| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I had my first playtest today as a GM. At 2nd level, with a Magus, Summoner, Fighter, and Cleric.
Even at 2nd level, where your spell accuracy is still fairly good compared to other points on the curve, the inability to reliably hit things with spell attacks makes Striking Spell feel like a huge waste a lot of the time.
The issue is compounded in boss fights where their higher AC and saves makes spellcasting incredibly unreliable. Spell attacks become unusable, and while save based spells are doing something, they don't really gain anything from Striking Spell- instead, they're liable to be lost entirely.
Which is unfortunate. The class looks and feels wonderfully dynamic in play with the Slide Casting Synthesis, while enables the Magus to feel like a proper striker... until they go to actually try and land a spell.
I proposed earlier that Striking Spell needs a clause that turns failed Spell Attacks into successes, and I'm even more convinced after actually seeing the class in action. It enables the Magus to be reliable in combat and put out steady damage (which still isn't really up to what the Fighter is doing on a mediocre day) while not making their critical threat with spells to be through the roof. It enables them to embrace spell attacks as their niche as a class, and also eases their pressure on Intelligence at 1st level. They still want Intelligence (since they can still critically fail even with the Striking Spell buff, and might want a Save DC for debuff options), but don't really need to start with a 16, instead freeing up a little space to boost their much needed Constitution.
It's worth noting that the Summoner is also not terribly strong, but at the very least it doesn't feel like it's constantly wasting its time while doing what the class feels like it should lean into.
I had my first playtest today as a GM. At 2nd level, with a Magus, Summoner, Fighter, and Cleric.
Even at 2nd level, where your spell accuracy is still fairly good compared to other points on the curve, the inability to reliably hit things with spell attacks makes Striking Spell feel like a huge waste a lot of the time.
The issue is compounded in boss fights where their higher AC and saves makes spellcasting incredibly unreliable. Spell attacks become unusable, and while save based spells are doing something, they don't really gain anything from Striking Spell- instead, they're liable to be lost entirely.
Which is unfortunate. The class looks and feels wonderfully dynamic in play with the Slide Casting Synthesis, while enables the Magus to feel like a proper striker... until they go to actually try and land a spell.
I proposed earlier that Striking Spell needs a clause that turns failed Spell Attacks into successes, and I'm even more convinced after actually seeing the class in action. It enables the Magus to be reliable in combat and put out steady damage (which still isn't really up to what the Fighter is doing on a mediocre day) while not making their critical threat with spells to be through the roof. It enables them to embrace spell attacks as their niche as a class, and also eases their pressure on Intelligence at 1st level. They still want Intelligence (since they can still critically fail even with the Striking Spell buff, and might want a Save DC for debuff options), but don't really need to start with a 16, instead freeing up a little space to boost their much needed Constitution.
It's worth noting that the Summoner is also not terribly strong, but at the very least it doesn't feel like it's constantly wasting its time while doing what the class feels like it should lean into.
My experiences with the class have been very similar to yours, although at the mid-level spectrum (lvl. 10-11).
During one of my group's playtests, we keeping the action economy as is and doing away with the spell attack roll and having it work kind of like the Eldritch Archer's feat but with a -2 penalty. It did wonders and did not seemed to cause the Magus to outshine anyone (we had a Dragon Instinct Barbarian with us), but rather put out the steady damage they should be putting out, like you mentioned.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It seems, based on a purely subjective review of the forum comments, that the most common fix for Striking Spell seems to be to remove the spell attack roll from the spell, making it go off automatically on a successful Strike.
The more I look at things, though, the more I am coming to think that the issue isn't the spell attack roll, it's the fact that the spell's contingent on the Strike in the first place.
With Striking Spell written as it is, the spell attack roll is likely to lag between 2 and 4 points behind the weapon strike, depending on level. To me, that makes it comparable to an agile weapon and some of the MAP enhancers that are available in various classes. The amount of damage a typical cantrip does at most levels is likewise comparable to an agile weapon. That math already exists in the game and is balanced. The difference here, though, is that the "agile weapon" in this comparison is limited to only being able to attack when the main-hand weapon actually lands a blow, which causes the math to get skewed.
Why not change Striking Spell to say "After you make a melee Strike using the receptacle for the spell, you may discharge the spell...?"
Except that’s not good enough.
2wf feat at first level offer Either a MAP savings or action savings. Striking spell offers neither, unless you take advantage of sliding. Combining it all into a single roll, even if there's no action savings, WOULD be acceptable.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It seems, based on a purely subjective review of the forum comments, that the most common fix for Striking Spell seems to be to remove the spell attack roll from the spell, making it go off automatically on a successful Strike.
