While all of us gish lovers don't always agree should magus(or the like) be a standalone class or just an archetype or class path, we all agree that we need something more to blend magic and martial than CRB has to offer at this point.
So I was thinking...how should spellstrike look like in current mechanics(no matter if it's a class ability or an archetype/path).
if we look at some other examples from playtest or CRB(power attack, double slice, channel smite), we can see that you don't save up in actions, but you delay MAP.
IMO initial spelstrike would let you cast an attack spell and add an action to that to deliver it with a strike. you would cobine dmg and treat it as 2 attacks afterwards for MAP. you would need 1 hand free, but it would remove manipulate trait from casting.
later in 5th-8th lvl you could get an ability(or have a feat option) that you can spellstrike with cantrips without adding an action, but it has to be downcasted 1 or 2 levels....or something like that
IMO it should work with both ranged and melee, touch or ranged touch, but with some range limitation(like only 1st range increment)
what are your thoughts regarding how it should look? Impatient ones can use these ideas to homebrew something for start :)
So, here’s an odd thing I’ve noticed. There are two basic abilities for PF1 Magus:
Spell-combat: basically dual wielding spells, which translates to action economy savings in PF1.
Spellstrike: a version of power attack with spells, in that you lowered your accuracy (by targeting the harder AC) in exchange for more damage.
Yet almost every fan conversion I’ve seen, including in fact my own, slaps the higher damage at an accuracy penalty on spell combat and puts the action economy malarkey on spellstrike. I don’t know what to make of it.
This isn’t criticism, by the way. Just something I’ve noticed most of us doing.
Given that power attack no longer does what it used it (the accuracy penalty is on follow up attacks now, not the initial one, AND it adds an action penalty), I’m not sure where that leaves Spellstrike. I almost want to just make spellstrike a cantrip in and of itself, rather than a feat. Or maybe you make a strike at the 2nd or 3rd MAP, but treat a success as a crit success. Or if that’s broken (and it probably is), just add your weapon’s damage die to the spell damage on success, increasing to 2 dice at 10th and 3 dice at 18.
One big issue is that in PF2 accuracy is king, and it's potentially a problem that for a spell attack roll you would roll CastingMod+SpellProf but for a weapon you would roll Str/DexMod + WpnProf. So it's likely that your accuracy goes way up or way down if you choose to spellstrike.
Also, there's the issue that touch attacks like shocking grasp no longer have an attack roll, they just hit and you go to the saving throw. So why would you want to give up a free hit for spellstrike?
I'm not sure that Magical Striker, or effects like it, aren't a better way to do this sort of thing than "you deliver the spell with your weapon."
I don't think spellstrike will be a thing and I think more feats like Magical striker as Possible cabbage said will be the go to. Extra damage or effects on your next attack hit based perhaps on the various tags a spell couuld have.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Based on what I've seen so far I think Ki strike would be a good model for spellstrike.
Verbal action focus spell that adds extra energy damage to the next strike. Start with fire, cold, lightning and expand with higher levels and/or class feats.
IMO not every touch spell needs to be deliverable via sword point.
Also, there's the issue that touch attacks like shocking grasp no longer have an attack roll, they just hit and you go to the saving throw. So why would you want to give up a free hit for spellstrike?
I can think of a few circumstances, like the Blood Ooze in fall of plaguestone with an AC of 12 but a ref of +6, but generally yeah.
Hmm. Maybe instead of adding damage, we can add weapon traits to the spells? At the cost of counting as two attacks for MAP, your spells with the attack trait also have the traits and critical effect of your weapon.
my premise was that spellstrike is used with attack spells only...so shocking grasp is no longer on the table i guess.
it doesn't make sense to combine save spells with attacks in that sense
but chill touch, ray of frost and vampiric touch are still here :)
Bespell weapon is the only gishy thing that we have, and it kinda sucks
sorc and wiz don't have martial progression to use it effectively, and MCs can't afford it and have to few spells to support it
that's why i was thinking about blending spells AND cantrips with (melee) strikes in a way where you don't provoke AoO's
casting a nonattack spell and then striking once with full att is cool, but not if you provoke a reaction from every other monster that threatens you
the idea of adding wpn traits to spells is cool, but i always imagined it vice versa, but would sure like an option for both
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We have a form of Spellstrike in the CRB.
