Four Slot Casting


Secrets of Magic Playtest General Discussion

51 to 100 of 378 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

WatersLethe wrote:
WWHsmackdown wrote:
Shisumo wrote:
It will be very interesting to see if Martial Caster winds up being a must-have feat.
I literally can't imagine a magus build where I wouldn't take it.....there is no single class feat in the game that is as strong as 12 spell slots, regardless of what said spells are. The versatility alone is a must buy.
It's just two spell slots, they keep pace with your normal four.

I see now. After re-reading it's much more tame lol. 2 spell slots for a class feat is still an amazing deal, especially on a class starved for slots. I wouldn't say no to free utility castings on any magus build


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Keep in mind that if you want both Bespell Weapon and Spell Parry (which is a prereq for Consume at 8), one of them is going to get pushed to 6 (where Martial Caster is). And 8 is also packed with Consume and Spell Swipe.

I'd be pretty tempted to just buy a few wands of Haste or Fly instead of spending a class feat.

I do think people are sleeping on Striker's Scroll though: ignoring the money cost (which is non-negligible, but should be workable for scrolls a few levels lower than your max), it's a free spell each short rest (although it could conflict with refocusing).


Lightdroplet wrote:
Orithilaen wrote:
And the system seems designed to be complementary with taking a spellcasting archetype, which will fill in the lower-level slots.
I feel like that's a small design flaw. Classes should not feel incomplete without a specific multiclass to accompany them.

I felt that for the Magus. He needs versatile spells and that 6th level feat is a must have for him. The summoner got a bunch of actions and some good things to complement his kit(eidolon abilities like fly and stuff) instead of being a 'bad fighter' when you run out of slots...


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I think the four slot casting works pretty well for magus. It makes some decent sense, I think, especially since they are prepared arcane. Meaning they never lose all the spells they used to know, and can choose to freely heighten any of those. They just have to be very selective every day as to which ones they do choose, because there's a lot less room for poor choices. It's difficult, but I think a good tradeoff for the martial proficiencies.

For summoner it's a lot weirder though. Being spontaneous and working out of a repertoire that can completely change every level (an amorphous concept in the game world) rather than with daily preparations... it's a little more awkward. Backfilling with a sorcerer dedication sounds very flavorful, thematically on point, and useful. But that should never be viewed as the implied foundation of the class, right?


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Ligraph wrote:
Bespell Weapon

This feat is PRETTY bad for the magus. They have VERY limited slots and on top of that, if you STRIKING SPELL with a 2 action spell, you don't have any extra actions in the round... [unless you're hasted]


Note that both Magus and Summoner have a feat or feat set that give you an extra two spell slots.

Martial Caster gives you two more slots (with limited spell choice) that scale at top-level -2, and the eidolon casting feats give a Summoner a top level -2 and -3 slot, but which can be chosen from their entire list.

That's not nothing - and its probably a trend we'll see continue with further similar classes.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Magus as written is a class that really wants to be able to cast True Strike cheaply, and not having any 1st level slots in the long run makes that terribly inefficient.

Have we received confirmation on whether or not Shifted Divination Staves can still function?


graystone wrote:
Ligraph wrote:
Bespell Weapon
This feat is PRETTY bad for the magus. They have VERY limited slots and on top of that, if you STRIKING SPELL with a 2 action spell, you don't have any extra actions in the round... [unless you're hasted]

Its not great, but it gets better if they let it be used with cantrips or magus gets a focus spell. Plus, given the way Striking Spell is worded ("If the next action you use is to Cast a Spell that can target one creature or object, instead of casting it as normal, you place its magic into one melee weapon you’re wielding or into your

body to use with an unarmed attack.") I assume you can do Striking Spell > Cast Spell > Bespell Strikes > Strike. At that point its 1d6 free damage + 1d6 persistent damage with the other feat, which isn't great but isn't terrible either. Its more than an extra level on most cantrips.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber
graystone wrote:
Ligraph wrote:
Bespell Weapon
This feat is PRETTY bad for the magus. They have VERY limited slots and on top of that, if you STRIKING SPELL with a 2 action spell, you don't have any extra actions in the round... [unless you're hasted]

Both Striking Spell and Bespell Weapon are free actions.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

My impression is that Magi get enough action economy juice through their feats to make up for the lesser casting capability and slots, squeezing everything they've got out of what they *do* have. Aiming for crits using their master weapon proficiency isn't unique to them by any means, but by that same token it's something they can theoretically do just as well as any other "one big hit" martial (though admittedly they don't get as many ways to help their accuracy as a Fighter, even ignoring the proficiency difference). I actually don't think they'd get as much direct combat capability from going for a caster multiclass as they would simply focusing on their own class feats, because they get a lot of juicy ones, especially at 6 and later. Heck, even a martial archetype to help make sure they hit or set up debuffs for crits might have more impact :o

What I do wish is for them to get a little more focus spell support to complement those 4 big slots. Magus Potency is kinda neat, but somewhat inadvisable compared to investing in a weapon like other martials, and I think it would make more sense for them to get a solid reusable blast like the Elemental Sorcerer's. That way you have the blasty focus spell as one extra line of defense before sifting through your slots or hunkering down with cantrips. I also didn't see any refocus boosters, and that strikes me as unnecessary.

