I don't know if any arcane or occult tradition class would want to use it, though, barring a gish. But then you'd have a Magus, so why?
Bladed dash is a perfect candidate for a focus spell.
While I don't disagree that it would make a good focus spell, we are getting a weapon-focused bard in the APG that could make good use of it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hey, we have "Force Bolt" compared to Magic Missile. So I wouldn't object to that.
Another thing I could see them bringing back is a feat I mentioned earlier in the thread, Spellcut and the spell attack portion of Smash from the Air. I mean come on. Using your martial weapon to cut through and deflect an incoming spell as a reaction? How does that not have "Magus" written all over it?
The best candidate for "the Occult Gish" is the Occultist, which is probably the candidate for "the master of focus-spells" but it doesn't really need bladed dash based on how it played in PF1. The Magus should be the one-hand free dashing-striker gish, whereas the Occultist should be the archer/two handed gish who is comfortable staying where they are and making you come to them.
(well it was a Fighter Ability) But a Myrmidarch Magus could do it. So yes it does sound like something a Magus would do.
Magus did have Disruptive arcana (basically the feat), and Dispelling Strike arcana. Which let them do a targeted dispel, with max level = spent arcane points.
Probably would need to be changed if that one is kept, given how dispel and points were changed.
Martial Focus fixed the matter of it being "Fighter only". Besides, a variety of general feats became class-exclusive. I wouldn't be surprised to see a variant of Spellcut become Magus-exclusive. Especially because the idea just fits so thematically.
The dispelling strike is also equally cool though, and I'd like to see that one too. To be fair though, giving Magus "Disruptive Stance" would accomplish a lot of that.
I still say it should have expert proficiency in weapons, but have a focus spell/rage esque mechanic that bumps them up to master for a duration.
Something where most of the time they can hit super well, but is disctinctively weaker in some circumstances a real Martial could still be going strong in.
Focus points appeal because they'd specifically have trouble with multiple fights without refocus, more focus points (and the recharge tricks, like a familiar, or the Gnome ancestry feats) would make them more robust as they level, but it would still sort of be a weakness.
That mechanic would be a base class feature, and then class feats would customize it, adding all the neat bells and whistles you could want, for different styles of Magus.
Wildshape Druids do something similar already where their effectiveness as a warrior is tucked into their Form spells.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I still say it should have expert proficiency in weapons, but have a focus spell/rage esque mechanic that bumps them up to master for a duration.
Something where most of the time they can hit super well, but is disctinctively weaker in some circumstances a real Martial could still be going strong in.
Focus points appeal because they'd specifically have trouble with multiple fights without refocus, more focus points (and the recharge tricks, like a familiar, or the Gnome ancestry feats) would make them more robust as they level, but it would still sort of be a weakness.
That mechanic would be a base class feature, and then class feats would customize it, adding all the neat bells and whistles you could want, for different styles of Magus.
Wildshape Druids do something similar already where their effectiveness as a warrior is tucked into their Form spells.
Based on the replies throughout this thread, I think you're missing the point. At the end of the day, your typical Druid is primarily a spellcaster. They get by with their spells such as Barkskin, Tanglefoot, Fireball, Heal, etc. The transformations are an entirely viable part of their build, but they are not central to how the Druid operates thematically or as a class. As proven by the fact that if it better fits your character you can instead have an animal companion or harness the power of weather's fury.
For the majority of the people who have posted in this thread, the central theme of the Magus is its capabilities as a "gish"; it may not be the premiere caster or martial, but it is equally proficient in both. And by combining the two, they become more than the sum of their parts. However else they play- the frequency of their spells, the tradition they use, the particular weapon in hand- the foremost central theme of a Magus is that whether it's by spell or sword, they can bring the hurt and do so reliably.
To gate that for the Magus would be similar to restricting the Fighter's capabilities with weaponry, or a Champion's proficiency with armor. Saying they can only get the equivalent of legendary proficiency in each only in limited circumstances. If you do that, then if a Magus doesn't use their focus points then what are they?
