Four Slot Casting


Secrets of Magic Playtest General Discussion

1 to 50 of 378 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

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

Both the Magus and Summoner get four spell slots, that upgrade as they level up without gaining additional ones. You will basically only have 2 slots of each of your two highest levels, before feat investment.

This is a new addition to the game that we haven't seen before. It seems to be a form of casting that is considered appropriate to ride along with major features-- Martial Weapon Proficiency, or the entirety of the Eidolon.

How do we feel about this system? I want to read discussion about this because I'm divided on it right now.


10 people marked this as a favorite.

I have yet to read through the whole thing, but I wasn't expecting this. This screams 13th age, which is a pretty cool thing.


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

I think it's one of the things that definitely needs playtesting. On paper it *looks* like a small number of spells.


11 people marked this as a favorite.

I feel like it is far too limiting. Yes, you get higher level spells than what a spellcasting archetype would get, but a spellcasting archetype has double the slots even before taking their respective Breadth feat.
In my opinion, I think it could be safely bumped up to 3/3 slots instead of 2/2, since the whole "only having two levels of spells" thing is already a large enough limitation on its own.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

I really like the idea but I think if they're going to do this the Magus should get regular Spellcasting proficiency. As it is right now they're worse at using spells than a Fighter/Wizard multiclass which feels really bad. Especially since you still have to make the attack roll with Striking Spell. It feels like they're being overly caution in making sure the Magus is bad at magic.


16 people marked this as a favorite.

I like it.

if you add the 5 cantrips they get for "minor magic", and how heightening works in pf2, it feels like they keep a big part of the "power" of spellcasting (usually the 3 highest spelllevels) while losing the support part of it (usually the lower level slots).

Add in a Staff for basically extra spellslots, and it feels balanced.


Since Magus is an arcane caster, Staves and especially Rings of Wizardry will help him get lower level slots.
Wands also are quite useful.

Plus it seems their core abilities aren't limited to the class' spell slots, so you could multiclass to get more slots and use those as a well.


11 people marked this as a favorite.

I do think that it might be good to give them more spell slots if they will just straight up remove all the slots below a certain level.

2 spells per level seemed fine if they got spells of every level. But not so much with only less than half access.


I like it at first and I will playtest it to see if I continue liking. They get the spell levels in the same speed than full casters after all.

If I don't I would say that giving one more spell level for 2/2/2 would do. Summoner does not look that really need it, but Magus is a good question, maybe if they had a focus spell pool strike would make help as well.


12 people marked this as a favorite.

My initial reaction is that I love it. I was worried about that a Magus/Spellcaster MC would be so overpowered that no other gishy combos would be worth considering. But this is a very clever way to balance the spell casting and combat abilities.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

To be honest, from my first glance it seems pretty restrictive

I expected less spell slots, but this is...wow...really not much
If it was like 3 spells per level or 3 spell levels

but 4 spells per day is ... I dunno how to call it but if you have long adventure days you can never properly deliver a can of whoopass because you might need those sparsly given slots for something bigger

I don't know about the practical aspect yet and would still have to look at it in play (if I were playing pf at the moment) but at first glance...doesn't feel good


12 people marked this as a favorite.

I wouldn't mind the limitation if the magus wasn't so bad at using his spells. As it stands my 2 hander gish is much much much better off staying a fighter with a wizard multiclass dedication.


Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

I think the magus in particular will want to spam cantrips. And the system seems designed to be complementary with taking a spellcasting archetype, which will fill in the lower-level slots.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Idk if you should be comparing the Fighter w/ Wizard archetype to the Magus, so much as comparing it to the Magus with Wizard archetype.

I'm inclined to think at the moment that Magus with a spellcasting archetype is probably the gishiest gish.


23 people marked this as a favorite.
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.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I must playtest, but my problem is, because not give to the magus spontaneous casting? All low level spells that they scribe in their spellbook are wasted, they must need select again at higher levels to heighten to the level of the slot


Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Lightdroplet wrote:
I feel like that's a small design flaw. Classes should not feel incomplete without a specific multiclass to accompany them.

