| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Expect Magus to mirror a Warpriest because balance and such.
Yet I'd also expect Magus to have a class ability or feat (which might have a variant for Warpriest) which allows them to put a spell-attack spell on a weapon Strike, meaning they'd get the weapon's item bonus.
That'd help a little. Paizo crunches the DPR numbers and has to factor in all the Dedication combos too, so we'll likely be unimpressed until we run the numbers, factor in buffs & debuffs, and recognize that access to multiple energy types on one's Strikes gives solid options to target Weaknesses.
I also expect 1-minute Focus Spell buffs (perhaps Stances) as well as other Stances, maybe even one that lets the Magus use their Int and/or spell proficiency on Strikes (or one specific Strike).
Expect Magus to mirror a Warpriest because balance and such.
Yet I'd also expect Magus to have a class ability or feat (which might have a variant for Warpriest) which allows them to put a spell-attack spell on a weapon Strike, meaning they'd get the weapon's item bonus.
That'd help a little. Paizo crunches the DPR numbers and has to factor in all the Dedication combos too, so we'll likely be unimpressed until we run the numbers, factor in buffs & debuffs, and recognize that access to multiple energy types on one's Strikes gives solid options to target Weaknesses.
I also expect 1-minute Focus Spell buffs (perhaps Stances) as well as other Stances, maybe even one that lets the Magus use their Int and/or spell proficiency on Strikes (or one specific Strike).
probably, and thats highly disapointing and uncreative but whatever. just means an entire class thats not very good, at least with warpriest youc an train out of it and go cloistered at higher levels.
It's entirely possible that some of the feats given to the Magus could also be extended to the Cleric class with a war priest requirement. Or new war priest specific feats will be added to the book based on final designs from the play test.probably, and thats highly disapointing and uncreative but whatever. just means an entire class thats not very good, at least with warpriest youc an train out of it and go cloistered at higher levels.Expect Magus to mirror a Warpriest because balance and such.
Yet I'd also expect Magus to have a class ability or feat (which might have a variant for Warpriest) which allows them to put a spell-attack spell on a weapon Strike, meaning they'd get the weapon's item bonus.
That'd help a little. Paizo crunches the DPR numbers and has to factor in all the Dedication combos too, so we'll likely be unimpressed until we run the numbers, factor in buffs & debuffs, and recognize that access to multiple energy types on one's Strikes gives solid options to target Weaknesses.
I also expect 1-minute Focus Spell buffs (perhaps Stances) as well as other Stances, maybe even one that lets the Magus use their Int and/or spell proficiency on Strikes (or one specific Strike).
Unless it's a way to gain or simulate higher proficiency and crunching action economy through specific actions than I'm just not buying.
Eldritch shot is a half decent attempt.
I'd like something similar where you pick an element or tradition. And get a 2 action melee attack, where you can combine the effects of a spell into the melee attack. But the spell loses levels in doing so maybe. Or has to be used on a spell 2-3 levels lower than your highest spell slot but you gain temporary increase in proficiency for that strike.
Just.. something.
People need to remember that the Cleric is balanced around the fact that, one way or another, you're getting 10th-level spells, all of your spell slots, and your Healing/Harming font. Warpriest has to be balanced around that fact and as such can only get so much into its budget. If Warpriest was able to be a 10th-level caster with master proficiency in weapons or armor, what reason would you ever have to be say... a Champion? Which gets master in weaponry, legendary in armor, but no spells of its own. Lay on Hands doesn't mean jack s*!* compared to multiple casts of auto-heightened Heal.
If an earlier comment in this thread is accurate, Magus is going to be balanced around its multiple proficiencies from the very start. It's not going to have 10th-level spells, and it's going to have less spells per day than other casting classes. Those facts alone are going to free up some design budget for the Magus. Warpriest Cleric unfortunately falls into the saying "they who chases two rabbits, catches neither"; Paizo tried to let people have both their casting dedicated squishy Cleric while integrating the heavily armored melee Cleric, and unfortunately the latter suffered for it. Magus is not likely to have that problem.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It’s already been leaked they’re getting level 9 spells anyway so it’s pretty sure what they’ll do in following the Warpriest numbers but with a more offensive edge.