A worse Wizard. Why go through the hassle of playing a Magus when you can get the same weapon proficiency by playing a Wizard, with more spells and metamagic and even arcane theses and school specialization?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Magus was created to make a balanced and usable Eldritch Knight from level 1.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Stepping away from fighting over numbers for a bit.
Should any ideas from the solarian or vanguard show up in the magus? Since they're all in their own way magic warriors?
I really liked the idea someone had in another thread of making the melee Kineticist build heavily Solarian inspired. With Fire and Void as existing elements that lets you do most of the necessary Solarian stuff without adulterating the medieval-esque aesthetic.
I also think that's a much better place for Solarians to live in PF2, since they're rather definitively not spellcasters in the traditional sense. The same all probably applies to Vanguard, though I'm admittedly less familiar with that Class and less clear on what element they'd best equate to.
|
|
Vanguards seem, at least after a quick read, a lot like a Barbarian. At least given its theme of getting power from the enemy hitting them.
True. I could see something like an Entropy Instinct for Barbarian duplicating what they do on a thematic level, though Entropy as such may be too 'sci-fi' a word choice. Maybe just a 'Destruction Instinct' all about wrecking people and things...
|
|
I want to see a choice every so many levels to increase their Weapons or Spellcasting Training. Give them a suitable number of increases with this option so they can be built with any of the following by 20:
Expert Weapon Training - Legendary Spellcasting Training
Master Weapon Training - Master Spellcasting Training
Expert Spellcasting Training - Legendary Weapon Training
Add in a number of Class Feats that key off Expert or higher Training to further refine these decisions such as one to give them 10th level Spells if they have the Legendary Prereq for Spellcasting or a unique Flourish for the Martial leaning Magus.
I think the function of letting each Magus choose how invested they are in Spells vs Martial combat is important, otherwise, no matter HOW the class is blended in the final release it is going to rub two-thirds of fans in regard to how they personally want to see it shake out.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe we need a separate thread on Magus proficiencies. Half of the posts here are talking about the presence or absence of +2(!) at the expense of most other topics.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I still say it should have expert proficiency in weapons, but have a focus spell/rage esque mechanic that bumps them up to master for a duration.
Something where most of the time they can hit super well, but is disctinctively weaker in some circumstances a real Martial could still be going strong in.
Focus points appeal because they'd specifically have trouble with multiple fights without refocus, more focus points (and the recharge tricks, like a familiar, or the Gnome ancestry feats) would make them more robust as they level, but it would still sort of be a weakness.
That mechanic would be a base class feature, and then class feats would customize it, adding all the neat bells and whistles you could want, for different styles of Magus.
Wildshape Druids do something similar already where their effectiveness as a warrior is tucked into their Form spells.
Based on the replies throughout this thread, I think you're missing the point. At the end of the day, your typical Druid is primarily a spellcaster. They get by with their spells such as Barkskin, Tanglefoot, Fireball, Heal, etc. The transformations are an entirely viable part of their build, but they are not central to how the Druid operates thematically or as a class. As proven by the fact that if it better fits your character you can instead have an animal companion or harness the power of weather's fury.
For the majority of the people who have posted in this thread, the central theme of the Magus is its capabilities as a "gish"; it may not be the premiere caster or martial, but it is equally proficient in both. And by combining the two, they become more than the sum of their parts. However else they play- the frequency of their spells, the tradition they use, the particular weapon in hand- the foremost central theme of a Magus is that whether it's by spell or sword, they can bring the hurt and do so reliably.
To gate that for the Magus would be similar to restricting the Fighter's...
Actually, Wildshape is essential to how that Druid plays, I've had one in my group, they were never really relegated to a caster role. Their job was to transform, and beat the crap out of everyone at close range, it even has a whole bunch of built in features that elongate the transformation durations.
To me, the point of the Magus (and really any proper spellblade) is that they inseperably combine magic and martial ability- if they're as good as a martial at just throwing their weight around in a melee without using magic, then you haven't built a Spellblade, ditto for if they're too good at just casting. Gating it behind a Focus Spell (or something) strongly supports the flavor where the class is dependent on magic for it's martial.
