| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, I'm sorry Mr. Boss Monster, did you just miss me with a higher-level-than-I-can-cast Finger of Death?
Yoink. Hope you are immune to negative damage, because that's coming right back at you...
Would standing next to a lasting AoE spell like, say, Wall of Fire or Flaming Sphere allow you to do it every turn ?
Could you trigger it on a friendly caster's spell?
Imagine your Wizard buddy casting a Flaming Sphere in melee, you get there in the thick of it and feed on your friend's spell to empower your own strikes while trying not to burn alive.
This feat alone defines the Magus as a mage-killer, that's kind of awesome.
I like this feat. Some similar feats (like mirror shield) require a critical save or critically failed attack roll which severely limits their usability. This one seems quite a bit more useful.
Would standing next to a lasting AoE spell like, say, Wall of Fire or Flaming Sphere allow you to do it every turn ?
Could you trigger it on a friendly caster's spell?
It only works on targeted spells, so that would not work.
Yeah, it's also a good synergy with the class' core mechanic.
I like this feat. Some similar feats (like mirror shield) require a critical save or critically failed attack roll which severely limits their usability. This one seems quite a bit more useful.
Yeah, that was exactly what caught my eye. Only needing a regular success means you are likely to be able to use it pretty frequently.
Only working on targeted spells is something of a limitation, but it still works on multitarget spells regardless of how your allies save; so a spellcaster that hits the whole party with Fear is going to catch it back from you in all likelihood.
My concern here is that it's hard to keep Spell Parry (and thus Capture Spell) up with the action economy.
If you're going to be using Striking Spell frequently, how often are you going to have an action to keep Spell Parry up?
My concern here is that it's hard to keep Spell Parry (and thus Capture Spell) up with the action economy.
If you're going to be using Striking Spell frequently, how often are you going to have an action to keep Spell Parry up?
You do not need to strike right after using Spell Striking (really should rename it Spell Imbuing or something) so you could put the spell in your weapon, Spell parry, and attack on the next turn for example. Attempt 2 strikes (hoping one connects and delivers the spell) then spell parry again.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, and you technically aren't even losing action economy doing that compared to casting the spell normally; Magus just kinds of "buys into" better action economy in their next turn when they do that.
Re-reading it specifies "a foe's harmfull spell", which is kind of a bummer. But it's still a very nice counter.
Oh yes, it's "foe" that is a "bummer".
I would have loved to raise my sword so my Sorcerer buddy could fling a Polar Ray a me so I catch it and strike someone with it.
Oh yes, it's "foe" that is a "bummer".
I would have loved to raise my sword so my Sorcerer buddy could fling a Polar Ray a me so I catch it and strike someone with it.
It's hard to see what's in it for your Sorcerer buddy, who would probably prefer the spell to have a decent chance of hitting rather than being wasted.
It's hard to see what's in it for your Sorcerer buddy, who would probably prefer the spell to have a decent chance of hitting rather than being wasted.Oh yes, it's "foe" that is a "bummer".
I would have loved to raise my sword so my Sorcerer buddy could fling a Polar Ray a me so I catch it and strike someone with it.
Rule of cool. or the ennemy could be behind a wall so they cannot target them.
Or he could just use a Fireball, hitting the ennemy and the Magus, assuming good Reflex saves or fire resistance, it could make a risky but fun team attack.
Oh right you have to be *targetted* that makes it less interresting. The ennemy can just not target you with spells at all...
It's cool because then the ennemy will take a big risk using spells against you, but depending on your dm he may just start making spell caster never target you and that's it.
Once per day is too limiting I think. A lot of Magus abilities only trigger on spell slot usage and those are very limited, so those abilities won't get triggered a lot already.
Capture Spell seems to be your way of Spell Striking more often and with a better variety of spells, limiting it to once a day (while it's already rare enough to encounter spell casters) would make it TOO niche.
If your DM is inclined to tweak the enemies' spell lists to not include single target spells just because of this feat, that's kind of a strong advantage in and of itself.
It does not feel like an advantage if it removes gameplay opportunity. It's like the DM removing all undead from the game because you have a Paladin and a Cleric in the party. (to a less extreme extent)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not to say that a spellcaster would target with fortitude stuff spellcasters ( or players not close to it ), and with will stuff melee ones***.In this case, the magus is ok because it will hit master by lvl 9 ( even if for anything else would have been better to have juggernaut instead ).
***This is just basic knowledge anybody has ( as somebody who tries an athletic checks would probably try to trip a large enemy and to push a small one )
Magus is a melee one, and I don't see how it lends itself to so obviously being good at any particular save that enemies will never target them. Summoner is also getting a lot of fears about things not working because the GM metagames to downplay their strengths, and that's weird. If a GM is liable to do that, you probably have much bigger problems, and it doesn't really reflect on the class itself.
Oh, I'm sorry Mr. Boss Monster, did you just miss me with a higher-level-than-I-can-cast Finger of Death?
Yoink. Hope you are immune to negative damage, because that's coming right back at you...
I mean I guess boss monsters can roll a 2 on a d20 like won't else lol
True, but then no reason to limit it to once a day.
That the ennemy "respects" the threat and stop target the Magus specifically with spells is likely intended, and of course if the DM plays "against players" that way it's a DM issue.
I just find it a bit disappointed that then... you're back at using your very limited ressources.
"I can empower myself when my ennemies try to throw spell at me!
But nobody does because I can." Kind of weird situation. That's what I meant by finding it a bit of a bummer that it's only targeted spells and not others like AoEs etc. (Though multi target spells would also work, but usually they can exclude you from the targets)
The entire idea that a DM is actively cutting into your character's strengths or hand holding and catering to their weaknesses is a silly argument to make.
Rather the concern comes from normal play and expectations. Not an adversarial DM or a hand holding one. Simple logic and natural reactions.
Yes, on paper when you do get it to trigger it's awesome.
But the situation needs to be juuuust right.
Edit: And I apologize, my argument was indeed completely irrelevant
HumbleGamer, that works if the enemy knows you and your tactics and has reason to prepare accordingly.
It's bad GMing when monsters that have never met you before avoid targeting you because of your abilities.