They're two different playstyles:

Base magus: a martial with special tricks like the monk, champion, or ranger. Those special tricks include a few high-level spells and magic-oriented feats.
Base magus with wizard archetype: a more classic fighter/wizard.

Edit: Or think of it as an implied subclass, like the rogue eldritch trickster.


13 people marked this as a favorite.

PF2 is a game where the design team tried to expand the adventuring day. Mundane Healing is viable, Focus Spells give caster's some spellcasting available even when their slots are tapped.

The Magus and Summoner both feel like steps backwards, simply due to their spell slot reductions. The summoner can kind of avoid using spell slots much of the time by just boosting or reinforcing their eidolon and playing as a martial. But the Magus really wants to juice up their attacks with spells. Cantrips help a bit with this, but to really perform up to it's potential, the Magus wants to be casting their slotted spells.

Imo, Magus would be better off having 3/ available spell level base, then reducing the number of slots granted by Martial Caster to 1. This gives them 1 more slot per day, but shifts 2 slots to offensive spells. Being able to spell strike with a slotted spell 6 times per day feels better than 4.

On the brighter side, we now have a Caster that can qualify for Eldritch Archer by 6th. So that's neat.

Summoner needs some tuning as well imo. The Eidolon's all share starting stats minus skills afaik, so what defines them is their specific abilities. As is, the Dragon feels like the king.
1. It gives access to Arcane Spells, which have a better spread of cantrips than other lists.
2. It grants a breath weapon that feels more impactful than +1 good damage (Angel), a watered down Retributive Strike (Phantom) or a 2x stride +Strike with +1 to hit (beast).

The beast is a close-ish second, but feels like a just worse dragon. Anything the beast can do, the Dragon can, and the Dragon does more things better.

The Angel's support aura is so situational that it's hard to factor. In some campaigns, it's REALLY good. In others it is worthless.

The Phantom feels like a slightly more able Angel. It is the only Eidolon I could see that gets a class feat based around it, and that class feat is pretty lack luster. If it made the Phantom actually incorporeal I could see an argument, but it doesn't.

All in all, the Summoner feels like it's where the Oracle was during it's Playtest: Good bones, but needs some tuning and some Oomph.

Magus feels REALLY good to me.. for an Archetype. But somewhere between an archetype and a class in actual ability.

Grain of Salt Clause: No play experience with either class. Opinions expressed above are based on white room first reading impressions.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
beowulf99 wrote:

PF2 is a game where the design team tried to expand the adventuring day. Mundane Healing is viable, Focus Spells give caster's some spellcasting available even when their slots are tapped.

The Magus and Summoner both feel like steps backwards, simply due to their spell slot reductions. The summoner can kind of avoid using spell slots much of the time by just boosting or reinforcing their eidolon and playing as a martial. But the Magus really wants to juice up their attacks with spells. Cantrips help a bit with this, but to really perform up to it's potential, the Magus wants to be casting their slotted spells.

Imo, Magus would be better off having 3/ available spell level base, then reducing the number of slots granted by Martial Caster to 1. This gives them 1 more slot per day, but shifts 2 slots to offensive spells. Being able to spell strike with a slotted spell 6 times per day feels better than 4.

On the brighter side, we now have a Caster that can qualify for Eldritch Archer by 6th. So that's neat.

Summoner needs some tuning as well imo. The Eidolon's all share starting stats minus skills afaik, so what defines them is their specific abilities. As is, the Dragon feels like the king.
1. It gives access to Arcane Spells, which have a better spread of cantrips than other lists.
2. It grants a breath weapon that feels more impactful than +1 good damage (Angel), a watered down Retributive Strike (Phantom) or a 2x stride +Strike with +1 to hit (beast).

The beast is a close-ish second, but feels like a just worse dragon. Anything the beast can do, the Dragon can, and the Dragon does more things better.

The Angel's support aura is so situational that it's hard to factor. In some campaigns, it's REALLY good. In others it is worthless.

The Phantom feels like a slightly more able Angel. It is the only Eidolon I could see that gets a class feat based around it, and that class feat is pretty lack luster. If it made the Phantom actually incorporeal I could see an argument, but it doesn't.

All...

The one thing about the Breath Weapon is it advances using the Summoner's spellcasting proficiency which isn't good.


