression, or how TWF works, but neither of those would normally let you take two consecutive attacks in the same round with the same longsword you're wielding in just your right hand, (left hand empty) with full BAB on both (or even full BAB -2 for TWF), would they?
Reference Jiggy's post above. Reference spellstrike rules. Combine and get exactly the case above ;).
|
Ok, but when you are doing normal TWF, you have to actually wield TWO weapons (one in each hand), and, as I understand it, if you're wielding a longsword and a dagger, you may not take ALL of your attacks (all 4 of them) with the longsword. With Spellstrike + Spell Combat, you are apparently allowed to take what would be your "offhand attack" with your "main hand" weapon, as long as you're using it to deliver a touch spell. That does seem a little strange, doesn't it?
I mean, I'm no stranger to the idea of a full round attack progression, or how TWF works, but neither of those would normally let you take two consecutive attacks in the same round with the same longsword you're wielding in just your right hand, (left hand empty) with full BAB on both (or even full BAB -2 for TWF), would they?
If you read through all of "Dr. Grick's" thread, it explains in more detail, but the gist of it is: Spell Combat makes the spell itself the offhand weapon. The extra attack is coming from the free touch attack to deliver the spell, as modified by Spellstrike.
But here is an additional question. Say you have a whip weilding magus. He spellstrikes with shocking grasp and misses. Next turn instead of attack he attempts totrip at range with the whip. The trip succeeds. Does the shocking grasp that is still in the whip go off?
|
But here is an additional question. Say you have a whip weilding magus. He spellstrikes with shocking grasp and misses. Next turn instead of attack he attempts totrip at range with the whip. The trip succeeds. Does the shocking grasp that is still in the whip go off?
Technically the Shocking Grasp isn't "in the whip" it is being held by the magus who can deliver it with the whip.
That being said, Trip and the other Combat Maneuvers are all listed under "Special Attacks", so if you successfully hit with your trip attempt, you should be able to deliver the spell through the whip a la Spellstrike.***Note***
Spellstrike does specify melee attack, and while tripping is certainly an attack, I'm less positive about whether a trip attempt with a whip is a "melee attack". I'm inclined to say it is though.
|
|
Considering the feat Tripping Staff is required to deliver a touch spell via spell strike when tripping with a quarterstaff, I'd say that No, just any touch with the weapon won't cut it. It has to be a melee attack to qualify. Thematically, I like to think of it as it needs the "force" between an attacking swing to force the spell down a conduit (the weapon) that isn't normally conducive to delivering a touch spell.
Ah, I hadn't seen that feat. I think you're probably right then Kazaan, delivering touch spells via trip attempts is normally a no go.