(I'm a little miffed that they get the Master spellcasting upgrade at 19 rather than 17 — Warpriest doing it doesn't make it good! — but I'm not sure how much it'll matter in the end. Get Advantages, Critically Hit. That's what'll make things work best, I reckon!)

Oh, and I think Summoners will be fine too! The Eidolon is more obviously set up for basic big-martial damage, and it's justified in both flavor and mechanics to let the Eidolon handle the fighting while the Summoner runs battlefield support. Using longer-lasting spells comes more naturally in a paradigm like that. :>


1 person marked this as a favorite.
AnimatedPaper wrote:
graystone wrote:
Ligraph wrote:
Bespell Weapon
This feat is PRETTY bad for the magus. They have VERY limited slots and on top of that, if you STRIKING SPELL with a 2 action spell, you don't have any extra actions in the round... [unless you're hasted]
Both Striking Spell and Bespell Weapon are free actions.

I think what gray means here is that you won't have any follow up attacks to really take advantage of Bespell, and this is true. If you cast the spell on the previous turn, to save actions on the turn you want to bespell, you can't bespell. It's kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't.

It's too bad bespell weapon doesn't work with Cantrips. Energize Strikes does though as far as I can tell. Neat for triggering weaknesses.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

My only quibbles with the summoner are some specific wording things. Like how Sensory Evolution is virtually pointless with the playtest eidolons (ALL of them get darkvision, so this feat just gives them imprecise scent: wow. Or Dedication Aura, for the cost of 1 hp you and your allies get 3 DR: wow).

I can see wanting to have some more Summon type spells (and there are some feats that key off of it, and its nice that you can summon a thing and have your eidolon out).

Other than that:
- WHINE, I want all four 6th level feats. :(
- Unfetter Eidolon is useless. Yes. Go beyond the 100 foot limit, infinite range! 1 minute duration. :|

On the topic of four slot casting (because that's what this thread is) I definitely agree that it hurts the magus more than the summoner. Summoner is spont though, which makes things a little weird, but in terms of available options and casts per day? Eh, survivable. Having a Divine Font of summon spells would be awesome, make it a feat if you have to, I'd at least consider it.

But yeah, for the magus? Its basically unworkable on the magus. Even with the feat that expands their spellcasting, from 11th on those slots never improve again.
No really.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Unicore wrote:
Parrot wrote:

To me it seems like a big step backwards from the seemingly original idea of no more 4th, 6th, etc. casters.

I would rather see one spell level of 1-10 then have to go back to the days of these 6 classes can cast 10th level but these 2 can only cast 9s and 8s and these other 2 can only cast 1-4s but lots of times and these other 2 can cast up to 6th, etc.

It feels off to me.

1 spell of levels 1 to 10 would be an absolute waste on the magus in particular. It is no fun casting bad spells through your blade, if the main concept is casting combat spells through your weapon attack.

You supplement it with feats like they are offering the magus now with extra spells at various levels.

Having 1 spell of levels 1-10 and a feat that says you get 1 extra attack trait spell for your 2-3 highest levels makes more sense to me than inventing new types of casters.

For summoner you have the same feat but for summon spells.

You can even have 2 feats so that you end up with 1 of each spell level 1-10 and two extra spells of your 2 highest slots that can only be used for attack or only can be used for summon spells.

Scarab Sages

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Vaktaeru wrote:

I don't really see a way to play Magus without investing in getting more spell slots. If they had 2 spell slots of each of their highest levels and 1 of every other level, it would probably be fine. Generally speaking you'll be in three to five combats each adventuring day. There's not much point in being a full caster though if you only get to cast a full spell once per combat on average - especially when that spell is liable to be weaker than the actual spellcaster's equivalent.

The class as it stands now is basically pigeonholed into one of two options - invest heavily in a spellcasting archetype/extra slot items/hope capture spell works out, or relegate to mostly casting cantrips and then using them as riders for strikes. In either case, I would mostly rather play an eldritch archer so I can actually have some martial abilities beyond proficiency. As a matter of fact, I might prefer eldritch archer so I can also hit my master spellcasting a level sooner and keep my good perception modifiers and base skills.

I would really like to see this class shine, but in its current state it looks one step short of a paycheck. Better/more feats, the ability to inherently pull a martial package off another class, focus spells that can actually spellstrike, better skill/perception proficiencies, better spellcasting proficiencies, spontaneous casting, or just straight up more spells. Any one or two of these things would make me say magus looks solid, but right now it seems to be an almost-finished class that needs to rely on heavily archetyping to realize its potential.

The cantrips aren't really riders, you still need to roll for them to hit. And the math is really bad on them.


EDIT: (now can't see what I originally thought I read and was responding too, so rephased)

Martial Caster Feat slots (seriously that Feat needs new name, sounds too much like generic term for any "gish") are interesting in that you can use them for Heightened True Strike (might as well Heighten as Prepared Caster) or the actual higher level spells if you wish. I'm not too concerned about the # of spells, I don't think Magus needs to be outright spamming spell slots as much as Wizard does, and between weaopn attacks, cantrips, focus spells, and skills/ movement/ etc I think they are well enough prepared for typical adventuring day, and they seem like class that should discern when to unleash the full nova and when to economize (or stick to Focus spells etc)... Especially considering they have other stuff going on like their Recall Knowledge-Combo Strike to contribute without using spell slots, and can augment slots with items.