Channel Smite (2-Actions) [4th Level Cleric Feat]
Cost - Expend a harm or heal spell.
You siphon the destructive energies of positive or negative energy through a melee attack and into your foe. Make a melee Strike and add the spell’s damage to the Strike’s damage...
_____________________
Bespell Weapon feels more like it promotes a Spell Combat style rather than a Spellstrike substitution. It’s not very practical and doesn’t scale well with just an added d6 and doesn’t work off of cantrips. It synergises rather well with a ranged weapon though.
I kinda like the idea Bardarok said with modeling it after Ki Strike. With the one change being it works from expending a spell rather than expending a focus point.
Here's a potentially interesting idea.
What if, instead of Spellstrike being an attack where a spell is delivered at the same time, what if Spellstrike is a charge mechanic?
Something like, a two action activity which charges your weapon with a spell that has a range of touch, using the spell slot if it was a slot of level 1 or higher.
The spell remains in your weapon until you make a successful strike against your opponent. If you miss your strike, the spell remains in your weapon. If you critically miss, then the spell is lost. The Magus in question would have full spell progression, but fewer spell slots total, but spell strike would be an excellent way of ensuring that your spell slots are less likely to be wasted.
You'd also lose it if you didn't expend the spell in like, 10 minutes.
This helps cement the idea of the Magus as the Nova class as well as adding some tactical elements to when it's best to use it.
They could include later feats like "Greater Spellstrike" which could include AoEs and/or ranged spells with the strike. In AoEs you may also have to make the save (such as with Fireball) but you treat your own degree of success as one level greater. Or "Swift Spellstrike" which may allow one free strike with the Spellstrike activity.
Depending on the balancing, it may also be necessary to add the Concentrate tag to it, so that if you don't expend the spell the same turn you charge your sword with it, then you would have to use an action every subsequent turn to sustain the spell. But whether or not this is necessary really would take some testing.
What if you have a feat that lets you swap weapon and spell proficiencies for a damaging spell, adds dice to the spell damage equal to the number of physical dice you roll with the weapon, and adds the weapons damage type to the spell damage for weakness/resistance?
For instance, a shocking grasp delivered through a +1 dagger would add +2 dice (of shocking grasp's die size), use dagger proficiency in place of spell proficiency for the DC, and do shocking and piercing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Spellstrike replacing the somatic action with an attack action makes the most sense to me.
Spell combat could expand the options to any attack fear becoming a somatic action, even one that used multiple actions as long as you still have enough total actions to cast the spell. That last bit is probably too complicated.
About 80% of spells only take two actions anyway, so not including 3-action spells shouldn’t be that big a deal. As for ranged and AoE spells, Spellstrike Ammunition allows you to charge it with a 2-action spell and inflict it on the target hit. No AoE splash though, so Fireball would just damage one person in this instance. There’s also a Spellstoring Rune that mentions if you use a spell with a save it defaults the save to DC 30, but will only store up to 4th level spells in it. This would mean Spellstrike could work with Save targeted spells; you just have to hit them first and they would have to save second. The spell level cap is also good to keep in mind.
EDIT: Also want to throw in an idea about having Magical Stances, like the Monk’s Wind Stance, that morphs Spellstrike while in the Stance.
Spellstrike replacing the somatic action with an attack action makes the most sense to me.
Spell combat could expand the options to any attack fear becoming a somatic action, even one that used multiple actions as long as you still have enough total actions to cast the spell. That last bit is probably too complicated.
The first option there is probably how I would do it.
