| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
The 3 action system is beautiful, one of the best mechanical aspects of this edition.
The increased mobility of 2e is fantastic.
And almost every new class outside the crb is actively hampered by it.
One of the goals, my understanding, of the system is to get away from full attack actions.
But most new classes and especially these two new ones. Are given features that basically require it and as a result, you end up with a weak full attack class. The various feats and features that help with this action economy are incredibly conservative and barely help if they help at all
This is a disappointing direction for new classes. Resulting in more caster syndrome playstyles or worse where your main abilities are extremely niche and only ever get to be used when Stars align
Meanwhile core classes just work beautifully within the 3 action system.
Every class I've seen added is mechanically weaker than the core classes whose unique benefits don't outweigh the action economy restrictions. I don't expect every new class to be a power boost. But I also don't like that they are always a power down grade.
I hope in the future new classes are not treated this way.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
One of the goals, my understanding, of the system is to get away from full attack actions.
But most new classes and especially these two new ones. Are given features that basically require it and as a result, you end up with a weak full attack class. The various feats and features that help with this action economy are incredibly conservative and barely help if they help at all
I'm not sure I follow.
Magus definitely is not a full-attack class. You cast a cantrip, get some benefit (free movement or temp HP), and then make an attack, followed by discharging the spell if it hits. It's a move-and-cast setup. If the spell is save-based, you don't even worry about MAP. That's in addition to spell parrying setups.
Summoner has actions split across two bodies, with an effective four actions as a baseline and a solid feat for movement. The eidolon is fairly full-attack heavy, but if it's in position the Summoner can cast a cantrip, buff the eidolon, and let the eidolon make an attack.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
One of the goals, my understanding, of the system is to get away from full attack actions.
But most new classes and especially these two new ones. Are given features that basically require it and as a result, you end up with a weak full attack class. The various feats and features that help with this action economy are incredibly conservative and barely help if they help at all
I'm not sure I follow.
Magus definitely is not a full-attack class. You cast a cantrip, get some benefit (free movement or temp HP), and then make an attack, followed by discharging the spell if it hits. It's a move-and-cast setup. If the spell is save-based, you don't even worry about MAP. That's in addition to spell parrying setups.
Summoner has actions split across two bodies, with an effective four actions as a baseline and a solid feat for movement. The eidolon is fairly full-attack heavy, but if it's in position the Summoner can cast a cantrip, buff the eidolon, and let the eidolon make an attack.
What I'm saying isn't attacking 3x. But rather having features that in order to utilize will require all 3 of your actions so they try to bandage this by giving you economy fixers. Resulting in you still being action locked. Something both the new classes struggle with more than even previous new classes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What I'm saying isn't attacking 3x. But rather having features that in order to utilize will require all 3 of your actions so they try to bandage this by giving you economy fixers. Resulting in you still being action locked. Something both the new classes struggle with more than even previous new classes.One of the goals, my understanding, of the system is to get away from full attack actions.
But most new classes and especially these two new ones. Are given features that basically require it and as a result, you end up with a weak full attack class. The various feats and features that help with this action economy are incredibly conservative and barely help if they help at all
I'm not sure I follow.
Magus definitely is not a full-attack class. You cast a cantrip, get some benefit (free movement or temp HP), and then make an attack, followed by discharging the spell if it hits. It's a move-and-cast setup. If the spell is save-based, you don't even worry about MAP. That's in addition to spell parrying setups.
Summoner has actions split across two bodies, with an effective four actions as a baseline and a solid feat for movement. The eidolon is fairly full-attack heavy, but if it's in position the Summoner can cast a cantrip, buff the eidolon, and let the eidolon make an attack.
Ah, I understand.
I think you're wrong about the goals of PF2, then. I think the goal is not "let you do something different every round", I think it's, "do something more interesting than move up and spend all your other actions to attack". Attack, attack, shield is more interesting. Intimidate, cast a spell is more interesting. Study, move, strike is more interesting. Cast a spell and strike is more interesting. Cast a spell, cast a buff, and have your eidolon attack is more interesting. It's not a very high bar to clear, and it doesn't need to be.