9 people marked this as a favorite.

Now, P2E and DnD are entirely different games, but the one thing that was common was that there is a degree of spell slot economy.

2E seemed to have it right with the mix of spell slots and focus spells, but this new one needs more of a playtest.

Long duration fights punish these limited slot casters: half their abilities are either useless as they either need to conserve their Spellslots, or have none remaining after splurging, leaving them working as a lesser fighter. It favours a nova, and less time adventuring: the sooner a fight is over, the less risk to the party.

So, you are limited to Striking Cantrips, which I suppose is fine, but then at that stage, just be a generic Caster with better ranged cantrips and better ranged spellcasting in general.

This is rather egregious in time limited situations.

I can only hope that the playtest is serving as a point at which the designers have said 'this is intentionally low, so we know where to build it to' and doesn't encourage the mentality of posts with 'it was this low in playtest release, so stay low in full release'.

The magus with their second stat, and low progression means that they are going to going up, hitting something, using one of their rare resources and flunking it against boss types, which is when you really want your big spell slinger's to be hitting the homeruns.

Stuff like the Dragon Eidolon has poor progression on their spellcasting and therefore the breath DC, which combined with potentially awkward shaping is going to be cutting into the damage. Add in that you can't boost if you use Synthesist...

At a first glance, some options have such a number of concerns when combined together that I'd be concerned about their efficiency, and lead to annoyed players who chose that playstyle to be underwhelmed, because of undertuned numbers.

Low Spellslots matters less if you can guarantee they hit well and hit hard - sniper mentality. But if you have lots of Spellslots, and actions with which to use them, but they individually have a lesser chance of fully succeeding, it is less bad. At the moment, the Magus is stuck as low spell slots, low success, for the reduced chance of critting with spell and strike to make up for it, while a full Caster can stay at range, and launch more spells doing more damage.


11 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

I'm not a huge fan at first blush. Four high level slots means that you're incentivized even more than usual to make them count as much as possible. Meanwhile poor spellcasting proficiency and non-maximized spellcasting stat (for magus) means that you have a greater chance of a slot being "wasted" if you use it on an offensive spell that allows a save or requires a spell attack roll.

Instead, I'm thinking these limited spellcasters will hoard their slots exclusively for high value, long duration effects. A limited spellcaster that uses their slots exclusively for heroism, death ward, invisibility or wind walk is going to be doing a pretty good impression of a regular full caster, while still getting a lot of other goodies.

The magus in particular feels like a poor match, as they'd like to have more damage focused magic that flows more freely. I'm already imagining some feel-bad moments where one magus delivers both of their max level slots as heightened shocking grasps (something very cool and magus-y) but misses thanks to poor proficiency, while the other magus is under greater invisibility and going to town with just ordinary melee attacks with an extra spell slot left in reserve.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Francisco Zermeño 121 wrote:
I must playtest, but my problem is, because not give to the magus spontaneous casting? All low level spells that they scribe in their spellbook are wasted, they must need select again at higher levels to heighten to the level of the slot

Prepared spellcasters don't have that issue.

If they know a low level spell, they can Heighten it unlike spontaneous casters that need to make it a Signature spell or relearn a higher version.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber

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.


Capn Cupcake wrote:
The one thing about the Breath Weapon is it advances using the Summoner's spellcasting proficiency which isn't good.

Not a problem if you multiclass into a casting class that matches your tradition: It'll get you to Master at least.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber

It was jarring, but I think I am a fan because it gives both classes more of their highest level spells than any kind of multiclass character, without letting them get anywhere near a full caster for total spells per day. This pushes them away from support/utility casting and towards powerful combat casting, which I think is the right move. The summoner can have 4 good summoning spells ready to go, and the magus can have 4 good attack spells ready to go, and both get enough action economy tricks that cantrips are viable for general battle routine.

Most importantly, it keeps the wizard as the ultimate spell slinger, because they will have the most spells to use in a day. I was pretty worried that a Master casting/master weapon magus would just make the wizard a waste of space and ruin all existing Gish builds, because weapons are the best cantrips you can have, but with the limit on spell slots, I think the proficiency split ends up working out ok. Now the magus and the summoner can be their own unique things without stepping on nearly as many toes.

