Why doesn’t Bespell Weapon scale?


Rules Discussion

51 to 71 of 71 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

mrspaghetti wrote:
Pumpkinhead11 wrote:


The loose wording is why i think it’s meant to be ‘Trigger’ rather than ‘Requirement’. It seems to be the only Free Action that i’ve seen with this amount of ambiguity on when you can/are supposed to use it.

As for stacking them; currently either have a Cleric grab Bespell via...

Again I point at Bond Conservation, which has similar wording and which we know to be usable at the start of one's turn.

Bond conservation isn't just usable at the start of your turn, it's required to be your first action. Drain Bond is a free action that requires that you haven't acted yet, and Bond Conservation requires your most previous action is Drain Bond.

It does explicitly state that it lasts until your next turn, but that's because of how drain works and how it interacts with drain. For Drain Bond, it's a free action that you HAVE to use at the beginning of your turn, and then you cast that spell using the relevant actions actions. Bond Conservation works more or less like a metamagic feat as far as the action economy goes, so there's no way you could exploit it in the same way as bespell weapon, so even if it doesn't necessarily suggest that Bespell can look at your previous turn, it doesn't really work against it either. It DOES however suggest that free actions count as actions.


Again, this wording is the same as we see on monster abilities like Grab or Rend.

Requirements The monster’s last action was a success with a Strike that lists Grab in its damage entry, or it has a creature grabbed using this action.

So if this is how it works those monsters just got even more dangerous.


Captain Morgan wrote:

Again, this wording is the same as we see on monster abilities like Grab or Rend.

Requirements The monster’s last action was a success with a Strike that lists Grab in its damage entry, or it has a creature grabbed using this action.

So if this is how it works those monsters just got even more dangerous.

Looking forward to the ruling that you're grabbed from 50' away when you took a pair of move actions between the monster's strike and its grab action.


Xenocrat wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:

Again, this wording is the same as we see on monster abilities like Grab or Rend.

Requirements The monster’s last action was a success with a Strike that lists Grab in its damage entry, or it has a creature grabbed using this action.

So if this is how it works those monsters just got even more dangerous.

Looking forward to the ruling that you're grabbed from 50' away when you took a pair of move actions between the monster's strike and its grab action.

That's only going to be at a certain posters table, to be fair.


Captain Morgan wrote:

Again, this wording is the same as we see on monster abilities like Grab or Rend.

Requirements The monster’s last action was a success with a Strike that lists Grab in its damage entry, or it has a creature grabbed using this action.

So if this is how it works those monsters just got even more dangerous.

I get this as a potential problem, but monsters don't seem to have a discrete "grab" action; they have attacks that have "plus grab" in them. There's no indication that the grab part even costs another action until you get to the glossary, but that's a side issue, I think. Even if it does count as it's own action rather than an extension of the strike that made it possible, it still costs the monster an action


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd like it if cantrips also triggered it, as it's pretty useless with multiclass archetypes due to the limited number of uses. The action economy wouldn't be any different either as there aren't any free action cantrips that I'm aware of?


Ferrin33 wrote:
I'd like it if cantrips also triggered it, as it's pretty useless with multiclass archetypes due to the limited number of uses. The action economy wouldn't be any different either as there aren't any free action cantrips that I'm aware of?

*Nods* I wouldn't even mind if it was a drop in damage to 1 point instead of a 1d6 for cantrips.

On usefulness, if you're planning to use the feat on a non-caster it's best to snag a focus spell. For instance, on a monk that multiclasses you take Ki strike and Monastic Weaponry. You Ki strike + Bespell Weapon and flurry for +1 to hit and +2d6 damage on 2 strikes with a bo staff and you still have an action left.

Also a staff/wand can add to the number of times you can use it. For instance, you can get a Staff of Divination and use all your charges on true strikes.


Ferrin33 wrote:
I'd like it if cantrips also triggered it, as it's pretty useless with multiclass archetypes due to the limited number of uses. The action economy wouldn't be any different either as there aren't any free action cantrips that I'm aware of?