Another option that may work is to add a spellstrike metamagic that reduces the casting time of a spell by one action (minimum 1 action) but adds the press trait to the attack.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know to much about the PF1 Magus, I think everything I know is based on Della on the Glass Cannon Podcast.
But I like the idea of replacing the somatic action with the strike. That would allow for a stride along with with a strike and spell per turn. I think allowing cantrips to be used would also be really cool. Currently we know cantrips are not the same damage as martial characters multiple attacks which is balanced. The Magus's cantrip spellstrike should fit in between those numbers so it's more damage then standard cantrip (but delivered in melee) but still less then a martial.
Using their higher level spell slots would give them burst damage and lower spell slots once outpaced by the cantrips could be used for buffs/debuffs.
I do like the area suggested about making saving throw spells into spell strike too. Make it so if it hits their AC then they auto-fail the save (and crit fail on a crit hit). AOE's could be a cone based on the hit.
I can imagine hitting a creature with a fireball strike, they fail on a hit then everyone behind them in a cone needs make a reflex save. Would be amazing.
dunno guys....I don't feel like save spells + strikes are a valid combination. you can already do that as it is...only potential benefit is if we remove manipulate, but that's to "meh" if it only does that.
wpn charge seem like a cool idea, especially if the charge of normal touchspells is wasted after a miss...
if spellstrike would let you load an attack spell into a wpn and hold it until it hits is already powerful enough IMO(even with 1min hold limit or even a few rounds)
it would allow a character some interesting options of "carrying" over actions from turn to turn, so I'm not sure how it would hold up in current rules...but it would be unique...and powerful
another way to do it as some of you mentioned is with charging your wpn as ki strike, weapon surge(zeal domain) or paladin's smite evil(6th lvl feat)
that would not be unique, but it could work....something like 1 action to imbue your wpn until begining of your next turn, and it adds your spellcasting mod to dmg(dmg type can be chosen each morning for the day)...
I should clarify somewhat. There is a Spell Storing Weapon Property Rune in the final Rulebook. I only have the PT on me while at work, but it’s virtually the same.
__________________
Spell Storing | Rune 13
A spellcaster can spend 1 minute to cast a 3rd-level or lower spell into the weapon, storing it for later. The spell must be able to target a creature other than the caster. When you wield a spell storing weapon, you immediately know the name and level of the spell stored in the weapon. When you activate the rune, you unleash the stored spell, treating the target of the triggering attack as the target of the spell, using a spell roll modifier of +20 (DC 30) if necessary.
__________________
The Final Rulebook is more clear on the fact that Save spells can be stored and have a default DC of 30 after a successful hit. The Final Rulebook also mentions a limit of 4th-level spells or lower.
Spellstrike Ammunition can be crafted to store up to 9th level spells and AoE spells only target the person hit, and makes no mention of if you use save spells; but i think Spellstrike Ammunition can’t hold spells longer than the attack action so it would go off of Class DC assumedly. I’ll have to find what it says on that to be certain though.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would think of Spellcombat as similar to a Metamagic feat. Add a third action to casting that allows you to deliver with melee strike (thus using weapon prof and str or dex), adding weapon damage to spell. This naturally eliminates 3 action spells from use.
If memory serves, metamagic feats have some kind of language like "can't be more than a two action spell" or something to that effect. Same language applies here.
No MAP, but limits you to one attack per round and spell is lost if miss. This is to avoid the Gish from significantly outpacing a Fighter or Barb in per round damage (squeezing all damage into first attack thus eliminating DPR penalty due to MAPs).
I would think of Spellcombat as similar to a Metamagic feat. Add a third action to casting that allows you to deliver with melee strike (thus using weapon prof and str or dex), adding weapon damage to spell. This naturally eliminates 3 action spells from use.
If memory serves, metamagic feats have some kind of language like "can't be more than a two action spell" or something to that effect. Same language applies here.