If you want open-ended actions, that's what the core martials are for. If they released another open-ended action class, it has to have some way to distinguish itself. That is going to be a unique action. For the most part, the only way to have a unique action and still be open-ended on actions is to copy Ranger/Barbarian and have a full-combat buff that you use the first turn. That doesn't fit any of the new classes. If a martial class doesn't have a special action, why not play Fighter or Rogue?
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
What I'm saying isn't attacking 3x. But rather having features that in order to utilize will require all 3 of your actions so they try to bandage this by giving you economy fixers. Resulting in you still being action locked. Something both the new classes struggle with more than even previous new classes.It might seem that way, but I think the correct interpretation is that spellstrike is not something meant to be mandatory all rounds, but a class feature which sometimes is used.
I wouldn't be surprised to see a Magus dealing in a similar way
R1) Stride, Stride, Strike
R2) Feint, Strike, Strike
R3) Strike, Stride, Shield ( cantrip )
R4) Spellstrike ( + 1 big one spell )
R5) Spell from a staff, StrikeEtc...
If it's only used sometimes it should be a feat, not a core feature.
The 3 action system is beautiful, one of the best mechanical aspects of this edition.
The increased mobility of 2e is fantastic.
And almost every new class outside the crb is actively hampered by it.
One of the goals, my understanding, of the system is to get away from full attack actions.
But most new classes and especially these two new ones. Are given features that basically require it and as a result, you end up with a weak full attack class. The various feats and features that help with this action economy are incredibly conservative and barely help if they help at all
This is a disappointing direction for new classes. Resulting in more caster syndrome playstyles or worse where your main abilities are extremely niche and only ever get to be used when Stars align
Meanwhile core classes just work beautifully within the 3 action system.
Every class I've seen added is mechanically weaker than the core classes whose unique benefits don't outweigh the action economy restrictions. I don't expect every new class to be a power boost. But I also don't like that they are always a power down grade.
I hope in the future new classes are not treated this way.
I have to agree. The newer classes don't seem to want to play with the 3 action system very well. It's a problem I have with most spells as well, but in this playtest the pain point is looking to become a break point.
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
What I'm saying isn't attacking 3x. But rather having features that in order to utilize will require all 3 of your actions so they try to bandage this by giving you economy fixers. Resulting in you still being action locked. Something both the new classes struggle with more than even previous new classes.It might seem that way, but I think the correct interpretation is that spellstrike is not something meant to be mandatory all rounds, but a class feature which sometimes is used.
I wouldn't be surprised to see a Magus dealing in a similar way
R1) Stride, Stride, Strike
R2) Feint, Strike, Strike
R3) Strike, Stride, Shield ( cantrip )
R4) Spellstrike ( + 1 big one spell )
R5) Spell from a staff, StrikeEtc...
If it's only used sometimes it should be a feat, not a core feature.
It's not that you "can't" use it any turn, but more that you would like to use different stuff.
A rogue won't be necessarily using its sneak attack every round ( bad positioning or eventually other stuff, like athletic checks or picking up and drinking a potion after a step )
A champion wouldn't necessarily use its reaction every round ( maybe he needs or prefer a shield block, or simply it doesn't meet the requirements ).
We have to deal with a core class feature which requires 3 actions to be used.
It is implicit that it wouldn't be used all rounds, regardless the reason:
- Out for range
- Prefer to cast a spell as a spellcaster ( ex, fireball to aoe blast )
- Need to withdraw from enemies ( stride away )
- Etc...But this doesn't make that not a class feature.
I was considering that the magus would have preferred to alternate it with other attacks, depends the situation ( as any other class would ).
I've yet to see a Rogue that wasn't built in some way get Sneak every turn. The Champion uses a reaction every turn, choosing between two very competitive choices - that's their thing.