I think Standby Spell Feat (8) is interesting, in that despite it allowing to designate one spell up to your max spell level (as spontaneously substitutable), I can easily see choosing low level spell to maximize the # of slots you can spontaneously substitute i.e. spam the chosen spell... But doing that would be casting the low level version WITHOUT Heighten even when you use higher level slots, since the Heightened version is distinct spell, technically, and you need to designate the low level version to use all possible slots. (a distinction Prepared Casters rarely encounter) Of course you can also use this Feat with a max level (including Heightened) spell, you just have much less slots to spam it with then.

"Choose a spell in your spellbook that you could use with Striking Spell and that has a level no higher than the highest-level magus spell slot you have. You can Cast this Spell without having it prepared ahead of time by expending a spell slot of a sufficient level to cast the spell."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber
beowulf99 wrote:
AnimatedPaper wrote:
graystone wrote:
Ligraph wrote:
Bespell Weapon
This feat is PRETTY bad for the magus. They have VERY limited slots and on top of that, if you STRIKING SPELL with a 2 action spell, you don't have any extra actions in the round... [unless you're hasted]
Both Striking Spell and Bespell Weapon are free actions.

I think what gray means here is that you won't have any follow up attacks to really take advantage of Bespell, and this is true. If you cast the spell on the previous turn, to save actions on the turn you want to bespell, you can't bespell. It's kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't.

It's too bad bespell weapon doesn't work with Cantrips. Energize Strikes does though as far as I can tell. Neat for triggering weaknesses.

The Strike you use to finish Striking spell is an entirely separate action than the spell cast. THAT strike benefits.

In fact, the way the feat and feature are both worded, you pretty much have to go: "Striking Spell > Spell Cast/Spell Cast > Bespell Weapon > Strike".


3 people marked this as a favorite.
AnimatedPaper wrote:
beowulf99 wrote:
AnimatedPaper wrote:
graystone wrote:
Ligraph wrote:
Bespell Weapon
This feat is PRETTY bad for the magus. They have VERY limited slots and on top of that, if you STRIKING SPELL with a 2 action spell, you don't have any extra actions in the round... [unless you're hasted]
Both Striking Spell and Bespell Weapon are free actions.

I think what gray means here is that you won't have any follow up attacks to really take advantage of Bespell, and this is true. If you cast the spell on the previous turn, to save actions on the turn you want to bespell, you can't bespell. It's kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't.

It's too bad bespell weapon doesn't work with Cantrips. Energize Strikes does though as far as I can tell. Neat for triggering weaknesses.

The Strike you use to finish Striking spell is an entirely separate action than the spell cast. THAT strike benefits.

In fact, the way the feat and feature are both worded, you pretty much have to go: "Striking Spell > Spell Cast/Spell Cast > Bespell Weapon > Strike".

Right, and I have my doubts that adding 1d6 to one attack up to 4 times per day is worth a 4th level feat, especially when it's competing with things like Spell Parry, Striker's Scroll and any lower level feat that you may want to pick up, but weren't able to at that level. Like a Familiar or Spirit Sheath.

Energize Strikes is much better, as that at least can be used with a cantrip. It lasts for a minute, and over the long run will easily overtake the average 14 damage/day you could ever expect from Bespell Weapon.


Draco18s wrote:

...

Other than that:
- WHINE, I want all four 6th level feats. :(

With Transmogrify, you can have them, and more! Just not at the same time.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nik Gervae wrote:
Draco18s wrote:

...

Other than that:
- WHINE, I want all four 6th level feats. :(

With Transmogrify, you can have them, and more! Just not at the same time.

Keep in mind that my PF1 eidolon had both Ride and Climb since level 2 or 3. I forget exactly when I picked up Climb (I had ride at 1st, and being a smol I could do that).


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber
beowulf99 wrote:

Right, and I have my doubts that adding 1d6 to one attack up to 4 times per day is worth a 4th level feat, especially when it's competing with things like Spell Parry, Striker's Scroll and any lower level feat that you may want to pick up, but weren't able to at that level. Like a Familiar or Spirit Sheath.

Energize Strikes is much better, as that at least can be used with a cantrip. It lasts for a minute, and over the long run will easily overtake the average 14 damage/day you could ever expect from Bespell Weapon.

I never said one way or another if it was worth it. Graystone seemed to be saying that you could not use the feat at all because there's not enough actions unless you're hasted. There are.

If she was implying that you need multiple strikes for the feat to be worth it, then that was unclear from her post. And as no version of Bespell weapon works that way, I'm not sure that is a safe assumption to make.


AnimatedPaper wrote:
beowulf99 wrote:

Right, and I have my doubts that adding 1d6 to one attack up to 4 times per day is worth a 4th level feat, especially when it's competing with things like Spell Parry, Striker's Scroll and any lower level feat that you may want to pick up, but weren't able to at that level. Like a Familiar or Spirit Sheath.

Energize Strikes is much better, as that at least can be used with a cantrip. It lasts for a minute, and over the long run will easily overtake the average 14 damage/day you could ever expect from Bespell Weapon.

I never said one way or another if it was worth it. Graystone seemed to be saying that you could not use the feat at all because there's not enough actions unless you're hasted. There are.