No MAP, but limits you to one attack per round and spell is lost if miss. This is to avoid the Gish from significantly outpacing a Fighter or Barb in per round damage (squeezing all damage into first attack thus eliminating DPR penalty due to MAPs).
that seems reasonable...down the line with what i've writen in OP. it is a bit weaker on start, but should work fine in mid and higher levels. since it uses all 3 actions, you won't be able to use it every round just because of that. But it would definitely need a higher level upgrade where you can do it with 2 action but with downcasted spells(use a slot 2 levels higher or use it with 2 levels weaker cantrip)...or to expend a focus to do it with 2 actions...something like that
I would still limit it to attack spells(but not just touch attacks)....or maybe also high level upgrade to use it with save spells.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem i usually see with 3-action limitations is you have to be in a situation where you don’t need to move. Metamagic tend to augment something that either has a range, meaning you don’t have to move, or giving a range in the case of Reach. This becomes a real issue when one of the more common mentions about combat now is just how mobile everything is.
Spellstrike and Spell Combat alike weren’t Metamagic in 1e, but this can certainly change. The way Spell Combat was introduced in 1e made it seem more like a combat style:
Spell Combat (Ex): 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.
_______________
In this way i feel it would make more sense to come back as a stance, or multiple stances, like how Monk Stances changes how they attack.
The problem i usually see with 3-action limitations is you have to be in a situation where you don’t need to move. Metamagic tend to augment something that either has a range, meaning you don’t have to move, or giving a range in the case of Reach. This becomes a real issue when one of the more common mentions about combat now is just how mobile everything is.
Spellstrike and Spell Combat alike weren’t Metamagic in 1e, but this can certainly change. The way Spell Combat was introduced in 1e made it seem more like a combat style:
Spell Combat (Ex): 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.
_______________
In this way i feel it would make more sense to come back as a stance, or multiple stances, like how Monk Stances changes how they attack.
i didn't think about it as a stance until now...do you have an idea on how would that work?
1 action to enter stance, and then you get a free attack with your wpn every time you complete a casting of an attack spell. apply MAP normally.
OR
1 action to enter stance, and then you can cast without free hands(if you hold a 2h wpn or wpn+shield) and remove manipulate from all spells while in stance
Both of those actually sound neat. The one I’ve been thinking about turns attack cantrips into one action somatic casts, apply MAP normally, and maybe give them the agile trait?
Cantrips are in a special area where weapons can out pace them and they aren’t modified by meta magic or work with bespell weapon.
The stance would cost a focus point to enter of course.
Looking at how 2e is structured, it may either be an archetype feat (or series of feats) or through a magic item. This would let any class act like a magus.
2e already has the "sort of, but not quite" Bespell Weapon sorcerer and wizard class feat (open to other classes through multiclassing) which lets you cast a spell and gain bonus damage on your next strike before the end of your turn.
As mentioned, spellstrike arrows exist for ranged attacks. A similar magic similar to spell storing, but allowing a caster to channel a cast spell through the weapon on the next strike before the end of your turn might also be a possibility. Spell level and/or uses per day may be limited by the level of the rune, however.
My version of spell strike, based somewhat off of power attack
Spell Strike Free Action
Magus Flourish
Trigger Finish casting a touch attack spell
You unleash the force of your spell through the weapon in your hand but this leaves you a bit unsteady. Make a melee Strike. This counts as two attacks when calculating your multiple attack penalty. The attack uses the weapon proficiency. If this Strike hits, combine both the damage of the spell and the damage of the weapon. The weapon attack gains the traits of the spell and keeps any of it's traits.
Balance
Cantrips, equalish to power attack.
All or nothing, no wording of holding the charge.
Next attack is at the third multiattack penalty.
It's a flourish attack.
Notes
Easy to add ranged spell strike, and close range spell as feats to modify it. Attack is based off weapon proficiency and not spell.
