The might, the magic, THE MAGUS!

[Logan Bonner]

Welcome to the magus playtest forum, folks! I'm the principal designer on this class, in addition to being the lead on the book and the Pathfinder Lead Designer. I'm looking forward to seeing your takes on this class and the reports of your play sessions!

If you haven't participated in a class playtest for Pathfinder before, here's what you need to know.

• Most of our data comes through the playtest surveys (link below). Staff will visit the forums, but if you really want to make sure something gets to us, make sure you include it in your survey.
  
• Actual play experience is vitally important! We appreciate opinions based on a read-through, but knowing how the class actually plays in a group during the game tells us much more.
  
• This forum will have a bit of everything: playtest recaps, mathematical analyses, wishlists, and wild speculation!
  
• As noted in the blog, remember that every poster is trying to make the game better for everyone, so please be polite and respectful. Be kind your fellow posters and our moderation staff!

Start building your magi and have fun!

[Kalaam]

Thanks a lot, done doing a first read through and kind of confused by some aspects. Can't wait to try it out though!

If I understood correctly, Magi only get 4 spell slots per day (once they reach level 4) and those slots increase in level, right ? Selecting what the 4 spells selected each day will probably be an interresting challenge, we'll see how it plays ! Martial Caster seems like a good way to counterbalance this limitation, it's funny to see Magic Weapon on this list since by 6th level the spell is usually far outdated, but it's nice to see out little buddy here.

Magus Potency and Runic Impression seems a bit weird at first glance, Magus Potency sounds more like an ability to compensate until you get a weapon fitting your level (I'd have to double check the level of runes) rather than an advantageous buff to match fighter's attack rolls, though since in 2E Magus ends up having the same proficiency as most other martials it probably makes sense to nerf this ability a bit (plus comes in handy when you have to use a random weapon you find).

Runic Impression seems like a good way to save money on weapon upgrades, and quickly changing damage types if an ennemy is resistant to your +2 flaming longsword. That's neat.

I was kind of expecting more offensive focus spells, maybe those are planned for the full release (and stuff like a 2E version of Pool Strike probably wouldn't be very hard to balance/design compared to those others ability).

So... that was a first glance review of things that popped to me.

Edit: Raise a Book should also allow to work as a prerequisite for Capture Spell ! Siphon that magical energy inside your weapon through your book ! (Ok that one is mostly a joke).

I would have expected a Spell Recall focus spell to help manage the limited slots. Something like "By spending one focus point, you recharge an expanded spell slots you expanded during this encounter." With a frequency limit of once between each refocus, so Magi can feel like that can afford to cast a spell at least once per encounter. That may be OP, it's just an idea from the top of my head.

[Ezekieru]

So there's special text about the Summoner's limited spellcasting:

"Because you draw magic from your connection to your eidolon, you have no more than two spell slots of your highest level and, if you can cast 2nd-level spells or higher, two spell slots of 1 level lower than your highest spell level."

But no such text exists for the Magus. Is the missing text on purpose? Is it an error? Or is the table in error?

[Kalaam]

After some more reading I think I have a suggestion (again, this can/will probably change after I get the chance to actually play the class more)

But based on immediate feedback I saw around, I noticed something that the Magus is lacking.

It does not have natural progression of his core class mechanic.
Whereas the Champion gets upgrades to their reaction and the (Un)Holy Ally, Barbarians to their instincts, Rangers to their Edge or even the Oracle getting new depths to their Curse, the Magus' core ability: Spell Striking does not get any progression without feats until 19th level.

Some of those feats seem essential for the class to stay effective at higher level, given its limitations.

Having some of those feats become part of the natural progression of the Magus class might be interresting and make some feats feel less "mandatory" (thinking particularly about Second Chance Spellstrike which feels both very useful and not fitting of an 18th level feat). I don't know what would work for something that would align with those previously mentionned abilities (so level 11) but it does feel like there is a void to be filled there.