The economy is so bad that the Spell Stride is far and above considered the best option because it gives them the move action they desperately need. To the point it should be baked in without further changes.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What I'm saying isn't attacking 3x. But rather having features that in order to utilize will require all 3 of your actions so they try to bandage this by giving you economy fixers. Resulting in you still being action locked. Something both the new classes struggle with more than even previous new classes.
Most of the casters from the core book, and just about anyone with an Animal Companion, or using the Summon spells. Will tell you that there are plenty of times they wish they had a good third action to use (for those without 1 action spells) or that they don't have enough actions to do all they want, (for those spending actions on summons and/or Animal Companions.) Especially if they both cast spells AND have an Animal Companion/summon (looks directly at Druids.)
Frankly, these "bandages" as you describe them, I see as very powerful and helpful boons that make me wish for such on those core classes you speak of.
No they are still bandages. Because the core classes can get them too (action economy fixers) but since they already function well within the system. They are more like things that open up your gameplay rather than make your gameplay at least function.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What I'm saying isn't attacking 3x. But rather having features that in order to utilize will require all 3 of your actions so they try to bandage this by giving you economy fixers. Resulting in you still being action locked. Something both the new classes struggle with more than even previous new classes.One of the goals, my understanding, of the system is to get away from full attack actions.
But most new classes and especially these two new ones. Are given features that basically require it and as a result, you end up with a weak full attack class. The various feats and features that help with this action economy are incredibly conservative and barely help if they help at all
I'm not sure I follow.
Magus definitely is not a full-attack class. You cast a cantrip, get some benefit (free movement or temp HP), and then make an attack, followed by discharging the spell if it hits. It's a move-and-cast setup. If the spell is save-based, you don't even worry about MAP. That's in addition to spell parrying setups.
Summoner has actions split across two bodies, with an effective four actions as a baseline and a solid feat for movement. The eidolon is fairly full-attack heavy, but if it's in position the Summoner can cast a cantrip, buff the eidolon, and let the eidolon make an attack.
Ah, I understand.
I think you're wrong about the goals of PF2, then. I think the goal is not "let you do something different every round", I think it's, "do something more interesting than move up and spend all your other actions to attack". Attack, attack, shield is more interesting. Intimidate, cast a spell is more interesting. Study, move, strike is more interesting. Cast a spell and strike is more interesting. Cast a spell, cast a buff, and have your eidolon attack is more interesting. It's not a very high bar to clear, and it doesn't need to be.
If you want open-ended actions, that's what the core martials are for. If...
Than I and many others will never have a compelling reason to purchase or use the extra classes they release who are objectively worse than the core classes in all but the most niche cherry picked scenarios. If that's what paizo intention is, it cannot be helped.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What I'm saying isn't attacking 3x. But rather having features that in order to utilize will require all 3 of your actions so they try to bandage this by giving you economy fixers. Resulting in you still being action locked. Something both the new classes struggle with more than even previous new classes.One of the goals, my understanding, of the system is to get away from full attack actions.
But most new classes and especially these two new ones. Are given features that basically require it and as a result, you end up with a weak full attack class. The various feats and features that help with this action economy are incredibly conservative and barely help if they help at all
I'm not sure I follow.
Magus definitely is not a full-attack class. You cast a cantrip, get some benefit (free movement or temp HP), and then make an attack, followed by discharging the spell if it hits. It's a move-and-cast setup. If the spell is save-based, you don't even worry about MAP. That's in addition to spell parrying setups.
Summoner has actions split across two bodies, with an effective four actions as a baseline and a solid feat for movement. The eidolon is fairly full-attack heavy, but if it's in position the Summoner can cast a cantrip, buff the eidolon, and let the eidolon make an attack.
Ah, I understand.
I think you're wrong about the goals of PF2, then. I think the goal is not "let you do something different every round", I think it's, "do something more interesting than move up and spend all your other actions to attack". Attack, attack, shield is more interesting. Intimidate, cast a spell is more interesting. Study, move, strike is more interesting. Cast a spell and strike is more interesting. Cast a spell, cast a buff, and have your eidolon attack is more interesting. It's not a very high bar to clear, and it doesn't need to be.