They'd get the 1 through 10th level casting (this is necessary, otherwise your spell damage doesn't scale with the health of does, unless the gish part of the equation is just letting them pop off anemic spells while still having actions for anemic attacks), but nothing in the Arcane Bond/ Font / extra slots niche. The class feats would customize the form to let you do cool things like combine spells and strikes and movement in unique ways.
This would also allow for different spellblade styles, one path of feats could make the form a set of wards and shields for a Tanky Spellblade, another would be your mobile Teleporting Spellblade, and so forth. Other examples could include Spellstrike (I deliver my spell through a weapon strike) or Spell Combat (Enhanced Action Economy for Spell + Strike.) How about casting a spell and getting a free reposition? More direct benefits like having the form directly add fire or electric damage to your weapon strikes?
The form is an easily passed gate, but really it's a platform for customization that lets you get to all kinds of flavorful Spellblade stuff through a central identity-defining mechanic (where Magus = Magic Super Form Warrior)
After the Oracle, I feel confident they can base another class around a unique focus mechanic, and after having both Wildshape Druid and a Warpriest in my games, this seems like the way to go. Even if the Magus does get caught with their pants down on occasion, they'd still have a Warpriest chance of hitting, which really isn't that awful in practice, they'd still have their spellcasting- haste, true strike, enlarge, fireball. But I can see from how Wildshape is designed, it would be a rare occurrence, where they've burned through their points, any freebie restores or extra duration awarded by feats, and have no time to refocus.
Remember, 10 minutes in exploration and you're completely good to go again- that's the base unit of time for anything, so if you search a room it's all back, if you stop to heal its all back. Combine that with having more than one focus point, and you can take 2-3 fights without refocusing, meaning 2-3 distinct encounters without 10 minutes seperating them. How often do you do even that much, much less more, without a 10 minute break? An optimized build could go even more by leveraging the focus point restores in the game (Familiar, Gnome Font, Other Tricks I don't know) and the class mechanics itself could make it easier at higher levels.
To me, the point of the Magus (and really any proper spellblade) is that they inseperably combine magic and martial ability- if they're as good as a martial at just throwing their weight around in a melee without using magic, then you haven't built a Spellblade, ditto for if they're too good at just casting. Gating it behind a Focus Spell (or something) strongly supports the flavor where the class is dependent on magic for it's martial.
But even with full proficiency, they won't be as good as a martial. They won't have Rage, sneak attack, Flurry, a Fighter's or Monk's crit chance, AoOs... They might not even have shields or 10hp per level.
Like you said, the point of a gish is to combine spells and blades. Which is going to happen in the feats, not in proficiency. Forcing an action penalty on Magi to apply a math fix seems like a waste of design space.
To me, the point of the Magus (and really any proper spellblade) is that they inseperably combine magic and martial ability- if they're as good as a martial at just throwing their weight around in a melee without using magic, then you haven't built a Spellblade, ditto for if they're too good at just casting. Gating it behind a Focus Spell (or something) strongly supports the flavor where the class is dependent on magic for it's martial.But even with full proficiency, they won't be as good as a martial. They won't have Rage, sneak attack, Flurry, a Fighter's or Monk's crit chance, AoOs... They might not even have shields or 10hp per level.
Like you said, the point of a gish is to combine spells and blades. Which is going to happen in the feats, not in proficiency. Forcing an action penalty on Magi to apply a math fix seems like a waste of design space.
Would you consider a barbarians rage an action penalty?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Would you consider a barbarians rage an action penalty?
No, nor a monk's stance, as both of those improve on the baseline, rather than just bring you up to...slightly less than baseline, unless a Magi's key ability is Str or Dex instead of int.
As Temperans said, your suggestion would be spending focus to buy the ability to hit.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Would you consider a barbarians rage an action penalty?
As Temperans notes, Rage is one action and requires no resources. At high levels, it becomes one action that gives you another action, making it not an action penalty at all. It's not at all equivalent to a Focus Spell.