I'm likely making little sense as it is quite late here now and I had little time to think this through, but I wanted to write it down before I forget. Good luck with all the feedback and I hope to see the whole class come to life next july !

[Shisumo]

Kalaam wrote:

Magus Potency and Runic Impression seems a bit weird at first glance, Magus Potency sounds more like an ability to compensate until you get a weapon fitting your level (I'd have to double check the level of runes) rather than an advantageous buff to match fighter's attack rolls, though since in 2E Magus ends up having the same proficiency as most other martials it probably makes sense to nerf this ability a bit (plus comes in handy when you have to use a random weapon you find).

Magus Potency's heightening looks mostly right, inasmuch as they heighten to a rune level just slightly better than what you could buy at the equivalent character level; however, I feel like its 3rd level heightening really should be 2nd, since it heightens to a level you'd already have access to via mundane runes.

[manbearscientist]

As mentioned above, it would be nice if we could get upgrades to the 'main thing'. I could particularly see upgrades to the various at 7 and 17, such as the ranged option getting a free Eldritch Archer dedication or slide casting getting even more mobility ta 17 (E.g, a whirlwind strike esque ability that instead has you teleport between hops).

[Ligraph]

A couple of things I noticed while theorycrafting:

No focus pool recharge feats. I'm assuming this is an oversight?

Bespell Strikes doesn't work with cantrips. Given that you only have 4 spells this is a big hit to its usefulness. Also, Energize Strikes does.

Magus is really incentivized to get a damaging focus spell to use with Striking Spell. I wouldn't think you would want that strong of an incentive to multiclass to help the class's central feature. A focus spell like a touch, attack magic missile would really help (although variable action might be a bit strong).

Particular standouts for that focus spell are Evo Wizard for Force Bolt (a 1 action spell that does almost as much as a cantrip, plus you can ignore the rest of the archetype as it always hits), and Elemental Sorcerer for Elemental Toss (a 1 action attack spell that does almost twice as much as a cantrip), although keeping it able to hit would be a pain.

[Ligraph]

Also, level 4 is pretty loaded with very good feats, while level 1/2 seems a bit short. Maybe move one from 4 to 2?

[TheLumbleHumberJack]

I'm honestly really confused about if Magi get 4 spells per day or more. Because the description lacks the bit about losing lower level slots (like the summoner has) and matches more with the wizard text that just gives more slots.

[Ressy]

After reading through the Magus, it really, REALLY, feels like it was balanced primarily with consideration to players taking Wizard dedication on top of it.

With Wizard dedication it feels close to on-par with a Fighter that takes Wizard dedication, but mainly feels like it's just Fighter+Wizard with worse martial proficiency and slightly better spellcasting.

Mainly, Striking Spell just doesn't feel distinct from casting and then hitting someone normally. With Slide Casting you do get a free stride action, but otherwise it's just the same Cast+Strike that anyone with a cantrip does.

Striking Spell is supposed to be the centerpiece of the class, but frankly I think I'd avoid using it as much as possible, due to the upsides being so limited (no MAP and the crit effect), and the downsides being an added chance to just waste the spell (and 2-actions taken to cast it).

[Temperans]

If the class really was balanced around taking Wizard Dedication it needs to be fixed.

Magus should not depend on Wizard dedication to do his thing.

[cjstevenson]

Ressy wrote:

Mainly, Striking Spell just doesn't feel distinct from casting and then hitting someone normally. With Slide Casting you do get a free stride action, but otherwise it's just the same Cast+Strike that anyone with a cantrip does.

Striking Spell is supposed to be the centerpiece of the class, but frankly I think I'd avoid using it as much as possible, due to the upsides being so limited (no MAP and the crit effect), and the downsides being an added chance to just waste the spell (and 2-actions taken to cast it).