If you want open-ended actions, that's what the core martials are for. If...
Or. 2 actions. Cast the spell as part of your attack. Incurs 2x map after use. Uses your melee attack in place is your spell attack, using spell attacks vs any target that you did not hit with your weapon or forces the spell to be single target only when used in this way.
You only have 4 spell slots a day to do this with. And your cantrips are weaker than if you had hit a second time
So it's not overpowered and you can at least utilize it most rounds. If you think this is too much than we disagree where the games balance lies.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've yet to see a Rogue that wasn't built in some way get Sneak every turn. The Champion uses a reaction every turn, choosing between two very competitive choices - that's their thing.
The economy is so bad that the Spell Stride is far and above considered the best option because it gives them the move action they desperately need. To the point it should be baked in without further changes.
A rogue is built around sneak attack, but a rogue might not be able to deliver a sneak attack every round.
Same goes for a champion ( you are not "forced" to use a shield, and the ones who hit your ally is not supposed to be within your reach ) or any other class.
The magus is way more strict because its class feature uses 3 actions.
I do agree on this.But even if I had the possibility to deal with spellstrike every single round ( I am able to teleport miself as a free action wherever I want ) I wouldn't be probably using spellstrike all the times.
You will be renoucing to skill checks like
- Feint
- Intimidate
- Recall Knowledge
- Athleticsand even stuff like 2x melee strikes.
I mean, in my opinion it's better than spellstrike is not that "mandatory", or else my magus gameplay would be
R1) Spellstrike
R2) Spellstrike
R3) Spellstrike
R4) Spellstrikeetc...
Apart from that, it's something which merges a strike and a spell.
As Eldritch shot it's something which "has" to require 3 actions.
Maybe they could come up with a different version if you use a cantrip.
2 actions but the cantrip deals 1/2 damage. In order to leave the magus an extra action to use to stride or make a skillcheck.
I don't even know what you're trying to say with the Rogue, i'm not getting it at all. they are capable of sneak attacking every turn - gameplay may not allow. The magus is not capable of doing Spellstrike every turn, totally different.
As for Skills Checks, that's kinda the entire problem I have - you don't have enough action economy. If I never have a spare action, I'll never consider those.
Or. 2 actions. Cast the spell as part of your attack. Incurs 2x map after use. Uses your melee attack in place is your spell attack, using spell attacks vs any target that you did not hit with your weapon or forces the spell to be single target only when used in this way.
You only have 4 spell slots a day to do this with. And your cantrips are weaker than if you had hit a second time
So it's not overpowered and you can at least utilize it most rounds. If you think this is too much than we disagree where the games balance lies.
Produce Flame, Electric Arc, and Chill Touch scale to ~25 + ability mod. A greatsword scales to ~26 + ability mod. It'd be like giving Magus Double Slice with a d12 weapon, and that's just with cantrips.
Than I and many others will never have a compelling reason to purchase or use the extra classes they release who are objectively worse than the core classes in all but the most niche cherry picked scenarios. If that's what paizo intention is, it cannot be helped.
I don't know about it being niche. Even if you decided to ignore Spell Combat entirely, Magus is at least a martial that gets ninth level spells. For anybody who wants that, it saves four feats of multiclassing and gets them the spells faster. Personally, I wouldn't ignore it. If I use a save-based cantrip, I've got better odds than making an attack at -5, and I either get to move or top up on temporary hitpoints.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't even know what you're trying to say with the Rogue, i'm not getting it at all. they are capable of sneak attacking every turn - gameplay may not allow. The magus is not capable of doing Spellstrike every turn, totally different.I know.
I was just pointing out that it's not that "I have never seen a rogue not built around sneak attack" but "sometimes even a rogue won't use sneak attack during its turn".Just this.
As for Skills Checks, that's kinda the entire problem I have - you don't have enough action economy. If I never have a spare action, I'll never consider those.Are you saying that, unless paizo gives you the possibility to
-Make a strike (1 action)
-Cast a spell (2 actions)
-Use a skill action (1 action)in the same turn, you'd never consider to use nothing different than spellstrike?