It's definitely not "pretty sure"; you've just convinced yourself. Magus also has fewer slots. I seriously doubt they lose out on 10th level spells, healing font, and spell slots and still get the same proficiencies. If they do, they'd need something impressive to make up for it.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The decision to make proficiency a +2, made it so that casters *had* to gain expert proficiency in their basic weapons, and trained could not be left as the default 1/2 BAB. Expert was always going to be the ceiling for what a full caster could get with weapons, it is just that the floor got lifted to meet it. Master weapons and armor is the realm of martial characters.
But it is only a +2 difference. With easy access to a status bonus to attack, a caster/ martial gish is going to be within one or two points of most martials on attacks for their entire career. What they wont be very good at, unlike their PF1 counter parts, is buffing themselves with 10 different spells before combat and then rolling through powerful enemies acting entirely as a melee brute until the combat is over. The closest casters get to that is high level battle forms and those completely negate the value of casters investing in martial weapons and armor.
Full martial/ MC caster builds are really in better shape for doing the buffing and then battling, especially because one or two buff spells per combat is all any character can really manage in PF2. low level scrolls are incredibly cheap and easy to acquire in PF2. Every character's treasure budget makes room for these kind of purchases.
The real "problem" that gishes have in PF2 is that they can't do anything better than either a full caster or a full martial. The decision to MC to pick up casting or fighting options is never more than a lateral move. This is definitely by design, and one I really like, but I imagine it is frustrating to people used to thinking about each level as "how much can I add to my character now."
We are going to get something new with the Magus playtest but it shouldn't be anything that makes MC Fighter/wizard or Wizard/Fighter a bad choice. I strongly believe it can accomplish this best through the class features and unique feats and not the proficiencies it bestows on a character. The hardest part of being a caster/martial and wanting to blend spell casting and martial combat turn after turn is actually mobility. The gish is usually turning either their spell or their strike into movement most of the time. Especially if you are desperate to pick up flanking for your attacks, giving the magus mobility features that blend into spell casting will give them very unique and useful design space, that leaves them able to make a powerful melee attack every round as well. If the default 1st level Magus has the ability to reliably cast an offensive cantrip (possibly tied to their weapon attack roll), and then also move and attack each round, it will be an excellent and unique class, even if it only has expert weapon proficiency. If it can do this with master weapon proficiency, then all non-fighter/caster MC builds are going to be made into garbage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do think we need a few more weapon related focus spells.
Like...
Teleport slash. Level 3 focus spell.
2 actions.
Teleport up to half your speed and make a Strike. The surprise of your movement makes the enemy flat footed agaisnt the attack.
You can spend a third action to teleport back to your original location after the attack.
NOTHING PERSONEL KID
It would be far better for them to get 'something impressive' than Master proficiency IMHO. I don't want to obsolete half the game's classes so early on in its lifespan.It’s already been leaked they’re getting level 9 spells anyway so it’s pretty sure what they’ll do in following the Warpriest numbers but with a more offensive edge.It's definitely not "pretty sure"; you've just convinced yourself. Magus also has fewer slots. I seriously doubt they lose out on 10th level spells, healing font, and spell slots and still get the same proficiencies. If they do, they'd need something impressive to make up for it.
I think that would be an overreaction. A master-proficiency magus could deliver a spell at slightly higher accuracy than a legendary-proficiency caster, yes... but at costs. And I think as long as they do a good job of balancing the costs with the benefits of playing this class, it would be just fine. Some of the costs are already built in, like melee only, single target only, heavy action cost...
I think the warpriest is a fun way to build the class and can be effective, but I've also seen where even average rolls fail to hit average enemies and waste turn after turn. It takes a few levels and heavy self-buffing for that subclass to get a reasonable hit rate, and since the magus will be on much more limited spellcasting, I hope to see a bit less punitive gambles.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not sure if it's been mentioned yet, but if we're talking proficiency, champions and monks do get master spellcasting even though they only have focus spells. They get it a level earlier than multiclass casters, even.
I strongly believe it can accomplish this best through the class features and unique feats and not the proficiencies it bestows on a character.