If she was implying that you need multiple strikes for the feat to be worth it, then that was unclear from her post. And as no version of Bespell weapon works that way, I'm not sure that is a safe assumption to make.

I was only putting out there that Bespell Weapon works much better (still terrible in this case honestly) with a class that has access to more than 4 total chances per day to use it. The Battle Oracle for instance can get a lot of mileage out of True Strike/Bespell Weapon/strike/strike.

The Sorcerer less so due to how non-martial it is, and the Magus is just starved for chances to use it. I feel like Bespell Strikes should be altered to work with Cantrips. Adding a single d6 is a lot more attractive if you can do it regularly.

Or maybe have it scale up to 3 or 4 dice per use for the Magus version. They went out of their way to rewrite it to include unarmed attacks, so why not alter the ability entirely?


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I can appreciate Paizo trying something new with the spell slots for the two new classes, but it feels so limited at higher levels. With just a few feat investiture, a fighter can gain 2 arcane spells up to 8th, for 16 spells per day and still has legendary proficiency in weapons at level 13. While the magus can deliver a spell through their weapon, they still have to make two attacks. Going back to the fighter/wizard, you can still Cast a Spell and make a Strike and mitigate the MAP by using touch spells or saving throw spells.

I feel like if they are going to keep the spells per day so limited they need change up the striking spell to match the result of the weapon attack, rather than rely on a second attack or a creature's save which may result in a wasted spell. I'm not mad when my wizard misses with a spell attack because I've got a lot more spells per day, but if I miss with that weapon attack or follow up spell attack or the creature rolls well on a save, you bet I'm going to be annoyed at losing one of only 4 spell slots that day.

I think I'd like to see double the current spell slots (4 of the two highest spell level), 1 spell slot for each spell level, or way more battle spells and feats for regaining more focus points. At any rate, I think Striking Spell needs to grant something more than it does right now, especially since it prevents the use of other metamagic feats and doesn't save any action economy versus a fighter/wizard.

Magus synthesis is cool and the battle spells (which are a good replacement for arcana abilities) feel solid.

The summoner is... interesting with the new dynamic between the character and eidolon. I almost feel like a druid with an animal companion not only effectively gets 4 actions between it and the companion, but also has full casting. Yes the eidolon is stronger, but not enough to justify the lack of spellcasting. I like the tandem abilities (seriously why couldn't we have these for animal companions) but I don't think a group of specialized feats makes up for the shared action economy. I'd rather see something like the eidolon gets 1 action of its own but can also share the summoner's actions. This would grant them the same action economy as a druid or ranger with an animal companion, but more versatility to distribute actions.

Overall I like how both these classes look right now, but I'm glad this is the playtest and not the final product because they both need some kinks worked out.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber
beowulf99 wrote:
I was only putting out there that Bespell Weapon works much better (still terrible in this case honestly) with a class that has access to more than 4 total chances per day to use it. The Battle Oracle for instance can get a lot of mileage out of True Strike/Bespell Weapon/strike/strike.

So your point had nothing to do with what I was talking about and you had no need to jump down my throat to make it? Cool.


4 slots is too few for the Magus. I'm just not sure adding 1 slot for all lower levels is a good solution. Adding a Spellcasting Dedication + Breadth feat onto that would suddenly give the Magus nearly a full caster's number of spells, while still retaining Master weapon and armor proficiency.


Kilgorin0728 wrote:
The summoner is... interesting with the new dynamic between the character and eidolon. I almost feel like a druid with an animal companion not only effectively gets 4 actions between it and the companion, but also has full casting. Yes the eidolon is stronger, but not enough to justify the lack of spellcasting. I like the tandem abilities (seriously why couldn't we have these for animal companions) but I don't think a group of specialized feats makes up...

Think of the summoner less as a pet and more as the Martial part of the partial caster that the Summoner is in the same way that the Magus is. Their attack and armour proficiencies all advance like a non-fighter martial class and you can split your actions between casting, moving, striking, etc.

The Eidolon is a lot stronger than a companion and is close numbers wise to a regular martial character including getting the benefits of Weapon Runes and Armour Runes. You also have the versatility of spellcasting a limited number of high level spells a day as well as Cantrips.


AnimatedPaper wrote:
graystone wrote:
Ligraph wrote:
Bespell Weapon
This feat is PRETTY bad for the magus. They have VERY limited slots and on top of that, if you STRIKING SPELL with a 2 action spell, you don't have any extra actions in the round... [unless you're hasted]
Both Striking Spell and Bespell Weapon are free actions.

Yep, you're right. I'm not sure what I was thinking but when I wrote it I was thinking there wasn't enough actions. So, yes you can do in in one round but is seems of questionable use especially compared to other feats you could take instead. Now it's value gets better the more slots you get so Martial Caster and/or each multiclass caster feat makes it better.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
AnimatedPaper wrote:
beowulf99 wrote:
I was only putting out there that Bespell Weapon works much better (still terrible in this case honestly) with a class that has access to more than 4 total chances per day to use it. The Battle Oracle for instance can get a lot of mileage out of True Strike/Bespell Weapon/strike/strike.
So your point had nothing to do with what I was talking about and you had no need to jump down my throat to make it? Cool.

