Deadmanwalking |
They have not.
Most spellcasters get to Legendary in their casting, which is +2 over Master, and duplicated for attacks only among Fighters of the non-spellcasters. This was considered a sufficient accuracy bump.
Whether it really is such a bump is a slightly different question, but that's the logic for why such things do not exist.
Ediwir |
They have not.
Most spellcasters get to Legendary in their casting, which is +2 over Master, and duplicated for attacks only among Fighters of the non-spellcasters. This was considered a sufficient accuracy bump.
Whether it really is such a bump is a slightly different question, but that's the logic for why such things do not exist.
Overall it matches Fighter, but really, the speed at which it’s gained is actually behind most martials.
It works for one reason and one reason only, and it’s the one guideline I gave the Magus in my group - it’s not meant to be used for multiple attacks.sherlock1701 |
They have not.
Most spellcasters get to Legendary in their casting, which is +2 over Master, and duplicated for attacks only among Fighters of the non-spellcasters. This was considered a sufficient accuracy bump.
Whether it really is such a bump is a slightly different question, but that's the logic for why such things do not exist.
It isn't. Spells should be markedly more accurate than normal attacks since they're a limited resource.
Deadmanwalking |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
They are more accurate than most classes attacks, just not the fighter, and to get the most out of spells you don't have the assumption of MAP for dpr.
This isn't really true. They're actually less accurate than martial attacks at just about every level since they don't get the net eventual +3 bonus a magic weapon gives. They're only very slightly behind non-Fighters at most levels, however.
Now, that's potentially acceptable if the math works out right in other ways, but that's not something I really want to get into an argument about right now.