Debuff Magus


Advice

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So, yesterday I saw this thread, where the OP asks if it is possible to build a powerful Magus without incurring in the usual Magical Lineage + Intensify Spell + Shocking Grasp shenanigans.

I would like therefore to build a Magus that still uses similar shenanigans, while however focusing on something completely other than rolling lotta'd6s. Specifically: debuffing. I have never built a Magus, so forgive me if I make some blatant mistakes.

The rules for this build are simple:
1) All efforts must be directed mainly towards debuffing and not mere damage.
2) Attack/debuff routine must be repeatable all day long. Spell slots are for versatility, not spamming the same thing a few times per day.
3) Str-based, no boring and overused Inspired Blade chimeras.

That being said, this is what I came up with:

CG Human Magus Jistkan Artificer/Hexcrafter.

Stats: 16+2 12 12 16 10 7

Traits: Wayang Spellhunter(Arcane Mark), Bruising Intellect.

Feats:
1 Blissful Spell, Enforcer
2
3 Dragon Style
4
5 Hex Strike(Evil Eye), Dragon Ferocity

By the time he gets a Cruel Amulet of Mighty Fists, his full-attack routine will be:
Round 0: Activate Dragon Style and charge into combat.
Round 1:
- Golem Arm, Spell Combat + Spellstrike: fist nonlethal damage + Blissful Arcane Mark
- Free action Intimidate (Enforcer)
- Normal Arm: fist nonlethal/lethal damage, Sickened (Cruel AoMF)
- Swift action: Evil Eye
Round 2+: Rinse and repeat. Spread Evil Eye maluses in case of failed save.

Which leads to these debuffs:
Blissful Spell: -2 hit, -2 dmg
Shaken: -2 hit, -2 saves, -2 skills
Sickened: -2 hit, -2 dmg, -2 saves, -2 skills
Evil Eye: -2 to hit or AC or saves or skills

For a total: -6 hit, -4 dmg, -4 saves, -4 skills, AND a floating -2 from Evil Eye, in a single round, with no resources expended. If the target failed the Evil Eye save (probable), on the following rounds we can add different penalties.

Considerations:
1) Touch of Fatigue (via the Two Worlds Magic trait) would have also added Fatigued, which gives -2 Str and Dex, AND makes the target unable to charge, but I am afraid the Fort save will become quickly an autopass, even considering the -6 to saves debuff we inflict. What do you think?
2) I like to think about Arcane Mark as the glowing impression left by the magically enhanced bionic arm on the target after the hit, but if Arcane Mark is too cheesy, we can use the aforementioned Touch of Fatigue, or Brand. Brand still requires a Fort save, but at least we do not have to spend a trait.
3) Not picking the Two Worlds Magic trait means we can pick the Magical Lineage one, and stick another Metamagic feat to our cantrip (Arcane Mark or Brand, it does not matter). Is there any other debuffing Metamagic feat that could be included?
4) The Jistkan Artificer archetype gives us a nice way to deal nonlethal damage (required for Enforcer) that also improves automatically without having to spend resources. We can also improve its damage via Dragon Style/Ferocity, the arcana giving it 19-20 crit chance and the Keen weapon property. Hexcrafter nicely compliments the build by giving us hexes and thematically fitting the concept. Are there other archetypes you suggest?
5) Arcane Strike and Riving Strike were also good options instead of Dragon Style/Ferocity, but then we would not have enough swift actions to use both Riving and Hex Strike.

What do you think? How would you continue the build?

Silver Crusade

UPDATE: How about Words of Power? Do you think a full wordcaster Magus (with GM permission, of course) would be viable?

Regardless, with the Experimental Spellcaster feat we could get the Flame Jet effect word, to get a fire touch-type cantrip, which could be used as our signature cantrip, as it does not require a saving throw. Apart from the 1d4 damage, the merits of Flame Jet over Arcane Mark are:

1) some GMs might find it less cheesy, especially if we use a feat to pick it in the first place;
2) it qualifies for Flaring Spell, which inflict Dazzled (-1 hit/Perception) on targets. However, we will not pick the actual feat, but rather a Fire Fragment, an alchemical reagent that can be used as focus component when casting fire spells to automatically give them the benefit of the Flaring Spell feat (let's be honest, Dazzled is not worth a feat).