Who jumped down anyone's throat? If it felt like I was being hostile, I assure you I wasn't. I just see it as unfortunate that Bespell Weapon doesn't really work all that well with the Magus' schtick.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Ressy wrote:

It really feels like the Magus was balanced around taking Wizard dedication.

Being limited to 4 spells per day? Pretty harsh.

However, dumping another 5 feats into dedication and picking up 2 each of 1-6, plus a 7th and 8th, on top of 2x 8th and 2x 9th, feels better.

As far as Cantrips, honestly I don't see the advantage of casting Electric Arc via Striking Spell rather than normally.

It's been said by others, but what other class have they released that felt balanced around taking a multiclass dedication just to have it function properly? What you are really saying is that the magus needs more spells to feel complete.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

No other class requires multiclass except maybe Alchemist and Wizard.

Both of which are largely regarded as the 2 worst classes in PF2.

Grand Lodge Contributor

6 people marked this as a favorite.

My first reaction is a very big thumbs down for this. It feels limiting, and I can see it confusing new players quite a bit. That said, I haven't playtested it as of yet, so grain-of-salt this.

I personally would be much happier without losing lower level slots. It just feels clunky and sad as is. 2/level is totally viable. Every other spellcaster gets 3 or 4/level. Trading the spells for an eidolon / combat casting is fine, but losing so many is crippling. Right now though Magus looks more like a Bloodrager with less health and Summoner looks like an Eidolon cheerleader rather than its own class (but maybe that's what's intended?)

Both could do a lot better if they had really tremendous focus spells (Summoner has a couple already), but even then I'd dislike 4 normal spells per day total. 2/day/level and some kickass focus spells would feel way less restrictive.


Wait, regarding Bespell Weapon
It says 'most recent action'

So if you go one turn
[action of your choice] -> Striking Spell -> Spell

and the next turn you go
Bespell Weapon -> [whatever you like]

one could actually get some mileage out of it
althoug 4 chances per day is still not much


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm also very doubtful about this four slot casting. I think I would have prefered having the same number of spells than a Druid/Bard/Witch/Cleric 2 levels under my character's. Having so few resources to last the day isn't much fun and it encourages in buying truck loads of Wands, Staves and the like when you are also supposed to have a top notch weapon and armor.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The 4 spell slots seem ok for the summoner, since their main draw is using the eidolon to fight but it hurts the magus quite a bit.

striking spell is kinda their key class feature and it really isnt good with cantrips. And given you get bespell weapon as a feat... 4 times a day you can add a d6 to one strike? oof.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I personally really like the four-slot casting.

It sacrifices the opposite half of casting compared to dedication-casting. So it actually works very well if you want more spell-casting of lower levels to take those dedications, while letting the magus/summoner fill a niche that isn't really covered in the game yet.

I think it's a relatively elegant solution for a complex problem. And it's limitations clearly gave room for the non-spellcasting aspects of the classes to have room to shine. which is what I really want from these classes.


I like it.

A few considerations here

1) The melee damage is good. It's similar to any other combatant class.

I know that some classes have features which enhances the damage, but not all of them. For example, a champion or a monk just deal normal damage with "strikes" or "stance attacks", with no extra damage. Same goes with a rogue, if it doesn't manage to get a flat footed target, and so on.

2) The number of spells can be enhanced in different ways.

- Dedications
- Martial Caster
- Magical Staves ( which can also be embedded with runes as any other weapon )
- Ring of Wizardry ( because the magus uses the Arcane School )

3) Spellstrike

Quote:

If you hit with a melee Strike using the receptacle for the

spell, the spell is discharged, affecting only the target you hit.
The spell still requires its normal spell attack roll or saving
throw, but you don’t increase your multiple attack penalty
until after attempting both the discharging Strike and the spell
attack roll. If your discharging Strike was a critical success, the degree of success is one better than you rolled for a spell attack
roll or one worse than the target rolls for a saving throw.

Really balanced imo.

Normally, if you attempt a strike and then a spell strike, you will suffer from -5 MAP ( you'd probably consider then a strike and a saving throw spell )

By using spellstrike you won't suffer from a full map ( it would be a -3 instead of a -5, because your spellcasting proficiency will be lower ), and also you will have the chance to also enhance your spell on a discharged strike critical hit.

____

So, at least 4 times per day, a magus would be able to deliver a very strong blow to a single enemy ( eventually with a control effect or something similar ), which is great given the infinite possibilities in terms of spells, and given the fact that "some" other classes have nothing.

And even if out of spells, it would perform the same as a champion or a monk for what concerns its damage outcome.

Remember also that even strike + electric arc ( no spellstrike ) could be a decent choice ( even if the 2 enemies manage to roll a success ).

Finally, if the party prefers to push expending any high level spell during 1 or 2 fights, they could always consider to rest. Personally I prefer to make at least 7/8 fights per day before a long rest.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
HumbleGamer wrote:
So, at least 4 times per day, a magus would be able to deliver a very strong blow to a single enemy ( eventually with a control effect or something similar ), which is great given the infinite possibilities in terms of spells, and given the fact that "some" other classes have nothing.

The problem is, you're going to use those big spells against the largest, most dangerous foes more often than not. That usually means at least 1 or 2 levels ahead of you. With low spell proficiency and the inability to pick Intelligence as Key stat, those very same most dangerous foes will have a good chance of avoiding your spell completely.