Third action attack is suboptimal in most cases. Shield is an amazing one action cantrip. If cantrips worked bespell weapon would become much, much better.


james014Aura wrote:

Replying to Fuzzy-Wuzzy and Captain Morgan:

action 1: as cleric, cast a 1-action divine spell (Heal? Shield?) Non-cantrips only if not Cleric.
free action: Divine Weapon
action 2: cast a 1-action spell from wizard/sorcerer multiclass
free action: Bespell Weapon
action 3: attack with weapon

You can use a 2-action spell for one of those if you're under a Haste effect. Such as, from wizard or arcane/occult/primal sorcerer. Also Bespell weapon is lower level than Divine weapon, so Cleric/other caster.

It's not at once, but it's still the same turn. It looks like both last until the turn's end, not just the next action.

Clerics can't use Divine Weapon after a cantrip either. Cantrips don't use spell slots.


Garretmander wrote:
Ferrin33 wrote:
I'd like it if cantrips also triggered it, as it's pretty useless with multiclass archetypes due to the limited number of uses. The action economy wouldn't be any different either as there aren't any free action cantrips that I'm aware of?
Third action attack is suboptimal in most cases. Shield is an amazing one action cantrip. If cantrips worked bespell weapon would become much, much better.

Yeah, Shield would be great to trigger Bespell Weapon, would it be to good, though? I doubt it. Especially as you can't use the Shield cantrip for an hour if you use its shield block ability.

Could be 2 damage per action spent on the spell? That way it'd generally be +2 for 2 attacks, or +4 for 1. (not counting flurry of blows and the like)


james014Aura wrote:

Replying to Fuzzy-Wuzzy and Captain Morgan:

action 1: as cleric, cast a 1-action divine spell (Heal? Shield?) Non-cantrips only if not Cleric.
free action: Divine Weapon
action 2: cast a 1-action spell from wizard/sorcerer multiclass
free action: Bespell Weapon
action 3: attack with weapon

You can use a 2-action spell for one of those if you're under a Haste effect. Such as, from wizard or arcane/occult/primal sorcerer. Also Lingering Composition, so Cleric/other caster.

It's not at once, but it's still the same turn. It looks like both last until the turn's end, not just the next action.

You don't have to jump through so many hoops: if you cast a single action heal, it meets the requirements for both Bespell Weapon [cast a non-cantrip spell] and Divine Weapon [cast a spell from a divine spell slot].

So Action 1 cast heal. Free action for both Bespell Weapon and Divine Weapon. Action 2 weapon attack. Action 3 weapon attack. Divine Weapon has a trigger and Bespell Weapon doesn't so it doesn't trigger the 'you can use only one free action per trigger". Bespell Weapon,as it has no trigger, is used "like a single action, just without spending any of your actions for the turn".

Free Actions


graystone wrote:
james014Aura wrote:

Replying to Fuzzy-Wuzzy and Captain Morgan:

action 1: as cleric, cast a 1-action divine spell (Heal? Shield?) Non-cantrips only if not Cleric.
free action: Divine Weapon
action 2: cast a 1-action spell from wizard/sorcerer multiclass
free action: Bespell Weapon
action 3: attack with weapon

You can use a 2-action spell for one of those if you're under a Haste effect. Such as, from wizard or arcane/occult/primal sorcerer. Also Lingering Composition, so Cleric/other caster.

It's not at once, but it's still the same turn. It looks like both last until the turn's end, not just the next action.

You don't have to jump through so many hoops: if you cast a single action heal, it meets the requirements for both Bespell Weapon [cast a non-cantrip spell] and Divine Weapon [cast a spell from a divine spell slot].

So Action 1 cast heal. Free action for both Bespell Weapon and Divine Weapon. Action 2 weapon attack. Action 3 weapon attack. Divine Weapon has a trigger and Bespell Weapon doesn't so it doesn't trigger the 'you can use only one free action per trigger". Bespell Weapon,as it has no trigger, is used "like a single action, just without spending any of your actions for the turn".

Free Actions

The hoops are actually needful. Having used divine weapon right after casting the spell (as you must, since that's what triggered it) you cannot then bespell weapon, since you violate its requirement that your last action was to cast a spell---your last action was actually to use divine weapon. Free actions are still actions.