(emphasis mine)

I think an interesting idea would be to allow an action with manipulate and concentration traits to extend the time allowed to expend the spell by a single round. (Kind of like sustaining a spell)

[Unicore]

I really like that the magus that takes a casting MC is going to have a radically different feel than one that takes a martial archetype.

Like a magus MC'd into wizard using a staff of divination as a weapon can poer up their staff one round, and then unleash it with a true strike the following round with a good chance of critting on the first strike. THey get 4 high level spells for damage and then can pump their MC spells into getting as many true strikes as possible.

My question is, what happens if the magus is wielding the staff one handed when they use striking spell to get to use slide casting, but then regrips their weapon afterwards? can i:

striking spell with a one handed staff, move, cast the spell (or vice versa) the regrip. Next round, move, cast true strike and then strike with the staff 2 handed? or do the same with a bastard sword?

[Ligraph]

cjstevenson wrote:

I think an interesting idea would be to allow an action with manipulate and concentration traits to extend the time allowed to expend the spell by a single round. (Kind of like sustaining a spell)

I like this idea. Probably would have to limit it to once per spell cast. Or make it a focus spell. But having some way to do this would be very helpful, even if its expensive, especially when you burn one of your high level spell slots. It prevents that crummy "I burnt one of my four spell slots to do exactly nothing" feeling.

[Ediwir]

Been reading for a while, I'll make sure to give plenty of feedback ;)
These secrets of magic need to be unraveled. It's like some sort of arcana to be unearthed.

[Logan Bonner]

TheLumbleHumberJack wrote:

I'm honestly really confused about if Magi get 4 spells per day or more. Because the description lacks the bit about losing lower level slots (like the summoner has) and matches more with the wizard text that just gives more slots.

The magus has a maximum of 4 spells just like the summoner. The spells table is accurate.

[TheCalicoKid]

Is there any chance we can get playtest info for the Magus' archetype? Depending on what that looks like, I'm worried that people will end up playing full spellcasters or full martial classes and just taking the dedications instead because the full class won't be worth it.

[Elfteiroh]

TheCalicoKid wrote:

Is there any chance we can get playtest info for the Magus' archetype? Depending on what that looks like, I'm worried that people will end up playing full spellcasters or full martial classes and just taking the dedications instead because the full class won't be worth it.

They'll probably only write it once it's confirmed they keep their current structure, because if they need to rework them completely, the work put into the archetype would be a waste.

[BluLion]

I think the way spell slots are handled was quite creative. I might've gone with 5 or even 6, but I think unless magus get a higher focus point total, or regain them at a higher rate, I think the spell slots is the best way to handle magus.

I'll be honest, after seeing the chart posted on another thread, I'm concerned about spell-strike accuracy regarding spell attacks. Do you have anything in mind about this?

[caps]

Unicore wrote:

striking spell with a one handed staff, move, cast the spell (or vice versa) the regrip. Next round, move, cast true strike and then strike with the staff 2 handed? or do the same with a bastard sword?

Why would you need to change your grip? To cast a material component spell?

[AngelisBlack]

I gotta admit, I've been waiting for the 2e Magus for a while, so I'm very excited about this playtest. One of my first Pathfinder characters was a Catfolk Eldritch Scion Magus built for the pen and paper version of Kingmaker.

My first thoughts after reading:

An Eldritch Scion option of this would be pretty interesting (Cha based spontaneous casting, with bloodline). The Pathfinder:Kingmaker video game does have Regongar as a character and people might want to make a version of him in PF2e.

Shooting Star, Slide Casting, and Sustaining Steel all look great, and each offers their own unique playstyle! A friend of mine was looking to be a 2 handed magus in 1e, and now that can be built here. Also love that unarmed magus builds are very viable.

Magus Potency and Runic Impression, good ports of the 1e abilities, but it feels like these could be combined into one single focus spell.

5e warlock style limited spell slots and prepared casting do not sound like a good mix on first review. Having 2 spells of each level might be a better option? Also, perhaps spell expert and spell mastery can be nudged to levels 9 and 17 respectively, same as the monk and champion?