If we go this route, we will add another -1 to hit (and Perception) on the targeted enemy. The worthiness of spending a feat to add -1 hit to the list of our debuffs is up for debate, the problem, however, is another:

1) Arcane Mark bypasses SR, while Flame Jet does not, but more importantly...
2) fire resistance 5 is quite common, which essentially shuts down two of our feats (Blissful Spell and Experimental Spellcaster) in a pinch. Therefore, Arcane Mark might still be preferable overall.


Well,I would take race bonus to dexterity, then strengh. +1 to AC instead +1 to damage and attack is beter for my opinion, if you havent tank in team


Continuing the build? You might pick up signature skill (intimidate) to increase the effect of enforcer, or you might aim for shatter defenses to increase the effect another way. Or you might pick up another hex and hex strike with it - evil eye is mind affecting and won't work on some targets, misfortune isn't (though it has no effect on a successful save). Or you might just pick up a few buffing hexes. You probably don't want to lose more arcana to get hexes so a feat or two on extra magus arcana is justified here IMO.


I'm building something similar as a backup character for Iron Gods (golem arm = cybernetic arm ... sorta).
I'm a big fan of the Wand Wielder arcana, especially for archetypes that get reduced casting. As a Hexcrafter you have access to Ill Omen, which is a no save debuff, so it's great for a wand (though sadly mind-affecting).
It's not quite "all day no resources expended", but since you can't get wand wielder till level 6 (because archetype) you should be able to afford infinity wands at that point.

The another hex I like for the Hexcrafter is Soothsayer. Since you don't want to be cackling this is like 1 free cackle for all the relevant hexes. It also turns the Protective Luck hex into an amazing defensive buff that can affect the whole party for the beginning of every combat.

I've found that my biggest problem with the Justkin Hexcrafter is that I want all the hexes and all the Justkin arcana and it'd be nice to get some of the regular arcana (and maybe a feat or two) as well.
#FirstWorldProblems


how you get Dragon Ferocity? You havent Stuning fist. Also i think take Power attack instead on early levels is good idea

Silver Crusade

Quote:
Well,I would take race bonus to dexterity, then strengh. +1 to AC instead +1 to damage and attack is beter for my opinion, if you havent tank in team

+2 Dex on a starting score of 12 on a Str-based build that can also use armours is a waste. +2 Str means +1 to hit and +2 to damage on the first hit (+1 to hit/damage on following attacks). The bonus to hit indirectly translates into a bonus to damage (on average +1 to hit translates into a +2 to damage, so a total of +4 damage on the first hit, +3 on following hits).

But, most importantly, +1 to hit rises the chances on landing the debuffs, which are the point of this build and, in turn, indirectly increase the party survivability. What's better: increasing the chances of having your target attack with a -6 to hit (i.e. everyone in the party gets +6 AC), or you alone having +1 AC?

Pro100Andr wrote:
how you get Dragon Ferocity? You havent Stuning fist. Also i think take Power attack instead on early levels is good idea

It's a typo from a previous version of the build that was Charisma based and relying on a dip into Scaled Fist Monk. In this version, substitute it with Power Attack.

I would continue the build with Hurtful at 7th level, eventually retraining Enforcer into Cornugon Smash, so that we do not have to rely on nonlethal damage anymore, if that is allowed.


Gray Warden wrote:
Quote:
What's better: increasing the chances of having your target attack with a -6 to hit (i.e. everyone in the party gets +6 AC), or you alone having +1 AC?