How many class features do people think Magus and other gishes will even have? If the assumption is that a Magus would get as many class features and feats as a martial, master proficiency in weapons, AND spells, then I can see that would be overpowered. My assumption is that a gish would get better proficiencies and the same number of class features as a caster (which normally 3 aside from spellcasting, 2 at 1 and 1 at 19). Or if they did get stuck with the same proficiencies, then 1 additional class feature at around level 7 that would help make up the difference.
Not sure if it's been mentioned yet, but if we're talking proficiency, champions and monks do get master spellcasting even though they only have focus spells. They get it a level earlier than multiclass casters, even.
Hmmmm, I had forgotten about that.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the gish problem is different between low and high levels.
At lower levels you can make a gish on a caster chassis and not be very far behind martials in combat ability. But at higher levels such a character has the spells of a full caster but starts to lag too far behind on martial capability for weapon attacks to be their default.
On the other hand at higher levels a martial basis with caster MC works fine as a gish. But at low levels that character doesn't even get a spell slot until 4th level.
There's definitely room for a class in between.
They are going to get class features. Paizo is not going to make a boring vanilla class with just the above and nothing else. And like you said it’s not like casters get a ton of class features anyway. But just ninth level spells and master in both is too much unless they do just gut the rest of the class of any scaling options. Anyway it’s clear here what a subset of people want is just a better chassis. They just want the master in both so they can get a semblance of that broken stuff from PF1 back. If Paizo can do it and not just invalidate all the other martials who are stuck at master than cool, but I don’t see it happening because you can already get powerful class features from dedicating into barb or ranger.I strongly believe it can accomplish this best through the class features and unique feats and not the proficiencies it bestows on a character.How many class features do people think Magus and other gishes will even have? If the assumption is that a Magus would get as many class features and feats as a martial, master proficiency in weapons, AND spells, then I can see that would be overpowered. My assumption is that a gish would get better proficiencies and the same number of class features as a caster (which normally 3 aside from spellcasting, 2 at 1 and 1 at 19). Or if they did get stuck with the same proficiencies, then 1 additional class feature at around level 7 that would help make up the difference.
At the expense of class feats. It's not like you get them for nothing.
The average martial gets double the class features of the average caster (Oracles being the odd balls. Alchemists get triple), with some of them scaling. Plus 1-2 more class feats than a caster (though arguably even the casters that don't get a level 1 feat do get the equivalent via a focus spell). And an extra save to Master.
Even the limited spellcasting we all assume Gishes will get, 2 per level up to 9th, eats up a ton of the budget for the class.
I think what MM is looking for is earlier access to spells/spell-like abilities; without introducing Power Creep.
Picture 1e Half-Casters like Bard and Magus. They start off similar to a caster but the progression curve keeps them from being inherently better than a full Martial or full Caster, and this generally gives the player a unique array of options.
In 2e so far, the progression curve ends up being much steeper. A Fighter can’t get a single spell slot till level 4; practically 1/5th of the character’s career; and sparse access to Focus Spells.
To contrast, a Champion, Monk and Ranger(as of the APG) can grab 2 Focus Points and Focus Spells as early as level 2. Fighter, Barbarian and Rogue on the other hand, currently don’t have a way to supplement this level 1-4 gap; Eldritch Rogue is the closest with gaining a Casting MCD at 1st lvl; and a 4th level feat dropping to 2nd level for the Racket. Though this doesn’t give access to early level Focus Spells; just half a dozen Cantrips. Barbarians getting Totem and Rage powers.
Speaking of which; Cantrips are definitely helpful. The one problem is they have very limited utility(as they should) and thus make it a struggle to use as a replacement for low level spells for 4 levels.
A couple of the APG Archetypes, i feel, are going in the right direction. Marshal, for instance, is a great Archetype for Martials that want to also gain a support role. The different Aura’s acting as spell-like abilities.
Eldritch Shot was used as an example, so an Eldritch Knight Archetype that focused on these kind of things might help fill out the niche.
I think the gish problem is different between low and high levels.
At lower levels you can make a gish on a caster chassis and not be very far behind martials in combat ability. But at higher levels such a character has the spells of a full caster but starts to lag too far behind on martial capability for weapon attacks to be their default.
On the other hand at higher levels a martial basis with caster MC works fine as a gish. But at low levels that character doesn't even get a spell slot until 4th level.
There's definitely room for a class in between.