The more I look at things, though, the more I am coming to think that the issue isn't the spell attack roll, it's the fact that the spell's contingent on the Strike in the first place.
With Striking Spell written as it is, the spell attack roll is likely to lag between 2 and 4 points behind the weapon strike, depending on level. To me, that makes it comparable to an agile weapon and some of the MAP enhancers that are available in various classes. The amount of damage a typical cantrip does at most levels is likewise comparable to an agile weapon. That math already exists in the game and is balanced. The difference here, though, is that the "agile weapon" in this comparison is limited to only being able to attack when the main-hand weapon actually lands a blow, which causes the math to get skewed.
Why not change Striking Spell to say "After you make a melee Strike using the receptacle for the spell, you may discharge the spell...?"
Doing that would be akin to having it work like spell combat did. It would be an accuracy enhancer that lets you attack and cast. Works like Similar abilities
Then, maybe create a spellstrike focus spell to translate the whole “deliver with your weapon like an eldritch archer does? Heck you could make it level 4 or 6. You would get limited uses and translate the whole nova aspect of the class for those that want it.
|
|
Because the spell is already suffering from a swath of penalties that makes it as bad or worse than a second swing. Yeah technically you're not paying more in MAP, but you're paying the exact same cost elsewhere so you're not actually any more accurate.How is "my second attack is only at a -1" not an MAP savings?Except that’s not good enough.
2wf feat at first level offer Either a MAP savings or action savings. Striking spell offers neither, unless you take advantage of sliding.
Those penalties are already included in my original post. That's why I said "the spell attack roll is likely to lag between 2 and 4 points behind the weapon strike, depending on level."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Those penalties are already included in my original post. That's why I said "the spell attack roll is likely to lag between 2 and 4 points behind the weapon strike, depending on level."Because the spell is already suffering from a swath of penalties that makes it as bad or worse than a second swing. Yeah technically you're not paying more in MAP, but you're paying the exact same cost elsewhere so you're not actually any more accurate.How is "my second attack is only at a -1" not an MAP savings?Except that’s not good enough.
2wf feat at first level offer Either a MAP savings or action savings. Striking spell offers neither, unless you take advantage of sliding.
Right, which isn't good enough. 2wf feats* at first level eliminate the MAP penalty entirely (except when they instead eliminate the action cost, or you're a rogue, who is weird).
Edit: *and by "feats" I mean Double Slice.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly I think that using two rolls for a Spell Strike is making things more complicated than they need to be. It slows down the pace of the game, adds too much RNG for an action that can result in losing a ressource and takes more than half a turn to setup and does not really make sense narratively (imo).
The idea has merit, and should be kept. Changing it to Spell Combat, where the "second weapon" is a readied spell that you can release after a successful strike, any spell.
Spell Strike should be a separate action (requiring to "ready" a compatible spell or not, it's another debate) that just uses your Strike to determine wether or not the spell hits as well and crits (exept for saves, this should stay as it is)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Spell Strike should be a separate action (requiring to "ready" a compatible spell or not, it's another debate) that just uses your Strike to determine wether or not the spell hits as well and crits (exept for saves, this should stay as it is)
That's a way to word it. Make it read like Aid, where the Spell Strike is a free action that modifies the Strike, but requires you to have set the spell up.
The ability entry would confer both the Free action and the ability to hold the spell in your weapon.
Yes.
I was also thinking that a "Hold the charge" action (concentrate trait) could solves some issue.
Would be something like:
> 1 Action.
Trait: Concentrate
You bend your focus to keep an infused spell from dissipating. By doing so you keep it ready until the end of your next turn.
You can keep doing it for a maximum of 1 minute, after which you lose your grip and the spell dissipates, leaving your Tired.
Holding the charge triggers your Synthesis' effects.
I think it would work pretty well with "Spell Combat".