Yes, better chance to debuff is better, but if you dont hit, enemy have better chance to hit you and +1 AC can help

Silver Crusade

Pro100Andr wrote:
Gray Warden wrote:
What's better: increasing the chances of having your target attack with a -6 to hit (i.e. everyone in the party gets +6 AC), or you alone having +1 AC?
Yes, better chance to debuff is better, but if you dont hit, enemy have better chance to hit you and +1 AC can help

I don't really have time to do a CR-based calculation with average ACs to show you the maths, but by experience I can tell you that, at least in this case, +1 to hit is without doubt better than +1 to AC, both in terms of damage and survivability.


Gray Warden wrote:
What do you think? How would you continue the build?

It's a good cantrip combo you've found, but Jistkan Artificer would not work for the build you've proposed as it's incompatible with AoMF.

Jistkan Artificer: Golem Arm wrote:
The arm gains no benefits from items that enhance unarmed strikes, such as an amulet of mighty fists.

Also, it seems like none of your debuffs works against undead enemies so I'd keep that in mind.


Gray Warden wrote:
Pro100Andr wrote:
Gray Warden wrote:

I don't really have time to do a CR-based calculation with average ACs to show you the maths, but by experience I can tell you that, at least in this case, +1 to hit is without doubt better than +1 to AC, both in terms of damage and survivability.

On early levels yes, +1 or 2 is important, but on middle and higher levels that bonus not so important, and plays more greater roll Strength score for feats, then number of bonus from strength

Silver Crusade

Wonderstell wrote:
Gray Warden wrote:
What do you think? How would you continue the build?

It's a good cantrip combo you've found, but Jistkan Artificer would not work for the build you've proposed as it's incompatible with AoMF.

Jistkan Artificer: Golem Arm wrote:
The arm gains no benefits from items that enhance unarmed strikes, such as an amulet of mighty fists.

Re-read the attack routine.

Round 1:
- Golem Arm, Spell Combat + Spellstrike: fist nonlethal damage + Blissful Arcane Mark
- Free action Intimidate (Enforcer)
- Normal Arm: fist nonlethal/lethal damage, Sickened (Cruel AoMF)
- Swift action: Evil Eye

Quote:
Also, it seems like none of your debuffs works against undead enemies so I'd keep that in mind.

Not everyone needs to be a master at everything, as long as they can still somehow be useful: in case of undeads, it will be time for the Paladin or the Cleric to shine. Meanwhile, this Magus will simply Shocking Grasp/punch his way through them like any other Magus would (perhaps with lower damage spikes, but higher base damage given by the 1.5x Str and Power Attack to damage). Of course, in an undead/vermin/constructs heavy campaign, the GM should advice the players not to rely on mind-effecting/nonlethal builds.

Quote:
On early levels yes, +1 or 2 is important, but on middle and higher levels that bonus not so important, and plays more greater roll Strength score for feats, then number of bonus from strength

Nope. If anything it's a mere +1 to AC becoming less and less and less and less important level after level. +1 to hit is always relevant instead.


Gray Warden wrote:
Wonderstell wrote:
Gray Warden wrote:
What do you think? How would you continue the build?

It's a good cantrip combo you've found, but Jistkan Artificer would not work for the build you've proposed as it's incompatible with AoMF.

Jistkan Artificer: Golem Arm wrote:
The arm gains no benefits from items that enhance unarmed strikes, such as an amulet of mighty fists.
Also, it seems like none of your debuffs works against undead enemies so I'd keep that in mind.

Re-read the attack routine.

Round 1:
- Golem Arm, Spell Combat + Spellstrike: fist nonlethal damage + Blissful Arcane Mark
- Free action Intimidate (Enforcer)
- Normal Arm: fist nonlethal/lethal damage, Sickened (Cruel AoMF)
- Swift action: Evil Eye

Quote:
On early levels yes, +1 or 2 is important, but on middle and higher levels that bonus not so important, and plays more greater roll Strength score for feats, then number of bonus from strength
Nope. If anything it's a mere +1 to AC becoming less and less and less and less important level after level. +1 to hit is always relevant instead.