Ferrin33 wrote:
Garretmander wrote:
Ferrin33 wrote:
I'd like it if cantrips also triggered it, as it's pretty useless with multiclass archetypes due to the limited number of uses. The action economy wouldn't be any different either as there aren't any free action cantrips that I'm aware of?
Third action attack is suboptimal in most cases. Shield is an amazing one action cantrip. If cantrips worked bespell weapon would become much, much better.

Yeah, Shield would be great to trigger Bespell Weapon, would it be to good, though? I doubt it. Especially as you can't use the Shield cantrip for an hour if you use its shield block ability.

Could be 2 damage per action spent on the spell? That way it'd generally be +2 for 2 attacks, or +4 for 1. (not counting flurry of blows and the like)

Actually, it would be pretty problematic if worked with cantrips. It would most likely become an automatic pick because of how consistent the damage output would be. Kind of like PF1 power attack. But what would be worse is that it would push casters towards using weapons... Which hurts a lot of concepts for "pure" mages.

Making the damage variable based on actions just seems more complicated than it is worth.


QuidEst wrote:
Feats that hand you free damage shouldn't scale because (as far as I can tell) that's damage above the expected curve- your feats are rarely sources of raw damage bonuses.

Some feats do scale, but they usually start out significantly lower. For example, Burn it! deals an additional point of fire damage per two spell levels when you cast a fire spell, and Dangerous Sorcery deals +1 point per spell level if the spell doesn't have a duration. But something that starts out as +1d6 damage probably shouldn't scale.


Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
graystone wrote:
james014Aura wrote:

Replying to Fuzzy-Wuzzy and Captain Morgan:

action 1: as cleric, cast a 1-action divine spell (Heal? Shield?) Non-cantrips only if not Cleric.
free action: Divine Weapon
action 2: cast a 1-action spell from wizard/sorcerer multiclass
free action: Bespell Weapon
action 3: attack with weapon

You can use a 2-action spell for one of those if you're under a Haste effect. Such as, from wizard or arcane/occult/primal sorcerer. Also Lingering Composition, so Cleric/other caster.

It's not at once, but it's still the same turn. It looks like both last until the turn's end, not just the next action.

You don't have to jump through so many hoops: if you cast a single action heal, it meets the requirements for both Bespell Weapon [cast a non-cantrip spell] and Divine Weapon [cast a spell from a divine spell slot].

So Action 1 cast heal. Free action for both Bespell Weapon and Divine Weapon. Action 2 weapon attack. Action 3 weapon attack. Divine Weapon has a trigger and Bespell Weapon doesn't so it doesn't trigger the 'you can use only one free action per trigger". Bespell Weapon,as it has no trigger, is used "like a single action, just without spending any of your actions for the turn".

Free Actions

The hoops are actually needful. Having used divine weapon right after casting the spell (as you must, since that's what triggered it) you cannot then bespell weapon, since you violate its requirement that your last action was to cast a spell---your last action was actually to use divine weapon. Free actions are still actions.

Not so. "you use it like a single action, just without spending any of your actions for the turn". It's NOT one of your actions for the round. If it was like you say, there would be no need for a limitation of "you can use only one free action per trigger" as the first trigger would already disqualify you from using a second. "For example, if you had a reaction and a free action that both had a trigger of “your turn begins,” you could use either of them at the start of your turn—but not both." There is no need for this if each is an action as the first would make it not the begining of the turn anymore.

In a 3 action turn, action in this case means one of the 3 actions IMO. "Free actions don’t cost you any of your actions per turn". they don't count as actions.


Captain Morgan wrote:
Ferrin33 wrote:
Garretmander wrote:
Ferrin33 wrote:
I'd like it if cantrips also triggered it, as it's pretty useless with multiclass archetypes due to the limited number of uses. The action economy wouldn't be any different either as there aren't any free action cantrips that I'm aware of?
Third action attack is suboptimal in most cases. Shield is an amazing one action cantrip. If cantrips worked bespell weapon would become much, much better.

Yeah, Shield would be great to trigger Bespell Weapon, would it be to good, though? I doubt it. Especially as you can't use the Shield cantrip for an hour if you use its shield block ability.