Quote:
Remember also that even strike + electric arc ( no spellstrike ) could be a decent choice ( even if the 2 enemies manage to roll a success ).

Except that's something pretty much any caster or multiclass caster can pull off. It shouldn't be the saving grace of a class.

Quote:
Finally, if the party prefers to push expending any high level spell during 1 or 2 fights, they could always consider to rest. Personally I prefer to make at least 7/8 fights per day before a long rest.

Resting is not always an option. No other class can blow through all their noteworthy abilities in a single short 4-round fight.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

In regards to the Bespell Strikes feat only being 4 uses per day... I feel like a lot of people are forgetting that Focus spells are still spells, and the only requirement is that the spell cast is not a cantrip (ie: spells from staves, wands, and scrolls would theoretically also work with this). Even without items though, casting one of your magus focus spells basically gives you a 1-action Bespell Strikes proc usable once per combat, and up to two more times per day if necessary (if you take the other focus feats or just have a bigger pool for whatever reason).

Also imo the 12th level Bespelled Persistence feat is pretty decent with the right build. It's a reliable source of persistent damage that applies on a standard hit, and since the damage type is based on the weapon you use with the right set up you can stack a lot of different persistent damage effects on one (or more) enemies. Even with limited spell slots, I can see Runic Impression -> Bespell Strikes [force] -> Strike x2, into a Striking Spell -> Generic Attack Spell -> Bespell Strikes [Something Else] -> Strike x1. It's a reasonable amount of damage by itself and even better if you manage to hit an elemental weakness of some sort. Persistent force damage on an incorporeal target is always nice too.


Blave wrote:
HumbleGamer wrote:
So, at least 4 times per day, a magus would be able to deliver a very strong blow to a single enemy ( eventually with a control effect or something similar ), which is great given the infinite possibilities in terms of spells, and given the fact that "some" other classes have nothing.
The problem is, you're going to use those big spells against the largest, most dangerous foes more often than not. That usually means at least 1 or 2 levels ahead of you. With low spell proficiency and the inability to pick Intelligence as Key stat, those very same most dangerous foes will have a good chance of avoiding your spell completely.

You will probably decide not to use a spell attack on a boss.

The magus class lacks the spellcasting proficiency to do it, and because so it is better to use a saving throw spell instead ( which has a nice effect even on a failure ).

I happened to see the sorcerer in my party doing the same, and it is way better than believing into a hit ( and its proficiency is higher than a magus due to the stats and the higher proficiency ).

Unless using true strike ( but you won't be able to do it with spellstrike ).

Blave wrote:


Quote:
Remember also that even strike + electric arc ( no spellstrike ) could be a decent choice ( even if the 2 enemies manage to roll a success ).

Except that's something pretty much any caster or multiclass caster can pull off. It shouldn't be the saving grace of a class.

This changes nothing.

Even I as a champion use strikes as a fighter, a rogue or even a wizard. if it's your best option you simply use it ( action economy and management ).

Blave wrote:


Quote:
Finally, if the party prefers to push expending any high level spell during 1 or 2 fights, they could always consider to rest. Personally I prefer to make at least 7/8 fights per day before a long rest.
Resting is not always an option. No other class can blow through all their noteworthy abilities in a single short 4-round fight.

Resting is almost always an option, but I agree there could be some exceptions like

- Dangerous place
- Time issues

Even by resting for XX minutes you will be equal to a champion or monk in terms of damage ( if not better, because of electric arc ). Also, you can opt for some dedication in order to increase your damage output ( like taking double slice, sneak attack, or similar ).

And do not forget items like wands and staves, or even consumables like scrolls.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
HumbleGamer wrote:

You will probably decide not to use a spell attack on a boss.

The magus class lacks the spellcasting proficiency to do it, and because so it is better to use a saving throw spell instead ( which has a nice effect even on a failure ).

But it's the same for save spells. Yes, they do get SOME effect on a successful save, but your DC is already at least 3 behind a full caster. That probably gives bosses a 20-30% chance to outright ignore anything you throw at them because they'll get a CritSuccess. And their level advantage makes it unlikely that you'll crit very often to use the save-downgrade from Striking Spell.

HumbleGamer wrote:
Blave wrote:
Except that's something pretty much any caster or multiclass caster can pull off. It shouldn't be the saving grace of a class.

This changes nothing.

Even I as a champion use strikes as a fighter, a rogue or even a wizard. if it's your best option you simply use it ( action economy and management ).

The difference is that the Magus is meant to use his spells through Striking Spell. If that's less effective than doing something MANY other characters can do, there might be a problem. That's as if a rogue was most effective when using non-sneak attack Strikes.

HumbleGamer wrote:
Blave wrote:
Resting is not always an option. No other class can blow through all their noteworthy abilities in a single short 4-round fight.

Even by resting for XX minutes you will be equal to a champion or monk in terms of damage ( if not better, because of electric arc ). Also, you can opt for some dedication in order to increase your damage output ( like taking double slice, sneak attack, or similar ).

And do not forget items like wands and staves, or even consumables like scrolls.

Consumables aren't class resources. Anyone can use them. They should be an option, not a necessity.