It seems that it's you the one who is forcing yourself not to use anything else but spellstrike.
As for me, it's the opposite.
If I have to choose between a spellstrike and, for example Feint/intimidate + Strike+ Strike, I'd probably consider them both, depends the situation.
Depends the current encounter, I guess.
There's a world of difference between "sometimes it doesn't work out" and "most of the time you won't be able to."
And I'm not saying that - but that is the ideal turn without movement. Cantrips are comparable to a weapon strike, I don't think the Magus should be paying an action premium on something that's not actually that premium - especially considering they will do about the same damage just swinging an agile weapon past the first couple levels where their accuracy is the most even. Then you might think, "but what about slot spells?" well they only have 4 of them, I don't really think that will be enough to unbalance anything - especially considering the math currently says they will only hit with 1 of their 4 spells in a given day.
Produce Flame, Electric Arc, and Chill Touch scale to ~25 + ability mod. A greatsword scales to ~26 + ability mod. It'd be like giving Magus Double Slice with a d12 weapon.Or. 2 actions. Cast the spell as part of your attack. Incurs 2x map after use. Uses your melee attack in place is your spell attack, using spell attacks vs any target that you did not hit with your weapon or forces the spell to be single target only when used in this way.
You only have 4 spell slots a day to do this with. And your cantrips are weaker than if you had hit a second time
So it's not overpowered and you can at least utilize it most rounds. If you think this is too much than we disagree where the games balance lies.
Sorry. Meant to say cantrips should be half damage when doing this. My bad.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Produce Flame, Electric Arc, and Chill Touch scale to ~25 + ability mod. A greatsword scales to ~26 + ability mod. It'd be like giving Magus Double Slice with a d12 weapon.Or. 2 actions. Cast the spell as part of your attack. Incurs 2x map after use. Uses your melee attack in place is your spell attack, using spell attacks vs any target that you did not hit with your weapon or forces the spell to be single target only when used in this way.
You only have 4 spell slots a day to do this with. And your cantrips are weaker than if you had hit a second time
So it's not overpowered and you can at least utilize it most rounds. If you think this is too much than we disagree where the games balance lies.
If damage is the concern then lets nerf it. That's truly fine with me. Make spell strike an arcane power attack in terms of damage output. I really don't care. What I do care about immensely is the fact that the core feature of the entire class is clunky in terms of action economy and wildly inaccurate. I'll take any concession necessary from the designers to fix those two flaws.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But a greatsword also adds greater weapon specialization damage which will be 6 for master and 8 for legendary. Using a cantrip like produce flames with a 2 action striking spell that also uses the same degree of success for the melee strike and spell will be just a few points of damage better than attacking twice with a greatsword.Produce Flame, Electric Arc, and Chill Touch scale to ~25 + ability mod. A greatsword scales to ~26 + ability mod. It'd be like giving Magus Double Slice with a d12 weapon, and that's just with cantrips.Or. 2 actions. Cast the spell as part of your attack. Incurs 2x map after use. Uses your melee attack in place is your spell attack, using spell attacks vs any target that you did not hit with your weapon or forces the spell to be single target only when used in this way.
You only have 4 spell slots a day to do this with. And your cantrips are weaker than if you had hit a second time
So it's not overpowered and you can at least utilize it most rounds. If you think this is too much than we disagree where the games balance lies.
Ah, I did forget about that the six damage from weapon specialization.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I did some calculations at 20th lvl against a 45 AC creature with +7 str modifier and +5 int modifier. For reference, if the magus spent all three actions just to strike, they'd do 48.75 damage on average with a +3 major striking greatsword.
If the magus uses produce flame for striking spell, they will deal 36.9 damage on average. That's not good but it gets worse. Using Polar ray (an 8th level attack roll spell) heightened to 9th level will deal 12d8 on a success. Striking spell with polar ray will deal, on average, 44.58 damage. And I'm pretty sure my math is correct. I think there's a problem with the class if it's better to not use a 9th level spell and their class feature.