Could be 2 damage per action spent on the spell? That way it'd generally be +2 for 2 attacks, or +4 for 1. (not counting flurry of blows and the like)

Actually, it would be pretty problematic if worked with cantrips. It would most likely become an automatic pick because of how consistent the damage output would be. Kind of like PF1 power attack. But what would be worse is that it would push casters towards using weapons... Which hurts a lot of concepts for "pure" mages.

Making the damage variable based on actions just seems more complicated than it is worth.

You need to use your actions to hit enemies with your weapon as a caster, which is a huge detriment. Even when you are using your spells for Bespell Weapon, it's not like it's a massive increase as you're still limited to the low proficiency bonus to attacks.

I don't see it being mandatory at all with cantrips as you're limited by your action economy.

As a caster, you're using actions for subpar attacks with a low proficiency.

Getting it through the multiclass archetype means your spells will just not be as good, the actions spent on casting are relatively worse.

It's not a hard thing to keep track of with only 3-4 actions per round, of which in most situations it will be either 1 or 2 used on a spell cast beforehand to be able to make use of Bespell Weapon. Having the damage variable will make it useful for both 2 action and 1 action spells, instead of just plain better for 1 action point ones. Or worse, free action spells.

Having it work for cantrips won't make it more powerful for casters as they generally have plenty of spells to use in combat each turn, and for martial characters it will actually allow them to use it, but forcing them to use relatively sub-par actions on casting. (Less proficiency on their casting)


Ferrin33 wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
Ferrin33 wrote:
Garretmander wrote:
Ferrin33 wrote:
I'd like it if cantrips also triggered it, as it's pretty useless with multiclass archetypes due to the limited number of uses. The action economy wouldn't be any different either as there aren't any free action cantrips that I'm aware of?
Third action attack is suboptimal in most cases. Shield is an amazing one action cantrip. If cantrips worked bespell weapon would become much, much better.

Yeah, Shield would be great to trigger Bespell Weapon, would it be to good, though? I doubt it. Especially as you can't use the Shield cantrip for an hour if you use its shield block ability.

Could be 2 damage per action spent on the spell? That way it'd generally be +2 for 2 attacks, or +4 for 1. (not counting flurry of blows and the like)

Actually, it would be pretty problematic if worked with cantrips. It would most likely become an automatic pick because of how consistent the damage output would be. Kind of like PF1 power attack. But what would be worse is that it would push casters towards using weapons... Which hurts a lot of concepts for "pure" mages.

Making the damage variable based on actions just seems more complicated than it is worth.

You need to use your actions to hit enemies with your weapon as a caster, which is a huge detriment. Even when you are using your spells for Bespell Weapon, it's not like it's a massive increase as you're still limited to the low proficiency bonus to attacks.

I don't see it being mandatory at all with cantrips as you're limited by your action economy.

However I do see, in a world where bespell weapon is triggered by cantrips, the inevitable guides saying: 'You're a gish, so obviously you pick up bespell weapon'.

For better or worse, that's something PF2 is trying to avoid by design.

Do I think it would be OP? Not really. Do I think making it trigger on cantrips is a good idea? No.

If I was disappointed with this feat, rather than lumping it into 'it's a decent choice if my character does _____', I'd probably make the damage scale by level, but change it's text to only affect your next strike on the same turn. Still no trigger on cantrips.


graystone wrote:
Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
The hoops are actually needful. Having used divine weapon right after casting the spell (as you must, since that's what triggered it) you cannot then bespell weapon, since you violate its requirement that your last action was to cast a spell---your last action was actually to use divine weapon. Free actions are still actions.

Not so. "you use it like a single action, just without spending any of your actions for the turn". It's NOT one of your actions for the round. If it was like you say, there would be no need for a limitation of "you can use only one free action per trigger" as the first trigger would already disqualify you from using a second. "For example, if you had a reaction and a free action that both had a trigger of “your turn begins,” you could use either of them at the start of your turn—but not both." There is no need for this if each is an action as the first would make it not the begining of the turn anymore.

In a 3 action turn, action in this case means one of the 3 actions IMO. "Free actions don’t cost you any of your actions per turn". they don't count as actions.

Argh. Okay, free actions are, despite the name, not actually actions. That's not confusing or anything.