It also makes scrolls and consumable items more useful for each class which I think is a good thing for the game.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
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.


I'm confused by the Spells per day aspect, on the chart it shows four levels that get two spells each for a total of 8 spells. In the Spellcasting description it says you only get 2 spells at your highest level and 2 more at 1 level lower than your highest. Which means only 4 spells total. Am I missing something?


Unicore wrote:
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.

I'd like to combine the 2: instead of losing the lower level spells , have it drop to 1.

As to "absolute waste", it doesn't have to be for attacks. Things like featherfall, create food/water, haste don't go out of style. But even if it was, you'd be sure to have ones that would be better than casting with a cantrip.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

A couple more thoughts:
- This isn't as big a deal for the summoner, who will probably mostly want to cast once-a-combat buffs from slots, and otherwise rely on focus spells and their eidolon. Shared action economy with the eidolon means that you definitely don't want to be casting a two-action spell every round.
- It's a big deal for the magus. I don't think you want play a base magus (without a multiclass archetype) the way you would play a magus in PF1E. You're going to spellstrike a lot less. You're going to want to use those high-level slots for long-duration combat buff spells (enlarge, haste, fly, freedom of movement, true seeing, contingency, foresight) and maybe for utility if you don't have other casters to take that role (teleport, divinations). The big advantage here (compensating a little for the loss of lower level slots) is that you have access to the highest-level spells except at 19 and 20 and you don't have a restricted spell list.
- So what does a magus use for direct damage/Striking Spell? My current tentative thinking is that the right approach is to mostly use cantrips. You use Striking Spell when you want the benefit of your Magus Synthesis and it gives you a substantial damage boost when it goes off right (especially if you crit)--but probably not worth the investment of a high-level slot. Maybe I'd prepare a magic missile in my odd-level slot, which is a nice combo because you can cast it in one action and there's no save or attack roll.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Its probably due to how the chart was made.

In either case 2 spells of the 4 highest spell level would at least be barely passable. Unlike the current situation of only having 4 spells period.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Orithilaen wrote:
- This isn't as big a deal for the summoner, who will probably mostly want to cast once-a-combat buffs from slots, and otherwise rely on focus spells and their eidolon. Shared action economy with the eidolon means that you definitely don't want to be casting a two-action spell every round.

My big issue with this is that the summoner isn't doing much summoning as a result. It's more an Eidolon Master class than a Summoner.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
WWHsmackdown wrote:
I wouldn't mind the limitation if the magus wasn't so bad at using his spells. As it stands my 2 hander gish is much much much better off staying a fighter with a wizard multiclass dedication.

I think Magus needs faster advancement on spell proficiency - since they can't even start at 18 in their casting stat waiting until 11 for that bump to expert is too long when they're expected to be landing hits with spells. Maybe not quite the level 7 bump of the pure casters, split the difference at 9? I'm not sure. I definitely hope some testing is run around level 9-10 to answer that.

I feel it's less of a concern for summoner, who is more clearly pushed into support effects and indirect damage from casting. On the other hand, I worry more about the supply of spell slots for summoner, as they can't get as much mileage out of their cantrips as magus (I mean, conceptually I guess? They have the same level 11 advancement).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
graystone wrote:
My big issue with this is that the summoner isn't doing much summoning as a result. It's more an Eidolon Master class than a Summoner.

Yep, as I've said in other threads, summons aren't really the summoner's thing as presently constructed. It's a companion/pet class.


graystone wrote:
Orithilaen wrote:
- This isn't as big a deal for the summoner, who will probably mostly want to cast once-a-combat buffs from slots, and otherwise rely on focus spells and their eidolon. Shared action economy with the eidolon means that you definitely don't want to be casting a two-action spell every round.
My big issue with this is that the summoner isn't doing much summoning as a result. It's more an Eidolon Master class than a Summoner.

The options were to have the Eidolon keep up with a martial in which case the Summoner couldn't get too many spells or the Summoner was a good caster which meant the Eidolon would end up being subpar. Too many spells and suddenly why would you not be a Summoner? Those mid level utility spells are really nice.