Edit: My math was slightly wrong so I changed 36.75 to 36.9 and 44.31 to 44.58
are you including Drained 2 from Polar Ray, which is essentially 40 damage vs a lvl 20 target?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm kind of confused on how the APG classes force you into three action routines.
2 actions: cast a spell
1 action: Spellstrike (your primary defining class feature)Feel free to suggest alterations.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Which implies that this same kind of issue with becoming a full attacker is also present in the APG classes. I was confused by this, because outside of this thread I haven't seen this opinion voiced, and was wondering if there was something I was missing.The 3 action system is beautiful, one of the best mechanical aspects of this edition.
The increased mobility of 2e is fantastic.
And almost every new class outside the crb is actively hampered by it.
One of the goals, my understanding, of the system is to get away from full attack actions.
But most new classes and especially these two new ones. Are given features that basically require it and as a result, you end up with a weak full attack class. The various feats and features that help with this action economy are incredibly conservative and barely help if they help at all
What Martialmasters meant by "full attack actions" is basically "spending all of your actions attacking." For a fighter that would be like doing "Strike-Strike-Strike" as your three actions. But this is inefficient and you're better of doing things like Recall Knowledge or Trip or Demoralize or Raise Shield.
The problem with the APG classes is that they CAN'T Recall Knowledge or Trip or Demoralize or Raise Shield as part of "doing whatever it is that they do" as their class primary feature: they simply don't have a "3rd action" that they can reassign. All three actions are consumed "doing their shtick."
For the Magus, that's casting a spell and spellstriking.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Magus still isn't an APG class, which Perp was asking about.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As for Skills Checks, that's kinda the entire problem I have - you don't have enough action economy. If I never have a spare action, I'll never consider those.
I feel your pain... My Fighter using Double Slice/Power Attack and Raise Shield never has a free action to Intimidate, Recall Knowledge... And if he's moving or tripping or disarming, he is is either not using his main class feature or gimping his AC. Terrible![/s]
Seriously, I have not had opportunity to closely look at the Magus, but complaining about it being able to 'always use its main class features' and accusing martials of having 'action economy boosters'...
How often do you think Sudden Charge happens in a regular fight? Maybe not even in round one if the party gets surprised and charged. Intimidating Strike is great for ignoring skill and stat requirements and still getting to inflict fear effects. At the cost of damage. But that's still a two-action thing.
Knockdown: Attack and Trip! Oh wait, that's two actions too.
So really, the martial classes are very much in the same boat as the Magus, if they want to play with all their toys, they have to have the action economy to pay for it.
Yes, Magus has it worse in that he basically has to use a full-round action to use his main class feature. But how is that different from a Wizard casting and shooting a bow or a Fighter/Wizard for that matter?
And a Magus does get Master Proficiency in martial weapons and medium armour while still being a full caster. That is huge. So having some action economy woes is a small price to pay in comparison.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, Magus has it worse in that he basically has to use a full-round action to use his main class feature. But how is that different from a Wizard casting and shooting a bow or a Fighter/Wizard for that matter?
Because they have options for other things. They can cast a utility/buff spell and attack. The Fighter/Wizard could raise a shield as a reaction, or Brutish Shove and a spell, or Dragging Strike, or Assisting Shot, or Snagging Strike, or Lunge, or Exacting Strike, or... [that's JUST 1st and second level fighter feats] Or they can True Strike, use a Strike of any of those feats I pointed out AND Recall Knowledge.
That's the thing: Fighter gets lots of OPTIONS. Wizards gets lots of OPTIONS. Magus gets strike and 4 options... [or 6 if you take a feat]
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Full caster is a bit much to claim. Casting Expertise is coming 4 levels late and your casting stat is also behind, and 4 spells total (6 with a nigh-mandatory feat) is a lot of lost magic ability.
Mastery comes so late it doesn't even matter.
Martial weapon and armor progression is nice, but they're sacrificing a lot for that.
Magus still isn't an APG class, which Perp was asking about.