Yeah that's exactly what i am feeling now in my table. Our warpriest is starting to lag behind without status bonuses, his to hit on a +2 level foe only hits on a 13-14+ if the foe has a decent AC. Buffs solve that issue a lot(Heroism +3) brings it to a 10-11 what is pretty fair while the other martials are 11-12 with a regular hit or a 9-10 when heroism 6lvl hits from me.
But that only felt true after level 15-16 when +3 weapons kick in it seems like proef start mattering a lot... I wonder if class archetypes can or will fix that... And even if that should be happening at all or it's an intended mechanic due to the extra healing and support capabilities of gishes...
See this debate is why I'm still a big fan of the Arcane Trance/ Arcane Form solution:
Being expert but being able to use magic to elevate yourself to master with a 'bladesong' like transformation, with some in built limitations (I'm partial to using focus points to do this) and an action cost ala rage (which is the barbarian damage feature that already makes up for the -2)
Then allowing class feats to customize this form to do all sorts of fancy tricks like costless short range teleportation, spell strike (this one should maybe just be the base functionality of the form?), and so forth.
1 action, 1 focus point, with some class feats that allow you a few different methods to circumvent the action cost (ala wounded rage), or let you use the form once per day without any points (or without consuming a point)
Like the Oracle, your class features would be the mechanic that nets you your base focus point increases and recharges.
You'd be able to hit with proper master accuracy, but you'd have a ramp up other combatants don't- you'd be one action behind another martial.
If for some reason you don't have it, no sweat you can still pop spells just fine, and make an attack just fine before MAP really tanks it in a meaningful way, just like the Warpriest.
See this debate is why I'm still a big fan of the Arcane Trance/ Arcane Form solution:
Being expert but being able to use magic to elevate yourself to master with a 'bladesong' like transformation, with some in built limitations (I'm partial to using focus points to do this) and an action cost ala rage (which is the barbarian damage feature that already makes up for the -2)
Then allowing class feats to customize this form to do all sorts of fancy tricks like costless short range teleportation, spell strike (this one should maybe just be the base functionality of the form?), and so forth.
1 action, 1 focus point, with some class feats that allow you a few different methods to circumvent the action cost (ala wounded rage), or let you use the form once per day without any points (or without consuming a point)
Like the Oracle, your class features would be the mechanic that nets you your base focus point increases and recharges.
You'd be able to hit with proper master accuracy, but you'd have a ramp up other combatants don't- you'd be one action behind another martial.
If for some reason you don't have it, no sweat you can still pop spells just fine, and make an attack just fine before MAP really tanks it in a meaningful way, just like the Warpriest.
I think that's a pretty elegant concept.
I'd be pretty happy if, like the oracle, magus were a class that required a free rounds of combat to truly get revved up and going. I'd think that a fair way to balance spell-striking at master proficiency.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Bombs were very limited in numbers an Alchemist that threw too many would run out and be useless. That is how limited resources should work. You can use them all and be strong, but afterwards you will be worst off.
Not that I didn't enjoy going nova as a player, but it was exactly this sort of thing that created huge problems with the game.
Because then players were demanding for rests in the middle of dungeons, or the party was severely gimped without their ability because of poor management. It's a bad play style that I prefer stay gone.
I prefer abilities that are useful (but not encountering ending) that you can use all day long.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If for some reason you don't have it, no sweat you can still pop spells just fine, and make an attack just fine before MAP really tanks it in a meaningful way, just like the Warpriest.
Not to ignore the rest of your post (Wich was nice) but this right here I disagree. Soon as non fighter martials hit master in weapons and armor this is just plain untrue.
Specifically the attack.
And I ignore the concept of buffing yourself to be in par, because you could have just buffed the actual martials and been better for the team. Heck a fighter with cleric dedication at high level might not have as much gas in the spell slots but is substantially better for the party as a buffer that also deals damage.
Warpriest is better if sitting in the back in his medium armor and healing.
If for some reason you don't have it, no sweat you can still pop spells just fine, and make an attack just fine before MAP really tanks it in a meaningful way, just like the Warpriest.
Not to ignore the rest of your post (Wich was nice) but this right here I disagree. Soon as non fighter martials hit master in weapons and armor this is just plain untrue.
Specifically the attack.