You're suggesting a Focus Spell to make up for lower Proficiencies, which has severe effects on what other Focus Spells a Magus can have or use. Indeed, in practice, it basically eliminates all other combat-related Focus Spells from use or consideration, which is bad since a Magus should have basically no non-combat oriented Focus Spells at all.
That's a fine way to go for Druids with Wild Shape for several reasons (including not being able to cast while shapeshifted anyway)...it is not fine for a Class whose entire schtick is in-combat casting, usually of directly offensive spells, and who should likely make use of Focus Spells in combat.
Also, there's the thematic element. Thematically, a Magus isn't as skilled with a sword as a Fighter (nobody is), but they really should be as skilled as a Rogue or Investigator, and both of those Classes have Master in their weapon use. Magus being behind even those non-combat oriented Classes on raw skill and making it up only with magic feels deeply dramatically unsatisfying.
Now, where I'd expect Magus would suffer is in damage sans spells. I could see Weapon Specialization and Greater Weapon Specialization being delayed, and I'm pretty positive they wouldn't have any non-magic based damage bonuses aside from those (unlike a Rogue, for example, who have lots). They should be expected to use spellstrike to make up for their lower base damage, and that's fine.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey so, seeing as it is in fact taking up about half the discussion on its own, I've made a new thread specifically for discussing proficiencies for not just the Magus, but for other gish classes that might also return. Please focus discussion regarding proficiencies on that thread from here on out.
I'm not super thrilled to split this thread in half as I've been very happy with all the positive discussion, but at this point it's somewhat beating a dead horse for this particular thread. There are a lot of other potential ideas for the Magus that we could be sharing and discussing, so I'd like to give room to those as well. But this whole proficiency thing has people pretty passionate, so I quite honestly encourage everybody to keep up said discussion.
Just, y'know, use the appropriate thread please.
EDIT: Also to clarify; mention of proficiency isn't so to say banned (since I don't have any actual authority to do that anyhow), I just don't want it to be the primary focus of this thread at the expense of whatever other ideas people might have.
So, do we think that Magus will be a class with Paths, or an outlier like Fighter or Monk without them? If we have class paths, what would they be?
What 1E archetypes should be present at the get go for Magi?
Personally, I would like to have a Staff Magus be an option right from the get go.
So, do we think that Magus will be a class with Paths, or an outlier like Fighter or Monk without them? If we have class paths, what would they be?
What 1E archetypes should be present at the get go for Magi?
Personally, I would like to have a Staff Magus be an option right from the get go.
When I took a first crack at writing up my own interpretation of Magus all by my lonesome, I actually tried writing Magus up as having individual paths/subclasses. One that focused more on spells, one that focused more on martial, and a third that focused on heavy armor and shields. It was through these paths that a Magus' proficiencies and feat options would be decided. I say this literally right after asking people to focus less on proficiencies.
Honestly I could see Magus either take them or leave 'em. Even for Wizard they're less "paths" and more "bells and whistles", with the details of your caster ultimately left up to your spell slots and feat selection. Given that neither of its "parent" (and I use that term loosely given all the discussion of whether it's hybrid or not) classes really have a subclass, it would be easy for the Magus to go without one as well. Alternatively, having subclasses would give means through which the Magus can uniquely specialize.
On a related note, in PF2e you don't need an open hand to cast anymore. So if Magus is brought back, you can pick up a staff and start whacking people with an electrified stick easy-peezy.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the class that should steal from the Vanguard would be the Kineticist in its "melee beast" style.
I'm not sure if I think Arcane/Eldritch Pool should be separate from their Focus pool. I'm leaning towards "yes", but not fully convinced on the subject. I'll see what Paizo comes up with, but I rather like the idea of having your focus pool be for bread and butter spells like Mystic Bolt, Judgment of Smiting, and the like, and having a separate Eldritch Pool for your temporary buffs or spell recall.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not convinced Arcane Pool should convert over at all. I think Focus Spells, Cantrips, and Feats each to duplicate specific aspects of it can do a good enough job without adding yet another pool to keep track of (something PF2 already tries to limit a fair bit).