Well for my opinion +1 to hit and damage becoming less and less and less important too. On higher levels you can gain more then +1 to damage with feats

Also, in long campaigns I prefer be more balanced: not crazy one/two stats with low others

Silver Crusade

Pro100Andr wrote:
Well for my opinion +1 to hit and damage becoming less and less and less important too. On higher levels you can gain more then +1 to damage with feats

I see, nothing of what I've written about the fact that higher Str is not just +1 to hit and damage was actually read. Fair enough.


What feats you think to take on later levels?


Gray Warden wrote:
Re-read the attack routine.

I missed that, but I don't believe it's legal. Spell Combat is like TWF so your attack routine is locked in when you start attacking.

You must make all your attacks with the main hand weapon, which in this case would be your Golem Arm.

Silver Crusade

Wonderstell wrote:
Gray Warden wrote:
Re-read the attack routine.

I missed that, but I don't believe it's legal. Spell Combat is like TWF so your attack routine is locked in when you start attacking.

You must make all your attacks with the main hand weapon, which in this case would be your Golem Arm.

Spell Combat and Spellstrike are two different things.

I can attack with my normal arm.

Now I use Spell Combat to cast a spell. The spell requires a touch attack. As it is, Spell Combat requires you to deliver the spell using your free hand, in this case: my golem arm. So, Spell Combat already requires you to use both arms to attack and off-hand cast.

Now I use Spellstirke to deliver the touch. Nowhere in Spellstrike it is said I need to use the same hand/weapon I have used before; in fact, Spellstrike is independent from Spell Combat. So I choose to deliver it with my golem arm.

Since the order between the two attacks is not fixed, much like TWF, I can choose to perform them in whichever order I prefer.


Alright, I see what you mean.

It seems like it could work, but I still don't think it would fly since TWF is extremely rigid. Expect some table variance and hands of effort arguments as the Spellstrike is happening "in concert" with the kind-of-TWF Spell Combat.

There's also this FAQ which states that you specifically have to use the main hand weapon when using Spell Combat. You could argue that the Spellstrike is separate, but don't be surprised if someone sees this FAQ as a blanket statement.


All your iterative/haste/etc attacks would have to use the same hand, but the free attack from Spellstrike could use either hand. You don't see this often because usually you're better off using your main weapon for everything, but it's doable.

Silver Crusade

Wonderstell wrote:

Alright, I see what you mean.

It seems like it could work, but I still don't think it would fly since TWF is extremely rigid. Expect some table variance and hands of effort arguments as the Spellstrike is happening "in concert" with the kind-of-TWF Spell Combat.

There's also this FAQ which states that you specifically have to use the main hand weapon when using Spell Combat. You could argue that the Spellstrike is separate, but don't be surprised if someone sees this FAQ as a blanket statement.

I really can't see how any table variation is going to happen or be justified. The FAQ you linked refers, as you said, explicitly to Spell Combat (and specifically refer to weapons in hand vs weapons not associated with a hand, such as armor spikes and bite). It's not like I could argue that Spellstrike is separate; Spellstrike is separate from Spell Combat: in fact, you can Spellstrike without having cast a spell via Spell Combat at all, you can even Spellstrike using a 2-handed weapon!

The usual Magus routine is:

1- Attack with Scimitar
2- Spell Combat > Shocking Grasp
3a- Deliver the spell as a touch attack via Free Hand, in this case: off-hand
alternatively
3b- Spellstrike > deliver the spell via weapon attack, in this case: Scimitar

In this case it is:

1- Attack with Hand
2- Spell Combat > Arcane Mark
3a- Deliver the spell as a touch attack via Free Hand, in this case: Golem Hand
alternatively
3b- Spellstrike > deliver the spell via weapon attack, in this case: Golem Hand

As you can see, I can already deliver the charge using the Golem Hand: why wouldn't I be able to Spellstrike with it? No table variations on this matter can exist outside of basically house rules.


Expect table variation anyway.

Unless the GM is familiar with the Magus they're probably not familiar with the rules for touch spells - let alone how touch spells onteract with spell combat and spellstrike.