Forgive my ignorance I'm less familiar with the game and the rules than everyone else, but I do agree with the idea that the attack landing should deliver the spell. However I can't help but ask what intelligence would do for the class without it being a part of the spell attack role? It's pretty bad already that max int is 16 for a magus due to how stat arrangements work, and that you also have to choose between int or str apex, potentially putting you behind another +1 in addition to master instead of legendary spell casting. That's +4 less than a dedicated caster. That's 20% less accurate when spells only had between 45 and 65% chance of hitting in most cases anyways... Idk seems super unreliable but at the same time I'm not sure what else a Magus uses int for. Int could be unnecessary if you don't need it to hit
*edit* I do however absolutely find the way the spell casting is handle super cool and interesting and if too few slots is a problem I do think 2/2/2 or 2/2/2/2 is a better solution than full slots
Forgive my ignorance I'm less familiar with the game and the rules than everyone else, but I do agree with the idea that the attack landing should deliver the spell. However I can't help but ask what intelligence would do for the class without it being a part of the spell attack role? It's pretty bad already that max int is 16 for a magus due to how stat arrangements work, and that you also have to choose between int or str apex, potentially putting you behind another +1 in addition to master instead of legendary spell casting. That's +4 less than a dedicated caster. That's 20% less accurate when spells only had between 45 and 65% chance of hitting in most cases anyways... Idk seems super unreliable but at the same time I'm not sure what else a Magus uses int for. Int could be unnecessary if you don't need it to hit
*edit* I do however absolutely find the way the spell casting is handle super cool and interesting and if too few slots is a problem I do think 2/2/2 or 2/2/2/2 is a better solution than full slots
You are absolutely correct to point out this issue.
The short answer is that auto-hit isn't the answer, but a strong buff from the hit is.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Forgive my ignorance I'm less familiar with the game and the rules than everyone else, but I do agree with the idea that the attack landing should deliver the spell. However I can't help but ask what intelligence would do for the class without it being a part of the spell attack role? It's pretty bad already that max int is 16 for a magus due to how stat arrangements work, and that you also have to choose between int or str apex, potentially putting you behind another +1 in addition to master instead of legendary spell casting. That's +4 less than a dedicated caster. That's 20% less accurate when spells only had between 45 and 65% chance of hitting in most cases anyways... Idk seems super unreliable but at the same time I'm not sure what else a Magus uses int for. Int could be unnecessary if you don't need it to hit
*edit* I do however absolutely find the way the spell casting is handle super cool and interesting and if too few slots is a problem I do think 2/2/2 or 2/2/2/2 is a better solution than full slots
You are absolutely correct to point out this issue.
The short answer is that auto-hit isn't the answer, but a strong buff from the hit is.
I want my spellstrike to go off as reliably as a barbarians raged swing or a rangers precision shot. I then want the damaged to be nerfed so as to be brought in line with these features. If I can't reliably do what my class does why am I playing a magus and not a fighter with wizard dedication utility spells?
|
Forgive my ignorance I'm less familiar with the game and the rules than everyone else, but I do agree with the idea that the attack landing should deliver the spell. However I can't help but ask what intelligence would do for the class without it being a part of the spell attack role? It's pretty bad already that max int is 16 for a magus due to how stat arrangements work, and that you also have to choose between int or str apex, potentially putting you behind another +1 in addition to master instead of legendary spell casting. That's +4 less than a dedicated caster. That's 20% less accurate when spells only had between 45 and 65% chance of hitting in most cases anyways... Idk seems super unreliable but at the same time I'm not sure what else a Magus uses int for. Int could be unnecessary if you don't need it to hit
*edit* I do however absolutely find the way the spell casting is handle super cool and interesting and if too few slots is a problem I do think 2/2/2 or 2/2/2/2 is a better solution than full slots
It would affect save DCs, and I think some cantrip damage. It's not their primary, they shouldn't have to treat it like it is.
|
Forgive my ignorance I'm less familiar with the game and the rules than everyone else, but I do agree with the idea that the attack landing should deliver the spell. However I can't help but ask what intelligence would do for the class without it being a part of the spell attack role? It's pretty bad already that max int is 16 for a magus due to how stat arrangements work, and that you also have to choose between int or str apex, potentially putting you behind another +1 in addition to master instead of legendary spell casting. That's +4 less than a dedicated caster. That's 20% less accurate when spells only had between 45 and 65% chance of hitting in most cases anyways... Idk seems super unreliable but at the same time I'm not sure what else a Magus uses int for. Int could be unnecessary if you don't need it to hit
*edit* I do however absolutely find the way the spell casting is handle super cool and interesting and if too few slots is a problem I do think 2/2/2 or 2/2/2/2 is a better solution than full slots
You are absolutely correct to point out this issue.
The short answer is that auto-hit isn't the answer, but a strong buff from the hit is.
I don't think so. They still need intelligence if they actually want to cast a spell normally, or use save-based stuff. Int dump would be possible if the weapon attack was used for the spell attack... but it would cut off a large swath of their options in doing so.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Magus usually never needed very high intelligence. Most of the time they stopped at 16 or 18, the minimum to cast all of their spells. More was mostly to get more slots, but it's not a mechanic in 2E.
Now, if Spell Strike allows the use of Save Spells, having higher INT will definitely be a worthwhile option.