It's mixed, but I'm ready to build a magus and put it through it's paces in comparison to other gish-y builds and see how it holds up in actual gameplay (and my attempts to optimize the hell out of it).

[RocketLettuce]

I got permission from my GM to rebuild my Fighter with Wizard Archetype into a Magus with an Investigator Archetype. When we played tonight I never managed to land a spell strike, but since I used Devise a Stratagem, also never wasted an action to miss the delivery Strike.

It was fun working out the action economy and I’m looking forward to trying again in a couple weeks.

Happy Playtest, everybody!

[manbearscientist]

Criticisms (and things I'd like clarified)

The action economy of the class worries me a bit. It seems like it is a step back for Shooting Star and Slide Casting, as they will almost always be pushed use the same three actions (Cantrip + Strike) in combat. Sustaining Steel is more flexible, but largely just because it needs to split its actions over multiple turns if it needs to move at all (something that seems week to me).

I've suggested making Slide Casting something any of the subclasses can do to fix this. I would create three new subclasses to make up for this loss, and address the issue with hands (below). With Arcane Fists being one of those subclasses, this would at the very least give two different 3 turn actions for each subclass. 1-Action spells would also help this a lot. I'd also like to see something for the class 1H Magus as well to make up for a losing Slide Casting I wouldn't mind being able to turn a 1H into a pseudo-wand, for instance, though that is more fitting for a feat.

My second issue is the hand economy. I'm specifically calling out Raise a Tome here, but it is also worth noting that Sustaining Steel can't make use of Spell Parry and its line of feats. This is where I think the the Magus needs a '2 hands full' subclass, covering two weapon fighting, sword and shield/book. For their variant, I'd like to see an option to swap the Stride from Slide Casting for an non-Strike one-action ability using the other hand's object.

I think the interactions with Familiars, Rings of Wizardry and Staves need clarified. Specifically, the lower level spells these things can provide. I am also concerned that the class will scale dramatically in unintuitive ways with these adding lower level spell slots. I think it rewards system mastery more than usual for the class to scale so strongly with picking up extra spell slots. Specific items, shifting staves, etc. What will the new player experience be like, versus a veteran that knows to value these things highly? This is especially when you consider Spell Shroud.

In combat, I think a core weakness is how the class interacts with 'soldier' type enemies with effects similar to attack of opportunity. It certainly feels to me that discharging a spell through a weapon should be enough to avoid these, but that isn't the case.

As others have mentioned, the odds of actually getting a spell to land at full effectiveness aren't that good. Particularly with this being the only gish that doesn't have easy access to True Strike, nor really a place to put it in the rotation. It seems like it is forced to fish for criticals to have any chance with its current proficiency, stats, and lack of accuracy bonus. Not speaking towards balance, but feeling, it is going to be a major downer when a Magus can't land their spells and loses their precious slot and actions for no gain. This can't make it to the final edition. Either the Magus should have something to help them land their spells, or they need to be able to trade an action or reaction to keep the spell around. This and the action economy have to be top priorities I feel for the class to feel good.

Before moving to feats, I'd like to mention that it feels odd that a Magus can't functionally use Spell-Storing weapons, as they lack the lower level spell slots to use it by the time said rune comes around. Minor nitpick.

Onto feats.

Martial Caster's spell choices seem odd to me. Magic Weapon and Mage Armor at 1st level won't do much at level 5 for a class with better Magic Weapon as a focus spell and Medium Armor. It feels like these should be True Strike and Anticipate Peril.

Cascading Ray seems like it is a prayer for a natural 20. Applying MAP to the second spell attack is just such a crushing penalty. Without speaking to balance, I generally don't think I can ever recommend a feat only works 5-10% of the time even for a decent benefit.

The various subclass expansions feel like they should be automatic advancements in the subclass. Otherwise, the class is featureless from up to 19 other than proficiency bumps.