Every Magus player knows how it works, everyone else doesn't.


So I see what Grey Warden is thinking. Essentially, the "off hand" attack is the main attack and then the spell is cast through the golem arm.

RAW, doesn't work because the off-hand is no longer unoccupied. That would include using an empty hand to attack. Because you attacked with it, it's no longer free to cast a spell (which I admit doesn't make sense for spells which lack a somatic component). I think I've seen several FAQs or explanations that you are TWFing with a spell in one hand and a weapon in the other, but spellstrike just happens to let you shift the magic from your empty hand to your weapon.

My question is, can't you still fire off the Hex Strike off the golem arm? Or no?

Silver Crusade

JiaYou wrote:
So I see what Grey Warden is thinking. Essentially, the "off hand" attack is the main attack and then the spell is cast through the golem arm.

You've got two hands: with one you attack, with the other you cast and deliver the spell. Literally cannot be simpler than this.


IIRC doesn't the standard debuff build do hexcrafter magus, then enforcer/cruel/rimespell frostbite? So you end up with shaken/sickened/entangled in one hit?

Silver Crusade

Ryan Freire wrote:
IIRC doesn't the standard debuff build do hexcrafter magus, then enforcer/cruel/rimespell frostbite? So you end up with shaken/sickened/entangled in one hit?

The idea was to do something different from the classic Shocking Grasp/Frostbite Magus.

Regardless, the Rime Spell build can't do it at will without spending resources, has to deal with SR and cold resistance, has to pay for Cruel on top of other weapon enhancements (each +1 drives the prices of further enhancements up), has to find a way to deal non-lethal damage with their weapon (usually this means wielding a Scimitar, worshipping Sarenrae and picking a specific trait) and can't deliver a Hex as part of an attack.

Not saying the standard is bad (it's "the standard", of course it is good), just that they are different. You can easily adapt this build to the standard by picking Rime Spell instead of Blissful Spell and go Frostbite. I just wanted to make a Magus build not depending on spell-slots for standard attack routines.

Scarab Sages

Gray Warden wrote:
JiaYou wrote:
So I see what Grey Warden is thinking. Essentially, the "off hand" attack is the main attack and then the spell is cast through the golem arm.
You've got two hands: with one you attack, with the other you cast and deliver the spell. Literally cannot be simpler than this.

It’s confusing, because normally a magus can’t have two weapons out. But I think what you’ve got here works. Note that your unarmed strike (not the golem arm) becomes the weapon you are wielding for Spell Combat, and the golem arm becomes your free hand, so when you get iterative or haste attacks, they have to be taken with the unarmed strike and not the golem arm if you’re using this spell combat sequence. But what you have for two attacks should work.

Wand Wielder combined with a wand of blade lash works well for tripping as a debuff when you can’t affect things like undead. As long as they aren’t flying undead.

Silver Crusade

Ferious Thune wrote:
It’s confusing, because normally a magus can’t have two weapons out.

Well, that's because usually Magi don't have Improved Unarmed Strike. But, yeah, you are right about the rest.


I agree that it couldn't be simpler, but I'm pretty sure that RAW it still doesn't work. I mean my friends and I have tried to imagine what Spell Combat/Spellstrike would actually look like, and it looks like a contrived method to make a Magus able to keep up in combat XD.

The reason I'm saying it doesn't work is this:

Spell Combat says wrote:
the off-hand weapon is a spell that is being cast. To use this ability, the magus must have one hand free (even if the spell being cast does not have somatic components), while wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand

.

Spellstrike says wrote:
At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack

So yes, you SHOULD be able to channel the spell through the off-hand unarmed strike, because Spellstrike doesn't specify which weapon the spell could be channeled through, but Spell Combat would need to be interpreted as you not having ANY weapon in your off-hand. If you've already made an armed attack with your off-hand, that to me disqualifies it from being "free". I'm unclear what part of IUS in your mind makes it work, since you should still be able to do it without (you'd just do nonlethal with the unarmed attack and it would provoke an attack of opportunity).