My version of spell strike, based somewhat off of power attack
Spell Strike Free Action
Magus Flourish
Trigger Finish casting a touch attack spell
You unleash the force of your spell through the weapon in your hand but this leaves you a bit unsteady. Make a melee Strike. This counts as two attacks when calculating your multiple attack penalty. The attack uses the weapon proficiency. If this Strike hits, combine both the damage of the spell and the damage of the weapon. The weapon attack gains the traits of the spell and keeps any of it's traits.Balance
Cantrips, equalish to power attack.
All or nothing, no wording of holding the charge.
Next attack is at the third multiattack penalty.
It's a flourish attack.Notes
Easy to add ranged spell strike, and close range spell as feats to modify it. Attack is based off weapon proficiency and not spell.
that's straight up "add your weapon damage to your spell" imo.
too strong, especailly in early game.
i'd say the fairest option seems to be one already mentioned:
1 action metamagic to deliver a spell via weapon attack.
you get the extra accuracy of the weapon (item bonuses etc) and it loses the manipulate trait (no AoO).
a higher level version that caps your max spell used to something like max spell level -3 but doesn't add an action can be added afterwards (like when you gain 4th level spells so you can add 1st level spells)
Hmm. . .
CHANNEL SMITE [two-actions]
FEAT 4 CLERICCost Expend a harm or heal spell.
You siphon the destructive energies of positive or negative energy through a melee attack and into your foe. Make a melee Strike and add the spell’s damage to the Strike’s damage. This is negative damage if you expended a harm spell or positive damage if you expended a heal spell.
The spell is expended with no effect if your Strike fails or hits a creature that isn’t damaged by that energy type (such as if you hit a non-undead creature with a heal spell).
Seems balanced to me.
Nah. SpellStrike being a 1-action Metamagic would be pretty terrible. Even in terms of Damage, Cleric would come out on top because of it, and that’d just be sad. The other consequence would be the same with Bespell Weapon; it’s neat, but useless enough that it’ll mostly be used as icing on someone’s turn or you’ll only see people using it with ranged weapons. We already have abilities that cheat the 3-action economy, so SpellStrike will end up doing the same.
Nah. SpellStrike being a 1-action Metamagic would be pretty terrible. Even in terms of Damage, Cleric would come out on top because of it, and that’d just be sad. The other consequence would be the same with Bespell Weapon; it’s neat, but useless enough that it’ll mostly be used as icing on someone’s turn or you’ll only see people using it with ranged weapons. We already have abilities that cheat the 3-action economy, so SpellStrike will end up doing the same.heal, as a 1 action spell that's what is being used in Smite, isn't on par with the damage of a single target two-action nuke from a wiz/sorc.
The xample you gave, Smite, is actually exactly that: 1 action metamagic that boosts a 1 action spell to 2 action spell+strike.
I do agree that it would be a pity for Bespell, although i do not like how they butchered it from the playtest version where it was actually a really good option for gish.
now it's a really small circumstantial bonus that doesn't even offer incentive for multiclassing.
The laternative way i can see it working, so as to not impact the the action economy, is to make it a Focus ability.
So, basically putting a cost to it.
But i simply don't like that we take something great about pf2, the fact that it managed to reduce the rocket tag that was pf1, and that (2 actions that's basically 3 fully offensive actions) is basically trying to undo it.
"Nova damage" is generally a bad game design imo.
Unless i misunderstood you, Channel Smite is not a Metamagic. Heal/Harm also admittedly are a special circumstance. The only 1-action spells i remember seeing are: Jump, True Strike, Magic Missle, Heal and Harm. I’ve thought about using Focus as a limiter, but again, this means Channel Smite will be the more powerful option every time. When comparing Harm with the Harming Hands feat a SpellStrike can only go 1 die size higher meaning they’re pretty comparable damage wise. I’d just set the limitation to ‘Touch’ spells and grab feats for anything more complicated.
Though maybe it’s possible i’m missing some touch spell that does more damage than shock grasp?