And I'm not sure agree with "a Magus without spells is as strong/good as a Monk or Champion." Champions have one of the best reactions in the game. Both classes can get AoO (or very similar abilities) increasing their damage output further. Both also have better defense. Monks are great at controling the battlefield with maneuvers, mobility and effects like Stunning Fist.

If you look at pure damage, the classes might be about equal. But without spells, I see nothing on the Magus that comes close to making a similar impact to a fight.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I actually like that spell slot progression. Only ever having 4 spell slots is nice on the bookkeeping side. Let's see if it is too limiting in play.

That progression up to spell level 10 and a kind of Focus spell at level 5 that let's you cast any prepared/known spell at lvl max-2 would be a nice beginner-friendly full caster I think.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

It is way too limited. Low level spells are some of the better buffs in the game and low level spells don't gain much from heightening. Having 4 of the highest level slots is too limiting and makes for not much in terms of casting buffs. Then you have a very low casting stat to begin with, so high level attack spells are pretty pointless.

I'm not going to say the ability is useless as there still are some nice buff or useful spells that can be heightened. Definitely heals for an angel caster. But overall they could use more lower level spell slots.

I'd rather see them able to cast all spell levels with a maybe a progression like a MC caster.

Right now the Eidolon isn't better than a fighter who MCs into a caster. I'm not even sure the Eidolon is sufficiently better than an animal companion to justify the low spell slots, since anyone can obtain an animal companion now including the Summoner.

I'd like to see the casting expanded to the same level as a MC caster with breadth.

I still enjoy a master summoner option with summon spells like a cleric's divine font.

Horizon Hunters

Ligraph wrote:

Keep in mind that if you want both Bespell Weapon and Spell Parry (which is a prereq for Consume at 8), one of them is going to get pushed to 6 (where Martial Caster is). And 8 is also packed with Consume and Spell Swipe.

I'd be pretty tempted to just buy a few wands of Haste or Fly instead of spending a class feat.

I do think people are sleeping on Striker's Scroll though: ignoring the money cost (which is non-negligible, but should be workable for scrolls a few levels lower than your max), it's a free spell each short rest (although it could conflict with refocusing).

It would work great with Scroll Trickster.


So assuming magic items like rings of wizardy what would seem like the correct amount of spells? I feel like 4 is a bit too few myself.


Quote:
But it's the same for save spells. Yes, they do get SOME effect on a successful save, but your DC is already at least 3 behind a full caster. That probably gives bosses a 20-30% chance to outright ignore anything you throw at them because they'll get a CritSuccess. And their level advantage makes it unlikely that you'll crit very often to use the save-downgrade from Striking Spell.

Yes, that's the point ( see the quote below, which explains how the proficiency works for both pure spellcaster and magus ).

Remember also that you have 4 spells per day, and probably at least 2/3 hero points per day. So you would be able to reroll a miss, if you want.

Blave wrote:
The difference is that the Magus is meant to use his spells through Striking Spell. If that's less effective than doing something MANY other characters can do, there might be a problem. That's as if a rogue was most effective when using non-sneak attack Strikes.

I mentioned electric arc because it has a ST instead of an attack roll.

If you decide to use ray of frost or the flame cantrip, you will be better than a spellcaster, because you will just have the map from "not being a pure spellcaster", which is -3 instead of -5.

And this just during 50% of the levels:

-lvl 1-6 your spellcasting proficiency will be equal to a pure spellcaster
-lvl 7-10 your spellcasting proficiency will be lower than a pure spellcaster
-lvl 11-14 your spellcasting proficiency will be equal to a pure spellcaster
-lvl 15-20 your spellcasting proficiency will be lower than a pure spellcaster

10 levels you will be equal, and 10 level you will be behing a pure one.

And since 6 of the levels your proficiency will be lower are the last five, it's like you will be equal to a spellcaster 75% of the time, given that many campaigns won't last till late levels.

The balance is for real.

Quote:

Consumables aren't class resources. Anyone can use them. They should be an option, not a necessity.

And I'm not sure agree with "a Magus without spells is as strong/good as a Monk or Champion." Champions have one of the best reactions in the game. Both classes can get AoO (or very similar abilities) increasing their damage output further. Both also have better defense. Monks are great at controling the battlefield with maneuvers, mobility and effects like Stunning Fist.

If you look at pure damage, the classes might be about equal. But without spells, I see nothing on the Magus that comes close to making a similar impact to a fight.

Consumables are not necessary, but they could be useful and save the day. It's not rare that a party blows up because it decided not to also invest in consumables becase "permanent items are better!".

As for the damage

1- Champion has one of the best reactions in the game, but just the "Paladin" has the attack. Tyrant and Anti Paladin has some damage given by the reaction ( the latter is a suicide masochist ).

2- AoO as you stated are an investement. A champion expend a lvl 6 feat. A magus would require a dedication and a feat. The both can do the same.

3- Monk are good in terms of action economy and running around the battlefield, but in terms of control, that's up to spellcasters. Out of 3 actions a monk would do Stride+Flurry+Stride or Stride+Flurry+Assurance athletics, hoping it will be enough for the target. There's really no controll ( even considering ki moves, it's not even comparable to a spellcaster ).

In my opinion, the damage, the action economy, and the overall balance is what makes this 2nd edition great.

