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.
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.
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.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.
That's only going to be at a certain posters table, to be fair.
| 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?
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.
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.
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)
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 weaponYou 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".
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 weaponYou 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".
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.
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.
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.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 weaponYou 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".
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.
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)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.