On the other hand, if this DID work, then this makes the Armored Battlemage actually viable. I just need to be able to take TWF normally, because then I can attack with my main weapon and then spellstrike through an off-hand gauntlet/fist/cestus/brass knuckles and it should still count. And I'm pretty sure no one has ever said that works.

On the other hand, if people are allowed to use Fencing Grace/Slashing Grace/Dervish Dance and also deliver a buckler strike without losing Dex-to-damage, then I'd argue that a similar interpretation works here.


So what he's doing is literally casting the spell with his left hand, delivering it with his left hand (via a punch) and then doing all his iteratives with his right hand. The left hand is free to cast/deliver the spell while the right dioes all the rest of the punching.

It works


It still shouldn't work because the hand that casts isn't the hand that delivers the spell. That's why I was trying to emphasize that it's Spell COMBAT that doesn't make it work. If it's the golem arm that casts, then it's not free to make attacks. If it's the unarmed hand that casts the spell, it's not free to make an attack.

Does any of this really matter? No.


I was going for a build akin to this and picked up two additions that would increase damage a lot.

If you take Boar Style at level 3 instead of dragon, you do +2d6 damage each time you hit twice in a round, which is super easy with Spell Combat.

Add Sapping on the arm for another +2d6 non-lethal damage. Spell combat, with just these two, should add up to +6d6 per attack+

An alternative as well is the rimefrost/frostbite combo to add fatigue in there.


JiaYou wrote:
It still shouldn't work because ...

I know what you're saying, and you're missing something - or rather you're adding something that's not actually there.

Here's how Spell Combat works WITHOUT Spellstrike.

Level 1 Magus casts Shocking Grasp and attacks as a full round action.
- Cast Shocking Grasp with your spell-hand
- Deliver Shocking Grasp as a Touch Attack with your spell-hand
- Attack with scimitar in your main hand.

Now what Spellstrike does is lets you replace a touch attack with your weapon, so let's take a look at how it works WITH Spellstrike.

Level 2 Magus casts Shocking Grasp and attacks as a full round action.
- Cast Shocking Grasp with your spell-hand
- Deliver Shocking Grasp as a Touch Attack Spellstrike with your spell-hand
- Attack with scimitar with your main hand.

Now the only thing Spellstrike is changing there is that it allows you to use your weapon in place of a Touch Attack. Your default option should indeed be the weapon in the casting hand, but Spellstrike is permissive enough that it lets you use ANY weapon, which is why our "two weapon fighting" mechanic usually lets us make more attacks with our scimitar (Spell Combat is less permissive, so one hand has to use a light or one handed weapon).

The argument that you can't use your spell-hand to spellstrike would also be an argument that you can't use your spell-hand to deliver a touch attack.

JiaYou wrote:
Does any of this really matter? No.

Apparantly it does since someone's talking about using this combo.

Scarab Sages

This line from the FAQ is why I would be permissive with it:

FAQ wrote:
Basically, the spellstrike gives the magus more options when it comes to delivering touch spells; it’s not supposed to make it more difficult for the magus to use touch spells.

He’s not getting an extra attack beyond what spell combat grants. Nothing in spell combat requires that he deliver the spell with the weapon he’s making the rest of his attacks with. Using Spellstrike to deliver the spell shouldn’t change what options he has for hands to use to deliver the spell.


If you're going for a debuffing route, I think you should throw Arcane Strike and Riving Strike in that build. Enforcer + Cruel weap = -4 saves, and Riving Strike is an additional -2 to saves vs. spells/sla's.

This would synergize really well with your Save or Suck spells.

Also, consider not taking Wayang Spellhunter right off the bat, and get Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage later with Additional Traits as a feat. Then you can retrain both of these as needed when you level up. I'd take Additional Traits around lvl 7-9ish and throw Wayang/Lineage on Touch of Idiocy so you can prepare a couple Empowered Touch of Idiocy as 2nd level spell slots. 1d6 +50% to Int/Wis/Cha can sometimes make enemy casters so debuffed they can't even cast their spells anymore, and any enemies with dumped Int/Wis/Cha stats are reduced to gibbering wastes of space, and of course it reduces their Will Save.