Spell Shroud is cool, but does scale a lot with non-Magus granted spells. My bigger criticism is that the spells it grants very wildly in power. Some are 1st level spells, others 4th, other 3rd but aren't on the arcane spell list, etc. No solutions given other than maybe swapping Fleet Step for Fly.

Versatile Spellstrike seems minimally useful, and arguably doesn't work. The problem is that typically, you Spellstrike to 'deal damage'. Casting a spell down two levels is a piss-poor way to do that. At best, you get around immunity once when your chosen spell stops working. If it were just casting in general, it would have tremendous utility.

Supreme Spellstrike is strong, but it does conflict with Hasted Assault. I feel Hasted Assault should have some benefit, rather than simply being a forced retrain at 20.

I'm not sure whether Spell Swipe, Whirlwind Spell, and Double Spellstrike will be balanced. I highly doubt many will play at high enough levels to give them thorough reviews. If the basic accuracy problems are fixed, I'd give these a careful glance.

I do think Magus should have the Refocus feats.

As others have mentioned, it would be nice to have a battle spell for damage. In particular, a 1-action battle spell. This would simultaneously help the action economy issues and make it feel less vital to make the spell slots land.

Magus Potency feels kinda bad at most levels. At 1, it is a minor upgrade but you'd be better off with Magic Weapon. At 5, you'd be better off using a +1 striking weapon you got at 4. At 7 it is just alright, but at 8 the benefit drops off again. 13-15 you at least jump the gun AND can Runic Assessment for an extra rune slot, but post-16 neither it nor Runic Assessment beat gear options. That's just 3 levels out of 20 with guaranteed benefit. Even if you go out of your way to avoid buying magic weapons (spending money on slot enhancement) and buff up round 1 instead, you will occasionally just get loot drops that make your focus spells irrelevant. Runic Impression feels like it dreams of being Radiant Blade Spirit, and it just feels like needing an action and a focus point should let it drop a rune on top of everything else.

[AnimatedPaper]

My impression so far is very favorable. The design feels on the weak side, but the concepts illustrated are solid.

I particularly enjoy most of the class feats, and the Scaling progression is intriguing.

Some tweaks I'd like to see:
-Give some boost to casting cantrips with Striking Spell. Given the limited number of spell slots, you're going to be forced to use cantrips a lot anyways. So I think it would be good if the player has a reason to want to cast cantrips instead of being so forced. Even something as simple as a focus stance boosting cantrip damage by 1 die would help a bit, as would a scaling Bespell Weapon that worked with cantrips (that might be too strong though, so possibly reduce the die to 1d4).
-Combine the spell attack roll into your strike attack roll (which might be enough to correct the above point as well). The saving through half of this is fine.

I don't want to add a ton of power to the class, but I do want to see them be more encouraged to use the expected playstyle of cantrip spamming, and I want Striking Spell to feel rewarding instead of punishing.

[Kalaam]

The concept is clearly solid.

[Angel Hunter D]

Kalaam wrote:

The concept is clearly solid.

The concept is excellent, and why so many of us were looking forward to this. The execution, leaves something to be desired at this point.

[Kalaam]

I aggree, there is probably a lot of spells and feats that will be in the final book that we don't see here. (maybe a selection of 1 action spells and more martial oriented feats)

So let's focus on tuning this execution.

[Throne]

Kalaam wrote:

I aggree, there is probably a lot of spells and feats that will be in the final book that we don't see here. (maybe a selection of 1 action spells and more martial oriented feats)

So let's focus on tuning this execution.

You can't test this with the approach 'there's probably stuff in the book we haven't seen that makes this work', because if there isn't, and there's no reason to think there is, you're left with an unworkable mess.

It needs to be good with what we're given, not with possible-stuff that might exist in the future that could maybe make it ok.

[Kalaam]

Oh no you misunderstood. I didn't mean "there is stuff we don't know that'll make it work". I absolutely aggree that it *must* work with what we have here, without multiclassing either.