Having a separate attack roll for spells only make sense if you cast your spell separatly from the weapon Strike, and there is situation where that could be useful. Finishing an ennemy with a strike and immediatly discharging a stored ranged spell to attack an ennemy that is further (assuming after rework discharging a spell separatly cost a single action) then using the third action to come closer or Spell Parry or stuff.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One option is to just have the Magus's base chassis substitute Dex/Strength for Intelligence when they use Spell Strike, the way the Investigator can do that when they Devise a Stratagem-- the Magus would still need some Dexterity for Armor, and some Strength for the damage roll, if that was done their Key Stat could just be Intelligence as well.
You'd be forcing them to want to Spellstrike at least a cantrip every hit with that model, which would drive home the fantasy of:
"I don't want to just cast and swing seperately, I want my Magic to be a part of my Martial, and my Martial to be a part of my Magic"
Since every hit they actually want to do is magic-- though if thats the case, moving AND Spell Striking in the same turn becomes essential... Well actually how about, if we convert Striking Spell into a melee eldritch shot:
"When you use this feature to cast a Cantrip that normally requires two actions to cast, it costs only one action instead."
Full Spell would still cost three action total to Spell Strike, which means they're a full-attack sort of nova move, not being able to move away after would be part of the cost.
|
Played one (Level One) game yesterday. I was Steel, she was Slide, and he was Star; the three Magi of our party!
We all had fun, yes. But I think Slide had the most fun, as the rest of us had to hold still trying to get our interlocking class mechanics to synergize well.
So, a casual suggestion: Can all the Synthesis's be granted limited mobility?
Steel > Temporary Hit Points and may Step
Slide > May either Stride or Step (choose)
Star > Ranged Spellstrike and may Step
May try another (Level Four) game next week.
Cheers!
|
|
I have probably missed something obvious, but does the prerequisite for Striking Spell — “If the next action you use is to Cast a Spell that can target one creature or object...” — bar using area of effect spells?Yes, unless the area of effect spell targets an enemy first. There is that fungus one on the primal list.
Got it, thanks.
So I think I've got something that works pretty well with the current system IMHO. Bear in mind, this is a very rough draft I thought up while getting ready for work.
Spellstrike
[2-Actions]
Choose a 1 or 2 action spell that can target at least one creature. Make a strike with a weapon or unarmed attack. If the strike is successful, the target is also subject to the effects of the spell.If casting the spell used a spell slot and deals damage, its damage is rolled normally. Otherwise it deals minimum damage(as if all damage dice rolled 1s).
With the numbers I ran through, I think it gives the Magus respectable damage(but not overshadowing other martials) and more acceptable action economy. Its one attack roll using the Magus weapon skill and relevant bonuses. All or nothing.
And to add some more of 1e Magus into this version, give them an "Arcane Pool". Their Arcane Pool is equal to their Int mod(or maybe a static number like 3, but gains bonuses like 3 + 1 for every 5 levels) and they can spend points from it to re-prepare expended spells. That'll help with the low spell slots and to alleviate the sting of misses with slot-using Spellstrikes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Last night I thought of a lot of possible feats or actions for the Magus and I also think simplifying Spell Strike to be "replace the somatic component of an attack spell by a Strike, uses your weapon weapon proficiency to determine the result of the spell, counts double for MAP" is much simpler and elegant. It removes part of the RNG, streamlines the action economy and is more in line with other similar abilities (Spell Storing ammunitions and weapons, Eldritch Shot, that one NPC everyone brings up...)
Current Striking Spell still has a place as Spell Combat (opening up to any kind of spells) and it'd be a shame to just ditch it while it opens some interresting, even if sometimes situational, possibilities. But I think I already said that earlier.
Among those I kept were:
Steel grasp/focus (Level 2 or 4)
Reaction
Trigger: you rolled a spell attack for spell combat/striking spell but don’t know if its a success.
By instinct, experience or reflex you feel that your spell won’t connect and hold it back as it was about to fire. You hold the charge for one more turn, but suffer an attack penalty as if you had released the spell.
This one can work with Striking Spell if it doesn't change, or with possible Spell Combat if it's reworked.
However a reaction isn't much of a cost if the Magus doesn't have other interresting options to spend it on.
Deflecting Spellstrike (Level 12?)
Reaction
Trigger: A foe rolls a melee Strike against you while you have a Striking Spell ready, but you do do not know the result yet
With both might and magic, you attempt to knock aside the foe’s weapon. Attempt a Strike, using only your proficiency and potency bonuses, if the result is greater than that of the foe, their Strike fails. If it is superior by 10 or more, or you rolled a natural 20, the spell in your weapon lashes at the opponent. Roll the save or attack roll of the spell, you cannot get a result worse than a success (for attack) or failure (for save).