And I ignore the concept of buffing yourself to be in par, because you could have just buffed the actual martials and been better for the team. Heck a fighter with cleric dedication at high level might not have as much gas in the spell slots but is substantially better for the party as a buffer that also deals damage.
Warpriest is better if sitting in the back in his medium armor and healing.
So about this, I may have brought it up earlier, but the thing is that the current model for caster-gishes is fine* but doesn't match up to what some people (including me) want, which is a full on master of blade and magic.
* I believe that the design was made with the assumption that they have an intended combat loop, one where they're expected to launch a saving throw spell, and follow up with a MAPless weapon strike.
See, by making only a single melee attack per turn, you keep your accuracy from ever suffering the -4/-5 from MAP, and you're still likelier to hit with your first attack than a martial is to hit with their second, and since the current experts are all full casters anyway, it makes perfect sense that their gishiness is limited to an afterthought attack on what was otherwise a perfectly powerful spell-casting turn. You can also benefit from flanking (and give it to your martial allies) to play additional catch up, in other words, the -2/-3 inhibits you from treating hitting things as your main job, but isn't terrible if you want to weapon swing with a third action while you do spells...
Which I'm fine with, provided we have blends at other points along the spectrum as well.
That isn't their only trick ofc, there's other options, True Strike Buffing your attack (which is worth +5, bringing even our -3 worst case up to fighter accuracy for a hit) for example. But I think what I mentioned above is the intended default for those paths, it also makes perfect sense in regards to feats like bespell weapon, which empower that single weapon strike as a reward for making it a point to cast something.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It isn't other casters that would be hurt by giving magus's master proficiency in weapons.It is alchemists, barbarians, champions, investigators, monks, rangers, rogues, and swashbucklers.
Master Proficiency alone doesn't do this.
All the Classes you list have additional bonuses to their DPR that are separate from their Proficiency alone, most of them quite substantial. Magus having Master in weapons (and presumably only Master in spells), does not mean that their DPR, absent spells, will be even close to equal to these classes.
Now, I'd expect that it will be equal if they spend most of their spells on combat options as intended (on average, I'd expect it to be a bit lower on most turns, but spike a bit better), at which point you have something pretty balanced with a martial taking Wizard Multiclass, since their remaining budget for spells other than 'I deal damage' will be about equivalent (as will their Proficiencies).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, it's okay if magus competes with fighter and barbarian for DPR. Just as long as it's balanced in other ways that make it fair--I don't mean just limiting them to nova spells. If it's mobility, defense, action economy, having to wait a round or two in combat to add that degree of damage... I don't have an opinion yet.
But everyone assuming that high damage means no one will ever play base martials again? That's silly. It's only a problem if it can do everything another martial can, but with spells.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, it's okay if magus competes with fighter and barbarian for DPR. Just as long as it's balanced in other ways that make it fair--I don't mean just limiting them to nova spells. If it's mobility, defense, action economy, having to wait a round or two in combat to add that degree of damage... I don't have an opinion yet.
But everyone assuming that high damage means no one will ever play base martials again? That's silly. It's only a problem if it can do everything another martial can, but with spells.
I personally think they should be competitive with them, but specifically that they have to use magic to do it, like-- its not half the class thats equal to them, its the whole class.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
On-level spells give excellent utility, and some other nice stuff, it's true.
But y'know who else gets way more utility than most other non-casters? Rogues.
Doubled Skill Increases and Skill Feats is a potent advantage that's in some ways better than utility spells in PF2 (now in some ways it's also worse, but it's a very on par advantage), and yet they still have Master in weapons and very respectable DPR.
Now, Rogues certainly pay for that in other areas, and I'm not suggesting Magus shouldn't as well. Quite frankly I'd expect them to be 8 HP per level like Rogue, just to start with, and with much worse Saves...I'd expect their Saves to be on par with other casters, not martials, and I'd expect them to not be proficient in Heavy Armor, either, nor have class features other than spells enhancing their defensibility (unlike, say, Barbarians and their extra HP, Resistances, and Temp HP from Rage).
Besides which, martials can already get the utility and defensive benefits of spellcasting by multiclassing. Magus will do it a bit better, I'm sure, but it's not like it's not achievable by existing martials...and yet nobody seems to think Fighters with Wizard Multiclass are vastly better in all ways than other Fighters.