Depending on how they do it, yes getting Arcane Pool might be redundant.
Are you okay? Blink twice and wear yellow if you need help.
I'm not convinced Arcane Pool should convert over at all. I think Focus Spells, Cantrips, and Feats each to duplicate specific aspects of it can do a good enough job without adding yet another pool to keep track of (something PF2 already tries to limit a fair bit).
Mostly I agree, but the I've been trying to convert over Spell Recall, and either it's a 1/day ability, which is fine but boring, or rips into Focus spells, which is lazy writing and I can do better.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For my part on the matter, I think that Magus would get by more than well enough by way of focus spells, but more specifically focus cantrips and class feats.
Magus arcana basically fall into one of the two anyways; something that modified how you fight or function in a way that class feats do now, or giving you an extra attack or maneuver. Which again, could either be covered under new class feats or as focus cantrips. I remember one arcana called "Pool Ray", which let you spend a point to fire off a ray attack at your foe. This attack could also be used with spell attack and spell combat. I could totally see that as a focus cantrip; weak enough that it's not your go-to option, but an entirely viable backup that makes you at least consider taking it.
Also an absolutely crazy idea I had was throwing or planting your weapon, then using it to either bounce your spell off of or as a point of origin for your spell. Kinda like what familiars can do, I guess.
|
I think the bard gives us a good model of how you could have some class-unique cantrips, which could be spells that drive the magus' more-magic-melee-than-thou standard combat loop. And then focus spells are what they use for once or twice per combat novas.
The classic shocking grasp magus in 1E was basically an aberration in the system: it was far too good at burning through all resources in one fight to do disproportionate damage in that fight. It made it so that those individual fights had to be far harder to still pose a challenge, while at the same time promoting a 15m adventuring day.
Focus spells are 2E's way of avoiding that. There's still the occasional spike, but you can't burn up a whole day's resources all at once. I think they're exactly the right sort of mechanic to pace a magus right in this system.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, do we think that Magus will be a class with Paths, or an outlier like Fighter or Monk without them? If we have class paths, what would they be?
What 1E archetypes should be present at the get go for Magi?
Personally, I would like to have a Staff Magus be an option right from the get go.
I think some kind of paths are probably a good idea. You want to make a bunch of features commonly available to all magi of course. But there are also a lot of other cool things that a magus could have, but if it had all of them it would be too good / cost you too much in other things like proficiencies to balance it out.
I do want to stay with 2E's general design principle of not locking people too hard into one weapon method, so I think all magi should be able to use their stuff with a set of core weapons. Perhaps all simple melee weapons, and a few more martial weapons, just like rogues or elves have a preferred set. Maybe a preference for one-handed martial melee weapons.
Beyond that, your methodology can give you other options:
- manifesting a mindblade that does mental, or maybe force damage
- arcane archery (the possible action economy benefits of not having to walk to your enemy really change how a ranged spellstrike should be balanced)
- unarmed combat, focusing on martial arts; if graceful multiclassing with monk is to be an option, this requires that the core bits of the magus aren't based on Stance feats. Unarmed magi should have a way of making up for / simulating special materials
- a heavy armor variant
- an animalistic variant that makes sense to combine with a druid multiclass, or in particular, meshes well with the Magic Warrior archetype (since those really should be magi-capable).
All of these require a bit more than you can properly package in 1-2 class feats.
Honestly, what about some really niche stuff? Like that one arcana that allowed you to literally sniff out other spellcasters. That would be pretty interesting to have, even as an uncommon feat.
What about other stuff? Like say, incorporating the effects of a spell into a maneuver. Tripping someone up after hitting them with Ray of Frost, disarming them with Shocking Grasp, or shoving someone with Produce Flame. Doing things like that would be pretty interesting too.
Hell, what are some ideas for things like spell recall, their weapon imbuing abilities, and even capstones?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I had a feeling that we'd still get the Magus as a class when it didn't appear as an archetype in the APG. I'm excited as my two favorite classes from PF1e are coming out. I can't wait to playtest this!