In both cases, the spell is expended after the deflection.
Yes, I totally took it from the Flamboyant Arcana. I thought of it like a very offensive defensive option. Kind of like "You really want to attack me? You sure ? You want to take that risk?" so it would be up to the ennemy (and GM) judgment to see wether or not they respect the threat or not.
And one last one I thought of, in the reaction department:
Critical Focus (Level 14 to 16?)
Reaction
Trigger: You land a critical success on a spell strike against a foe, or a foe critically fails a save against one of your spell strikes. You have used at least one focus point during this encounter.
Frequency: Once per encounter
Seeing your foe’s resolve wavering gives you a second breath, clearing your mind and achieving a new level of focus on the battle. You regain one (1) focus point.
Mostly useful if the Magus gets a lot of Focus spells and you decide to invest in them, I was inspired by the Bladebound's ability to recharge the Arcane Pool upon killing a foe. This would be mostly useful when dealing with mooks during dungeon crawling, and a helpful boon when you happen to crit on a tougher opponent.
The Magus could also get its own AoO variant, requiring to have an infused attack spell ready. Maybe an upgrade to it would give you reach, but opponents within the extra reach would only be hit by the spell (even if you still use a Strike).
1) if you hit with you melee attack and the spell does not hit it doesn’t discharge instead it stays in your weapon until the spell hits or the end of the next round. This gives you 4 attacks to attempt to hit with the spell.
This is currently an 18th level feat called "Second Chance Strike".
|
|
1) if you hit with you melee attack and the spell does not hit it doesn’t discharge instead it stays in your weapon until the spell hits or the end of the next round. This gives you 4 attacks to attempt to hit with the spell.This is currently an 18th level feat called "Second Chance Strike".
Which is both overly punitive and overvalued. Should be a much lower level or base functionality.
|
|
Which is both overly punitive and overvalued. Should be a much lower level or base functionality.1) if you hit with you melee attack and the spell does not hit it doesn’t discharge instead it stays in your weapon until the spell hits or the end of the next round. This gives you 4 attacks to attempt to hit with the spell.This is currently an 18th level feat called "Second Chance Strike".giving second chance spell effect at least for attack roll spells at low level would pretty much completely fix Striking Spell as far as I’m concerned.
I wouldn't go that far, but it would be a big step in the right direction.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fun idea I had creating a magus: keep a small golf-bag of mundane light bulk weapons with scrolls of situational debuffs affixed to them via Striker's Scroll. You can power up the weapon with Magus Potency and deliver a situationally effective spell to your enemy.
Spells like command, touch of idiocy, and hideous laughter aren't great for most enemies, but can really shift a combat to your favor against particular foes.
^ I like it... I see Spirit Sheath as similarly relevant (if just one weapon instead of the golf bag), of course with free action Drawing Weapon in that case... So not just using Spirit Sheath to draw weapon when you have none in hand, but using it SWITCH from weapon in hand to new optimal weapon at no action cost... Both the weapon traits as well as attached Striker's Scroll spell having own situational advantages.
Which reminds me, seems like Spell Storing is pretty solid Rune for Magus. Limited to 3rd level and lower, but it doesn't even require slots so can be powered by scrolls. Doesn't seem compatible with Spellstrike since that requires casting BEFORE the weapon strike, but even without possible effect tier upgrade from weapon crit, even just partial effects on Save seem decent value if you can do it for 1 action despite normally being 2 action spell casting. Spell Storing also seems efficient way to trigger Energize Strikes (ends up being 2 actions total, 1 for activating Spell Storing, and 1 for Energize).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I spitballed an idea of making Striking Spell a unique cantrip that uses your weapon's damage, and can be interacted with as both a Strike and a Spell for the purposes of feats and abilities (eg. Metamagic and combat feats)
You can then get unique heighten and rider effects based off of your magus synthesis or feats.
I really don't like that the only role of Striking spell is to combine a spell and strike damage for the purposes of action economy/crits. That feels boring to me. I want it to be a magical strike that feels unique and can be interacted with meaningfully.
It would be nice if we could get a dev to come and codify what has been said about the magus in other threads. At this point many on the forum are talking in circles with no new guidance to go by. I would love to hear what the Dev team feels is sub par, what’s going by the way side and what’s being looked at. Of course they won’t be telling us how things will end up but it would be nice to know what’s being looked at.
Judging by last posts I've seen from them I think they are hesitant to post here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's kind of understandable, but given how it is going I really hope a second playtest will happen to see what has changed. That'd be great.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A short second round, something along the lines of what they did with the 2e class update (in which we got to see the Champion, etc) would be stellar