Look at it this way, comparing a hypothetical Magus to a Fighter with 5 Feats in a spellcasting multiclass here's the trades being made:
Lost:
-Legendary Weapon Proficiency goes down to Master (this also reduces damage from Weapon Specialization).
-One Save gets worse one category (so, Master/Expert/Expert instead of Master/Master/Expert).
-Heavy Armor Proficiency.
-2 HP per level.
-Str or Dex as a Key Ability (Magus will likely have Int).
Gained:
-A few extra spells per level (it's probably only one spell at many levels). One actual level of spells (9th level ones).
-Gain 2 Class Feats (Remember, Fighter gets two floating ones on top of the normal 11, while casters normally get 10).
-Some action economy advantages on casting and attacking.
-Probably Focus Spells of some sort.
That trade does not look one-sided or like the Magus is unambiguously the better choice to me.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Don't look at just level 20. What about Level 5? Your hypothetical Magus has access to 5 spells, compared to your Fighter's 1. Your fighter isn't anywhere close to getting Haste or Mirror Image.
Sure, and maybe the Magus doesn't get Expert in weapons until level 7. Or puts off some other fundamental stuff. But even if that's not true, I'm unconvinced that spellcasting on its own is inherently better than +2 to hit, +1 AC, +10 HP, and +2 to at least one Save.
But we don't know the progression, so talking about a specific level in isolation gets weird. Or maybe they actually are better specifically at 5th level...Rogue is arguably already better than Fighter at that level specifically (it's when the second Sneak Attack die kicks in, but before Weapon Specialization), so individual spikes in power at very specific levels can happen.
If the issue is specific to 5th level, that's really not a huge problem, though. The issue is if it's consistent throughout levels, the two being relatively even with one above the other some levels and vice versa is rather the expectation of balanced classes.
Level 13? Your fighter has access to 8 spells, up to 4th. The Magus has access to 14 spells per day, topping out at things like Contingency and Reverse Gravity.
Yep. At that level, of course, the Magus is even more significantly behind in Feats, HP, and Saves than the differences I mention above, as well as falling behind in their attack stat again (so -1 to hit even vs. non-Fighter martials). Spells are really all they have going for them in the comparison
And besides, the argument has been that fighters niche as 'the high attack and feats' martial gets taken. The real complaint is about all the other martials.
This is a weird argument, though. Fighters are not better than other martials, so if the Magus isn't better than Fighter it's also not better than other martials.
All the same things said about fighter, now compare to say Barbarian. For 4 HP per level, some resistances and Rage the Barbarian is losing out on all those same spells as Fighter. The Barbarian has to spend 5 feats just to equal the basic prowess the hypothetical magus here has.
4 HP and meaningful Resistances are a lot of survivability. And Rage is a damage bonus so high it actually successfully compensates for Fighter's increased accuracy (the two have very comparable DPR). The Barbarian is also giving up Legendary Fortitude Saves down to Expert, and giving up their attack stat being their Key Stat just as the Fighter is.
In short, they're not giving up much less than Fighter. I mean, the Magus comes out a bit ahead in Feats and AC, but even further behind in Saves and HP, and the damage they're giving up comes to much the same amount.
Spellstrike and the other magus has will have to be pretty awful for them to not totally overshadow Barbarian, and even if they are that might arguably happen.
You are drastically underestimating how much damage Rage adds. As well as underselling how much extra HP matters quite a bit.
This also extends to class archetypes for the other casters. How many distinct master-master classes can you make if you have to gut the class features to make them? How many can you make if they sacrifice some power on both ends but get really strong, unique abilities to make up for it? I think the latter is better long-term for the game's health.
Why would you assume Master/Master is the only possible paradigm for a Gish? It is arguably the best for a Magus, because their schtick relies on actually whacking someone with a stick. Also, as they share the most in common with fighters, getting a lesser version of the fighter's proficiency bump works thematically. But an Inquisitor? Hunter? Occultist? Something new we don't have an equivalent for? All of those might have different approaches, including that +2 to certain kinds of strikes you're looking for.