I do feel the Eidolon could use access to some combat based feats/evolutions which seem sorely lacking considering it seems to be the focus of the class. It ends up 1 behind the martial but with a pocket bard with an extra action which isn't bad but it never gets any feats to give it variety and is stuck with a subpar weapon. There are several feats to help with mobility but none really help with combat. Let them get scaling proficiency in martial weapons with an evolution. Let them get natural attacks with different tags. Maybe let them do elemental damage without a rune.

The biggest issue I feel with the Eidolon is I don't see that much use coming out of the extra action. It's not useless but an attack at -10 isn't that useful.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

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.


Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
demon321x2 wrote:
The biggest issue I feel with the Eidolon is I don't see that much use coming out of the extra action. It's not useless but an attack at -10 isn't that useful.

Movement! You can Stride and then Strike twice. Also the special actions that every eidolon but the angel gets.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, I first wondered about what to do with Cantrips/Focus Spells (as the absence of 10th level slots for the reintroduced classes), then I forgot the clause that they ALWAYS heighten automatically up to the caster's level halved and rounded up. How embarrassing...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ressy wrote:
It really feels like the Magus was balanced around taking Wizard dedication.

Wizard also gives you access to a focus spell that works fairly well with Striking Spell in the form of Force Bolt, which is something the current Magus lacks.

All in all, I'm a bit afraid of the fact that Magi have so many abilities that synergise with spells and so few spells at their disposal that a spellcasting dedication overshadows a large part of their native class feats.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
demon321x2 wrote:
The options were to have the Eidolon keep up with a martial in which case the Summoner couldn't get too many spells or the Summoner was a good caster which meant the Eidolon would end up being subpar. Too many spells and suddenly why would you not be a Summoner? Those mid level utility spells are really nice.

I'm not even talking about the full allotment of normal caster spells: even a divine font style ability that JUST allows summons would make you feel more like an actual summoner. Right now, there isn't a lot of incentive for the summoner to use spell slots to actually summon: only 3 feats have anything to do with your summoned creatures [only can work with just an Eidolon while the other 2 require both an Eidolon and a summoned creature].


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I will be interested to see how getting a critical on the Strike improves the effect of the Spell Attack roll and how that balances against having a lower Spell proficiency level. It sounds cool, but without playing it out across multiple encounters how does it compare.

What impact will Capture Spell play into a magus' rotation?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hmm - should these classes be given an alternate type of 10th level spell slot?

At 19, give them a class feature that allows them to heighten one spell per day to 10th level. So they don't get access to the powerful 10th level spells, but summoner could drop a maxed summon spell or magus throws out a 10th level Earthquake or something.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

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.

Lantern Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

The Summoner reads "Each day, you can cast one 1st-level spell and five cantrips."

I feel sure that's meant to be at first level only, but it can be interpreted to mean they always have one 1st level spell available.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
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.

I do have one thought-- it wouldn't be bad if you had combat focus spells to use with Spell Striking in place of the current set, then it wouldn't be essential to get more casting, because you'd have a renewable resource with fair damage, and your cantrips.

Your slots at that point just become your daily 'special' attacks.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It will be very interesting to see if Martial Caster winds up being a must-have feat.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
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 8 spell slots, regardless of what said spells are. The versatility alone is a must buy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I'm interested in the "bonus" spells Magi can get with the one feat that puts a buff on them when they cast from a certain school.

It gives their limited spell slots more oomph AND is action efficient.

I feel like that kind of thing has potential.

Other options I can think of:

1. Every time you land a spellstrike you regain a quarter of a focus point. Add a focus power that refreshes a spell slot one lower than max.

2. Have a separate set of bonus spell slots (1 for each spell level?) that, when used, lock you out of spell striking for 2 rounds.

3. Add a focus power that grants you two temporary spell slots of a significantly lower level.

4. When you expend all your spell slots you can refocus to regain a spell slot at a lower level, getting lower every time you do so down to level 1.


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.

2 spell slot, which scale from 1st to 4th, leaving you at the end of the day with 2x 4th, 2x 8th and 2x 9th level slots + 5 cantrips


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

1 to 50 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