I like the magus being one which merges spells and strikes, as I like it being able to choose to use one big hit when needed ( we have absolutely to bring down this one before the start of the next turn. Leave it to me. Bam ), but this must happen a limited number of times per day.

Ps: A lvl 11 rogue has +3d6 sneak attack

A Magus could use a chain lightning ( +8d12 ) or an enhanced shocking grasp ( +8d12 ) depends if he want a spell attack or a TS.

I wonder how many sneak attack a rogue would have to perform to cover up for a single spellstrike ( in case of failure, success or critical success ).


11 people marked this as a favorite.

Well, the magus gets his big damage 4 times a day. Rogues can sneak all day long, often twice per round. And he doesn't lose it with no effect on a bad attack roll or good opponent save. I'm playing casters regularly, and losing a slot without effect feels bad enough when you have multiple of them. It seems devestating if it's a quarter of your spellpower.

Multiclassing to get AoO is like a Monk multiclassing to get spells - significantly more spells per day than a Magus. Multiclassing should be an option, never the answer.

Anyway, I won't argue about this anymore. I think we just value things too differently. I'll stick with 4 slots is not enough, much less so if you want to use a few buffs or - Nethys forbid - utility spells. Which are kind of the speciality of the arcane tradition.

At the VERY least, Martial Caster should be a baseline ability, not a feat. And even then it's probably too little.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Blave wrote:


At the VERY least, Martial Caster should be a baseline ability, not a feat. And even then it's probably too little.

I second this one.

I expected some "self supportive stuff" given for free.

Focus spells are meh, apart from the hast one which is godlike. And it's not clear if the missing "improved refocusing" is an overlooked thing or not.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Having slept on it, read through the other opinions, and talked with some of my players and peers... I'm still really internally divided.

I feel more and less terrible about the number of slots they get, and looking at the numbers from other casters has made it more conflicted.

A full caster has focus spells and between 28 and 37 spell slots, and 5 cantrips. At best they're expert in armor and weapons, and at worst they're master with casting (poor Warpriest).

A mult-class non-caster who dedicates fully has 14 spell slots plus 2 or 3 cantrips, and possibly some focus spells. Said multi'd character is at worst going to be expert with armor and master with weapons, and master with spells, in general (though possibly a legend in either weapons or armor).

A magus or summoner who takes the "Extra Spells" feat has focus spells, 6 slots, and 5 cantrips. Magus is Master/Master/Master, as is Summoner (effectively, via the Eidolon).

If summoner/magus dedicated fully to a casting archetype they'd have half spells that a full caster normally does, at 18 total slots, and redundant proficiency because they're both already master casters.

If the new classes had a third of the options of the lower slotted normal casters they'd still be looking at 9 spell slots per day. 3/3/3 could accomplish that, so could 2/2/2/2/1. I don't think 1 each would feel good, either, though, especially for Magus with how "spellstrike" works right now. Multi-classing would, at this point, bump them up to 23 spell slots, which is just behind a lower-slotted full caster, and possibly too much?

At that point, though, with having 9 spells I think the casting enhancer feats and multi-classing would feel less mandatory for either class, though. They could still absolutely burn through their slots, especially a Magus, but it'd leave some room for utility or other considerations.

Would that be too many slots, still? Obviously playtesting is still needed, but that at least feels a little better to me, on paper. Food for thought, at least?


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Vidmaster7 wrote:
So assuming magic items like rings of wizardy what would seem like the correct amount of spells? I feel like 4 is a bit too few myself.

I feel like that might going be too far on the other end, but simply 2 spells per level might work. It is generally agreed upon that damage spells are only really worth it if cast in your three highest level spell slots, so the nova damage potential of Magus and Summoner wouldn't increase too drastically, but it would give them the vibe of being the "in-between" of magic, with slightly more spells than an archetype, but still fewer than any proper caster. In the case of Magus, it would help making a spellcasting archetype being something you only pick if you still want to get additionnal magic, not something that ends up feeling more like a requirement to fully use your class abilities.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I really like the idea of restricting their spell slots vs. the 'real' casters. Whether 4 spells per day is too few is another question, but I think the basic idea is a great way to reduce their power to compensate for better proficiencies.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber
Shandyan wrote:
I really like the idea of restricting their spell slots vs. the 'real' casters. Whether 4 spells per day is too few is another question, but I think the basic idea is a great way to reduce their power to compensate for better proficiencies.

Likewise. I tend to think it is too few, but the concept itself feels interesting.

They're really set on the Magus and Summoner having the same number of slots, so while the Magus could really use 4 slots per level (if they only get 2 levels), that is less true of the summoner. I think 3 per level would be a good number. It is consistent with current classes, leading to everyone running out of their top slots around the same time, and lets the Magus feel a bit more like a caster (without giving access to ALL the lower level buffs which might tip them into OP territory).

I also think that if multiclassing for more slots is going to be a thing, a 8th or 10th level feat that gives you an additional slot per level would be worthwhile. Just give the Magus a Summoner the feat they're going after anyways, without the additional hoops. I'd actually prefer it to be 2nd level, so you could start as you intend to go on, but I think the forum would object too much.

51 to 100 of 378 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Secrets of Magic Playtest / General Discussion / Four Slot Casting All Messageboards