I just meant that additional options are likely to be part of the full release, and we are just focusing on the core of the class.

[Callin13]

Big key there is without multiclass dedications. I agree it falls short and others are better at explaining why than I am. I have spent so far 12 levels playing a Wizard. I have not taken a Wizard feat period I think. I did dedications out the wazoo to get class features. Also I have been very disheartened with the spellcasting. Having to change up my playstyle twice to try and find some way to make it fun.

I just really hate to see the Magus make the same mistakes to make it be unfun for me. So far the class has tons of potential. The profs are right except for the spell casting. Master ar 17 would be better, 19 is too late I feel.

Spell Strike is just not workable for me. Im fine with 3 actions, but requiring 2 attack rolls is not going to be fun. Remember the old thing about 3.5 Monks and the "Flurry of Misses" thing. Yea, missing with your main class feature is not fun. My Wizard misses or get saved on more times than I can count in an adventuring day. Its not fun. Now if I only had 4 spell slots (which I dont mind on the Magus btw, I think 2/2/2 would be better but anyways) I would just reroll.

[graystone]

Angel Hunter D wrote:

Kalaam wrote:

The concept is clearly solid.

The concept is excellent, and why so many of us were looking forward to this. The execution, leaves something to be desired at this point.

Couldn't agree more. Wish I could favorite this more than once. ;)

[Kalaam]

A class should feel complete without its feats I think.
You can play a wizard and never take a single wizard feat and still feel like a wizard.
Same with ranger, barbarian etc.

Magus feels like it needs its feats to be complete, especially in the middle of the progression.

[AnimatedPaper]

graystone wrote:

Angel Hunter D wrote:

Kalaam wrote:

The concept is clearly solid.

The concept is excellent, and why so many of us were looking forward to this. The execution, leaves something to be desired at this point.

Couldn't agree more. Wish I could favorite this more than once. ;)

Hard same.

So I'll just favorite your post Graystone. That's almost like favoriting Angel's more than once, right?

Kalaam wrote:

A class should feel complete without its feats I think.

You can play a wizard and never take a single wizard feat and still feel like a wizard.
Same with ranger, barbarian etc.

Magus feels like it needs its feats to be complete, especially in the middle of the progression.

I'm not sure I fully agree with this. I might though; I need to think about it. As a standard for if a class design meets its design goals, I've certainly heard worse.

[Kalaam]

I might be a bit harsh when saying that. But I do think the Magus seems lacking in its natural progression between first and 19th level.
I mean, yes, Wizards don't get a lot of feature either but they have so many spells. I understand that casters do not get a lot of feature upgrade as they level up (since those are their spell slots/levels) but the Magus is not just a caster, he's also a martial. 75% martial 75% caster 150% something greater than just the individual parts.

[manbearscientist]

As many have focused on the issue of Striking Spell's low odds of actually hitting with the spell (which feels double-bad given that it has double cost in actions for most spells), here are all the ways I can think of that this could be improved::

If the spell had a spell attack, you may use the same roll (but applicable bonuses), or roll again. (Use inverse of 20-roll for saves?)

You may use your martial weapon proficiency and either Strength or Dexterity (if using a finesse weapon) for the spell attack roll, and that same bonus - 10 for the spell attack DC. If you do, this has a -1 circumstance penalty.

Spell attacks stored in this weapon have advantage (I'm not typing it out). Spells requiring a save force disadvantage.

If the spell used was not a cantrip, it gains a +2 circumstance bonus on its spell attack roll or DC.

If your stat bonus (Str/Dex) on your Strike was +4, gain a +1 circumstance bonus on the spell. +5, gain a +2. +6, gain a +3.

You may use your Strength or Dexterity modifier instead of your Intelligence modifier for stored spells.

Reaction: Save a Spell. If your turn would end and you would lose a non-cantrip spell stored in a weapon, you may postpone its loss by one round. This cannot be done outside of combat.

