Only arcane?

[Verzen]

In PF1, there were archetypes to get occult and primal spellcasting. Why is only arcane an option? At least I remember having a spiritualist with magus capabilities and I remember a druid like magus archetype.

I could totally see Magus being more than just an arcane user and that one could make the case that there is a magus type dedicated to each tradition of spellcasting.

[Hejtan]

I agree that Magus should have access to more than just arcane casting. Moreover, I would argue that Magus should have the option to choose between Prepared and Spontaneus casting. Not sure whether to implement it like Sorcerer bloodlines - choose what you like - or add the option in form of Feats, but why should a wizard that has to spent years studying arcane tomes have time to also train with a sword, but a sorcerer whose magic simply comes wouldn't?

[ShadowFighter88]

I get the feeling stuff like this will be what Class Archetypes are for in the future when they get introduced (since they'll function similarly to archetypes in 1e - changing class features around or swapping some out for others).

We don't have any class archetypes yet so there's no examples, but given that the un-archetype'd 1e Magus was an arcane prepared caster, I'm not surprised that they're nailing that bit down first before finagling with it beyond that.

[PossibleCabbage]

I would prefer to get 4 different classes for "Gish for Arcane/Primal/Occult/Divine" and have those classes reflect how those traditions are different.

Like why make the Magus be able to be Occult/Divine/Primal when we could instead have the Occultist/Inquisitor/[New Class] fill that role? I get that we're only getting 2 classes in this book, but there will be more books with more classes. Having the Oracle as a class unto itself is better than having the Oracle be a subclass of Sorcerer, after all.

[Enrif]

While i think they should do this, if they do this with too many classes, it makes those classes who are stuck with their tradition look bad over time.

A primal Magus would be a 1e Ranger Like?
A divine Magus would be a 1e Paladin Like?

Kinda cool, but also, Ranger and Champion could feel worse as they lost that.

[Verzen]

ShadowFighter88 wrote:

I get the feeling stuff like this will be what Class Archetypes are for in the future when they get introduced (since they'll function similarly to archetypes in 1e - changing class features around or swapping some out for others).

We don't have any class archetypes yet so there's no examples, but given that the un-archetype'd 1e Magus was an arcane prepared caster, I'm not surprised that they're nailing that bit down first before finagling with it beyond that.

Sorc was an arcane caster in 1e and in 2e they got every tradition.

[ShadowFighter88]

Verzen wrote:

ShadowFighter88 wrote:

I get the feeling stuff like this will be what Class Archetypes are for in the future when they get introduced (since they'll function similarly to archetypes in 1e - changing class features around or swapping some out for others).

We don't have any class archetypes yet so there's no examples, but given that the un-archetype'd 1e Magus was an arcane prepared caster, I'm not surprised that they're nailing that bit down first before finagling with it beyond that.

Sorc was an arcane caster in 1e and in 2e they got every tradition.

Which was a surprise when we first saw it in the 2e core playtest, but I expect prior to it being revealed everyone was just expecting it to be a normal arcane caster. I feel like we should've approached the Magus the same way - assume we'd be getting a rendition of 1e's base Magus as an Int-based prepared arcane caster.

I get the feeling that variable tradition casters are going to be reserved for particular class themes - so far we have the sorcerer, witch, and summoner. Two of those draw their magic from external sources (the witch from their patron, the summoner via the connection to their eidolon), while the third has it burned into their blood (either from genetic heritage or notable supernatural influence). Magi have always been described as people who study magic. Wasn't until Paizo started releasing the hybrid classes that we got the Eldritch Scion archetype for it and the majority of 1e Magus archetypes still retain the studious independent-researcher theme. Making their closest parallel among the caster classes the Wizard, which is also an arcane-only class.

[Innominat]

Totally agree. I want the non-arcane tradition options added as other types of Magus Synthesis options. It's easy enough as written to replace the word "arcane" with "magic" and get 95% of the class ready for three other traditions.

Based on how the Magus MC archetype Striking Spell will be basically useless* for other spellcasting tradition classes, it really needs to have the other traditions as options in the core class.

Striking Spell (Spellstrike) is the fundamental action of the class. Wizard with Fighter archetype (or vice versa) doesn't get that. Champion doesn't get that. Cleric with Warpriest doctrine doesn't get that. That could change with a Magus MC archetype (and it should).

*Spellcasting is the Magus class' hook into Striking Spell. For a caster taking a Magus MC archetype the spellcasting is not needed, but the missing weapon proficiency advancement would make Striking Spell useless. Similarly a martial taking a Magus MC archetype spellcasting is necessary for Striking Spell to have any utility, while the weapon/armor proficiency advancement is not. Either way, you're using a 2nd level feat to MC and more feats to either get weapon proficiencies (most needed by other casting tradition classes) to be useful in striking or spellcasting MC feats to make it useful. It's just not easy to adapt to a MC archetype.

To edit the class to accommodate other traditions, the spellbook verbiage could just as easily be modified to allow a holy text or occult grimoire if it has to be prepared from books. But rules for preparing from prayer/meditation/familiar already exist from Cleric/Druid/Witch and are easy to reference for the tradition Synthesis options.

There are also some feats that specifically talk about arcane tradition spells, but those could just as easily require the right Synthesis options as prereqs. But the class feats themselves are already almost all good fits other traditions.