Garretmander wrote:
Ferrin33 wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
Ferrin33 wrote:
Garretmander wrote:
Ferrin33 wrote:
I'd like it if cantrips also triggered it, as it's pretty useless with multiclass archetypes due to the limited number of uses. The action economy wouldn't be any different either as there aren't any free action cantrips that I'm aware of?
Third action attack is suboptimal in most cases. Shield is an amazing one action cantrip. If cantrips worked bespell weapon would become much, much better.

Yeah, Shield would be great to trigger Bespell Weapon, would it be to good, though? I doubt it. Especially as you can't use the Shield cantrip for an hour if you use its shield block ability.

Could be 2 damage per action spent on the spell? That way it'd generally be +2 for 2 attacks, or +4 for 1. (not counting flurry of blows and the like)

Actually, it would be pretty problematic if worked with cantrips. It would most likely become an automatic pick because of how consistent the damage output would be. Kind of like PF1 power attack. But what would be worse is that it would push casters towards using weapons... Which hurts a lot of concepts for "pure" mages.

Making the damage variable based on actions just seems more complicated than it is worth.

You need to use your actions to hit enemies with your weapon as a caster, which is a huge detriment. Even when you are using your spells for Bespell Weapon, it's not like it's a massive increase as you're still limited to the low proficiency bonus to attacks.

I don't see it being mandatory at all with cantrips as you're limited by your action economy.

However I do see, in a world where bespell weapon is triggered by cantrips, the inevitable guides saying: 'You're a gish, so obviously you pick up bespell weapon'.

For better or worse, that's something PF2 is trying to avoid by design.

Do I think it would be OP? Not really. Do I think making it trigger on cantrips is a good idea? No.

If I was disappointed with...

For a character aiming to blend weapons and magic into their turns, then it's a great pick for damage. If you only aim to use your spells to get ranged damage options or buffs, not really using both spells and attacks in the same round, then it's potentially not the best pick for your character. If it's not useful for a gish, then who is it good for? Why would it exist if it's not useful for anyone?

Having the damage scale by level doesn't solve the issue that it's a crappy thing to pick up when multiclassing. Sure, it'd be better, probably even mandatory for non-gish casters even because the burst damage is that much higher.

Having it work for cantrips just makes it usable as a multiclassing option if you're not already a caster, while casters don't get more burst out of it as cantrips aren't the best spells to use. It'd just make it more consistently useful for them. It solves two of the issues it has very simply like that.


Captain Morgan wrote:
Actually, it would be pretty problematic if worked with cantrips. It would most likely become an automatic pick because of how consistent the damage output would be. Kind of like PF1 power attack. But what would be worse is that it would push casters towards using weapons... Which hurts a lot of concepts for "pure" mages.

Not sure I agree. Cantrip damage isn't exactly amazing and if you're doing it for damage you might end up having to deal with MAP on characters who already have very low accuracy.

Moreover, it's a fairly small amount of damage that loses power relative to monster HP as a game goes on... and it costs a feat, which is a nontrivial resource. It's hardly free.

It does make the idea of a mage carrying around a weapon to use as their third action more relevant if someone wants to do that, but giving people options is good, not bad.

Garretmander wrote:

However I do see, in a world where bespell weapon is triggered by cantrips, the inevitable guides saying: 'You're a gish, so obviously you pick up bespell weapon'.

For better or worse, that's something PF2 is trying to avoid by design.

What PF2 is trying to avoid is mandatory feat choices in general. That's not the same as a feat being good for someone whose character plays into the exact circumstances a feat is set up to enable.

There's a difference between "you need combat expertise and improved trip or you can't do this" and "most crossbow rangers are going to take the feat that makes them better at using crossbows".

The latter is both a lot less problematic and emphatically not something PF2 is trying to avoid by design, because there are a lot of feats that do exactly that in PF2.

I'm not saying bespell weapon necessarily needs to trigger off cantrips, but these arguments don't really hold up for me.


Pumpkinhead11 wrote:

You may be right in your interpretation, but i’ll still hold skepticism until a Dev says otherwise.

That's not actually my interpretation, I am actually leaning away from that idea. I was merely pointing out something which I thought might support such an interpretation.

51 to 71 of 71 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Rules Discussion / Why doesn’t Bespell Weapon scale? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.