Instead of rolling for a spell attack, you may compare your initial attack roll - 2 to the target's AC.

Instead of rolling for the spell, it automatically has a result one level worse than your attack (for a spell attack roll), or one level better (for a save).

Roll the attack with a -2 circumstance penalty. Instead of rolling for the spell attack or save, if the attack would at least a success then the spell attack is a success or the save is a failure.

Focus Spell: Burn Spell- If the spell attack would fail, or the save would critically succeed, you may instead expend the spell. It gains the result of a success on a spell attack or a failure on the save, but does minimum damage.

Any other ways to achieve better spell results I'm missing? Would any of these alleviate the issue in an acceptable way?

[Lightdroplet]

manbearscientist wrote:

Any other ways to achieve better spell results I'm missing?

The only other one I can add to your list is giving the weapon item bonus to your spell roll/DC as well.

[Kalaam]

Lightdroplet wrote:

manbearscientist wrote:

Any other ways to achieve better spell results I'm missing?

The only other one I can add to your list is giving the weapon item bonus to your spell roll/DC as well.

It's the solution that comes the more often and is probably the simplest and most elegant while being thematically accurate.

Would also make Magus Potency even more thematically relevant. If it could go above +3 with it :p

[manbearscientist]

Kalaam wrote:

Lightdroplet wrote:

manbearscientist wrote:

Any other ways to achieve better spell results I'm missing?

The only other one I can add to your list is giving the weapon item bonus to your spell roll/DC as well.

It's the solution that comes the more often and is probably the simplest and most elegant while being thematically accurate.

Would also make Magus Potency even more thematically relevant. If it could go above +3 with it :p

I have only one minor concern with the item bonus rolls: alchemy.

Yes, yes, I get it. Alchemy isn't that good. But mutagens do change up item bonuses. Getting +1 to one roll with a mutagen is all fine and good, but getting +1 to one roll and +4 to another may be another thing entirely for balance. It would be weird to me if an Alchemist with Magus archetype were significantly better at landing their spells (same proficiency, +2 INT, +1 item bonus).

Going this route, I'd prefer Magus Potency to be a free action that lasted a round and didn't improve damage damage. Instead, have it improve item bonuses at the mutagen rate (+1 at 1, +2 at 3, +3 at 11, and +4 at 17).

[Kalaam]

I think we only mean the potency rune from the weapon.

[Lightdroplet]

manbearscientist wrote:

Kalaam wrote:

Lightdroplet wrote:

manbearscientist wrote:

Any other ways to achieve better spell results I'm missing?

The only other one I can add to your list is giving the weapon item bonus to your spell roll/DC as well.

It's the solution that comes the more often and is probably the simplest and most elegant while being thematically accurate.

Would also make Magus Potency even more thematically relevant. If it could go above +3 with it :p

I have only one minor concern with the item bonus rolls: alchemy.

Yes, yes, I get it. Alchemy isn't that good. But mutagens do change up item bonuses. Getting +1 to one roll with a mutagen is all fine and good, but getting +1 to one roll and +4 to another may be another thing entirely for balance. It would be weird to me if an Alchemist with Magus archetype were significantly better at landing their spells (same proficiency, +2 INT, +1 item bonus).

Mutagens do not change your weapon's item bonus, which is what Striking Spell would depend on for its scaling. I feel like assuming a weapon's item bonus will never be above +3 is a rather safe assumption.

[Angel Hunter D]

Kalaam wrote:

I think we only mean the potency rune from the weapon.

Yeah, just the weapon. Otherwise it's not really hitting that Magus theme.

[Kalaam]

I think we were all talking about using the weapon's potency rune bonus. Does mutagen change that ?

External buffs like a mutagen (which an alchemist can give to their magus teamate) should not be taken into account for now.