Round 1:

Activate Arcane Strike as Swift.
Punch with Golem Arm, Shaken/Sicken -4 saves, Riving Strike -2 save vs spells/sla's
Spellcombat Empowered Touch of Idiocy for -2 to -9 Int/Wis/Cha

On your lowest roll for ToI, you'd reduce their Will Save to spells by -7. On your highest roll for ToI, you'd reduce their Will Save to spells by -10.

Round 2:

Hit them with any Save or Suck spell that has a Will Save.

Silver Crusade

Ryze Kuja wrote:
If you're going for a debuffing route, I think you should throw Arcane Strike and Riving Strike in that build.

Riving Strike is not compatible with Hex Strike, as both require swift actions. By the time you've applied all Evil Eye penalties on a target, it will be probably dead. If not, I guess for the price of 2 feats I would probably be better off picking an additional Hex and Hex Strike.


Gray Warden wrote:
Ryze Kuja wrote:
If you're going for a debuffing route, I think you should throw Arcane Strike and Riving Strike in that build.
Riving Strike is not compatible with Hex Strike, as both require swift actions. By the time you've applied all Evil Eye penalties on a target, it will be probably dead. If not, I guess for the price of 2 feats I would probably be better off picking an additional Hex and Hex Strike.

You could alternate though if you wanted. Like round 1, Hex Strike EvEye -2 saves, Round 2, Arcane/Riving Strike -2 saves.

Evil Eye is going to last for 3+Int mod rounds, you could Riving Strike them every round after.

You'd be looking at debuffing their Will by -9 to -12 in only 2 rounds. And once Evil Eye becomes -4 at lvl 8, you'd be looking at -11 to -14 to Will Saves.... absolutely redonk.


Dirty Tricks Master would be pretty sick on a Magus too. Blind/Nauseate is cruise control for awesome.

Greater Trip + Combat Reflexes + Fortuitous Enchant would be pretty sick too.

Or what about taking a level in White Haired Witch for 1 free natural attack + free action grapple, and pick up Touch of Blindness! One charge per Caster Level Blindness!


I actually really like Evil Eye plus Soothsayer for a Hexcrafter - as a Magus you'll likely have pess INT than a Witch so your save DCs will be lower. Evil Eye works on a failed save, and Soothsayer delays when the hex "triggers" so you can get a little more time out of your hex - perhaps enough to help your next hex land. Alternatively if your hex does land it'll last the whole combat.

I don't think I'd bother with White Haired Witch, you can't use the natural attack with Spell Combat without soending another arcana, and even then it'll function as a secondary natural attack. Touch of blindness wouod be pretty great though, that could be worth picking up with Spell Blending?

The other ideas are good, but I don't think you could pick them up on the same character (you only have so many feats/arcana).


Tbh, forget what I said earlier Arcane/Riving Strike, I think you would do well to get Prehensile Hair as an Extra Hex at level 7. This gains you the ability to deliver Touch attacks at 10ft, an AoO whenever someone enters your threatened area (possibly blinding/fatiguing someone with Touch of Blindness or Frostbite), a Hair Forklift, and a third limb to retrieve stored items or hold a wand in combat. And do what MrCharisma said, pick up Touch of Blindness with your lvl 6 arcana rather than White haired Witch.

I mean, you wanna talk about being a ridiculous debuffer? Imagine doing Touch of Blindness/Frostbite in round one with your normal routine, and if any enemies come within 10ft of you, whether to come attack you, or to attack an ally, whap, blind/fatigued. No more attacky for you. If you want to commit yourself to that style of play, throw in Combat Reflexes for 2 AoO's per round (or up to 4 AoO's if buff yourself with cat's grace).

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Debuff Magus All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.