Edit: In fact, it sounds like Summoners are going the same pared down spell casting for greater ability to strike (via their eidolon), so already we should have multiple approaches for comparison.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
id take master weapons and trained only in spells on magus if spell strike was good, tbh.
you want to do damage with spells? you gotta spell strike.
but imo no, whats uninteresting is having a built in gish missing all the time because he sucks at both halves of his job. no amount of niche action concepts make up for missing.
Why would you assume Master/Master is the only possible paradigm for a Gish? It is arguably the best for a Magus, because their schtick relies on actually whacking someone with a stick. Also, as they share the most in common with fighters, getting a lesser version of the fighter's proficiency bump works thematically. But an Inquisitor? Hunter? Occultist? Something new we don't have an equivalent for? All of those might have different approaches, including that +2 to certain kinds of strikes you're looking for.All martial stuff relies on actually whacking someone with a stick. That is no less true for Barbarian than it is for Warpriest or Fighter. And yet, the Barbarian got a bunch of class features in exchange for 1 level of proficiency and the Warpriest got full casting for another level from the opposite side.
The simple +2 proficiency then is obviously a weighty part of the power budget. I think the space is way higher in Expert/Master than Master/Master. Master/Master is already treading out and over the other master-martials area of expertise rather than exploring new territory.
There are tons of things I'd rather see them try over simply jumping the jump to master-master. Advantage on your 'big thing' to make it less likely to be wasted, +2 status on the thing or under certain conditions, the ability to easily inflict conditions before your Strike, spreading the Investigators roll first and see mechanic, etc.
That's space that could be put to work making unique niches. And if the Magus ends up being the unique master-master, I still worry about it either suffering for it in terms of flavor or getting that extra interesting sauce it needs to put it head and shoulders above most of the martials.
warpriest is not a martial, and doesnt rely on whacking even if you take feats that involve whacking. especially at higher levels.
id be happy with master/expert for magus instead.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Behold, my far worse proposal than anybody else's!
Magus gets worse than trained weapon proficiency. You use your level as your proficiency modifier, and can never become trained or better in any weapon. A regular miss still successfully delivers the spellstrike spell, though. When casters normally get legendary casting proficiency, you instead crit with the spell on a successful hit. A loophole allows you to get actual proficiency in unarmed strikes, but insisting that the loophole is valid is also arguing that you can't deliver spells through unarmed strikes.
Now, if you disagree with somebody, at least it's not my awful approach.
All martial stuff relies on actually whacking someone with a stick. That is no less true for Barbarian than it is for Warpriest or Fighter. And yet, the Barbarian got a bunch of class features in exchange for 1 level of proficiency and the Warpriest got full casting for another level from the opposite side.
The barbarian get heavier damage for their hits, which is another approach I expect to see implemented (the warpriest can do this a limited number of times per day). And they actually don't have that many more class features than fighters (7 vs 8, arguably 6 v8, as bravery is mostly a proficiency bump). The ones that key off rage are quite varied, but you don't actually get much more of them on any one character.
id take master weapons and trained only in spells on magus if spell strike was good, tbh.
you want to do damage with spells? you gotta spell strike.
but imo no, whats uninteresting is having a built in gish missing all the time because he sucks at both halves of his job. no amount of niche action concepts make up for missing.
+2 from proficiency is NOT the only way not to miss. In fact, it is just the most boring way to miss less. It makes you better at going Strike/Strike/Strike, but at what cost?
It is at the cost of any of the below:
Roll twice and take the better result on your Spellstrike
+2 status bonus to attack rolls during Spell Combat's activity
Pushing your weapon up to +4 item bonuses
Getting free spell-storing and keen runes without taking up rune slots
Having a high level "Certain Strike" effect - Guaranteed hit on your Spellstrike once per day at the cost of minimum damage on both Spell and Strike
Etc. I'd rather the Magus be really good at Spellstrike/Spell Combat and not nearly as good as Champion or Ranger at attacking multiple times per turn, than just getting a rising tide from proficiency. If you really want to hit your Spellstrike, a specific focused ability has more power budget to do that than pushing up the ability make all types of Strikes in general.
that all sounds fun, ill take something like that
but not at the expense of master proficiency
the status bonus comment is a good example of what you are not getting, you can get status bonuses to everyone in other ways, so it doesnt, again, move the needle. it just helps to keep you from falling completely behind.