[Lightdroplet]

Kalaam wrote:

I think we were all talking about using the weapon's potency rune bonus. Does mutagen change that ?

No, mutagens give you (as in your character) an item bonus to a specific type of roll. If the ability depends on your weapon's fundamental rune, mutagens wouldn't change anything.

[manbearscientist]

I do see one downside to the weapon potency, though I agree it is thematically appropriate and simple. It doesn't get around the nuisance of extra rolling slowing down play at the table. This is more of an issue with higher level feats than anything else, but it is still a factor at low levels.

I guess that is a question for whether we want to focus on eliminating the spell discrepancy, or if we want to make reduced rolling an equally important consideration as well.

[Shisumo]

So, trying to get a baseline for whether Striking Spell was working as intended, I decided to compare move/attack/attack against Striking Spell/produce flame/Slide Casting/attack for a 1st level magus (Str 18, Int 16, using a longsword) against a level 1 orc warrior (AC 18, Ref +7).

The simple, straightforward, walk up and swing twice sequence has a DPR of 7.225.

Using Striking Spell and Slide Casting nets you a DPR of 6.28375.

I also checked what happens with electric arc instead of produce flame; that DPR is 6.77875.

Assuming I didn't mess up my math, this seems like a problem; it shouldn't be a better idea to not use a key class feature.

[Golscia]

So my problem with the magus is threefold. First is the action economy it takes 3 actions to cast a spell put it into your weapon then attack with it. Second is accuracy, in which you have to succeed at two attack rolls of which the second attack is quite a bit less accurate. This just makes it unreliable especially in big and important fights. No one wants to not be able to do anything in a boss fight. Third is the fact that besides cantrips you have very few spells to cast which means you can only go all out a couple times a day. This leads to your main class feature requiring lots of set up to get to work that you can only do a couple of times per day that is not likely to work which means you have a large chance of doing nothing which leads to lots of feel bads. If it was only 1 of any of these issue at once maybe 2 it would be fine but its all three. Basically as it is right now to play a gishi your are better of playing a fighter multiclassing into wizard because you would have more spells per day, your proficiency would step up earlier, and you are more accurate with your weapon, the main thing you give up on is being able step up success on a crit. I would gladly give that up too be able to do things more reliably and more frequently.

[Lightdroplet]

Golscia wrote:

[cut for space]

You've basically summed up my thoughts too.

Action economy, spell accuracy and slot limits are probably the three biggest issues with Magus, and all other issues such as Slide Casting's overbearing superiority over Sustaining Steel, Bespell Strike's relatively low usefulness or Stiking Spell's seeming weakness stem from these three large ones.

[Kalaam]

It's kind of like they tried 3 different ways to give the Magus a limit to its power, which is fine.
But they applied the 3 of them at once. Only one of those and we'd probably wouldn't complain that much.

[CaffeinatedNinja]

Kalaam wrote:

It's kind of like they tried 3 different ways to give the Magus a limit to its power, which is fine.

But they applied the 3 of them at once. Only one of those and we'd probably wouldn't complain that much.

Yep, I ran some numbers in another post. Even if you make cantrip+strike 2 actions (basically always getting the extra action slide benefit) and make the cantrip roll when you swing the first time, hit or miss. Your damage still isn’t amazing, (got rid of the bonus from crit for balance.).

Here is a chart comparing that 2 action damage vs a fighter simply swinging twice, 1h and 2h. Damage is actually lower than this for magus, this uses the wizard spell proficiency (couldn’t change it) and the fighter gets to flatfoot people etc.

https://imgur.com/a/lSEi4Xs

[Kalaam]

What if Magus had more spells per day ?

Or if it was the same number of actions but hitting the Strike would make the Spell hit too (expect for saves)

Edit: It's interresting that, in the survey, some of the options for changes to the magus are:
-Remove spell slots for more martial options, focus spells and cantrips.
-Reduce martial abilities and bring cleric/druid amount of spell slots.
-Leave as it is.