I can't speak to the Investigator or the Swashbuckler. I know they have their shtick and they generally want to use it, but I don't know how badly that eats into their actions.
What I can do is discuss how that comment applies to the magus.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can't speak to the Investigator
Investigator can:
Devise a Stratagem with a free Recall Knowledge check = 1 action
Strategic Strike = 1 action
Expeditious Inspection [free Recall Knowledge, Seek, or Sense Motive] = free action.
1 action to do what you want.
So the equivalent of 5 actions can be done in a single round and can be done at 1st level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What I can do is discuss how that comment applies to the magus.
If I recall the original comment was about the APG classes having this problem, Perpedog asking what APG classes have this problem, and then you responding that Magus has this problem.
I'm just pointing out that the Magus isn't an APG class.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, Magus has it worse in that he basically has to use a full-round action to use his main class feature. But how is that different from a Wizard casting and shooting a bow or a Fighter/Wizard for that matter?Because they have options for other things. They can cast a utility/buff spell and attack. The Fighter/Wizard could raise a shield as a reaction, or Brutish Shove and a spell, or Dragging Strike, or Assisting Shot, or Snagging Strike, or Lunge, or Exacting Strike, or... [that's JUST 1st and second level fighter feats] Or they can True Strike, use a Strike of any of those feats I pointed out AND Recall Knowledge.
That's the thing: Fighter gets lots of OPTIONS. Wizards gets lots of OPTIONS. Magus gets strike and 4 options... [or 6 if you take a feat]
That's a bit disingenuous though, the only thing that locks a Magus into 3 actions is his Spell Strike feature. Which is of course the main draw of the class, but nothing stops them from doing a casting and a move, or True Strike and strike or trip or disarm. Heck, even a Fighter's Double Slice or Power Attack or even Reactive Shield are a mere 2 feats away.
So a Magus has a lot of options too. He even has an extra option that other casters and martials don't have. It is just that that particular option locks him into 3 actions.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The issue is that that option (Spell Striking) does not offer much benefit compared to every other options (that almost anyone has or can have)
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As for Skills Checks, that's kinda the entire problem I have - you don't have enough action economy. If I never have a spare action, I'll never consider those.I feel your pain... My Fighter using Double Slice/Power Attack and Raise Shield never has a free action to Intimidate, Recall Knowledge... And if he's moving or tripping or disarming, he is is either not using his main class feature or gimping his AC. Terrible![/s]
Seriously, I have not had opportunity to closely look at the Magus, but complaining about it being able to 'always use its main class features' and accusing martials of having 'action economy boosters'...
How often do you think Sudden Charge happens in a regular fight? Maybe not even in round one if the party gets surprised and charged. Intimidating Strike is great for ignoring skill and stat requirements and still getting to inflict fear effects. At the cost of damage. But that's still a two-action thing.
Knockdown: Attack and Trip! Oh wait, that's two actions too.
So really, the martial classes are very much in the same boat as the Magus, if they want to play with all their toys, they have to have the action economy to pay for it.
Yes, Magus has it worse in that he basically has to use a full-round action to use his main class feature. But how is that different from a Wizard casting and shooting a bow or a Fighter/Wizard for that matter?
And a Magus does get Master Proficiency in martial weapons and medium armour while still being a full caster. That is huge. So having some action economy woes is a small price to pay in comparison.
First, your fighter does all of that better than any other class due to proficiency - and has access to unique options as well. Fighters don't really have a "main class feature" but they can do all the combat stuff and do it better.
Second, Sudden Charge happens in 3/4 combats I've run and seen in Age of Ashes and PFS.
Third, how is it different from a wizard casting a spell and using a bow? It's worse than that, that's the problem.
I'm just pointing out that the Magus isn't an APG class.
Yes, I know that. You'll notice that I never said otherwise. I broke down the claim, then included one line in reference to what class this thread is about. You know, one in the "Secrets of Magic Playtest" board.
If you're just going to whine and complain, though, that's fine. Please do it without posting.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
"That's a bit disingenuous though
Not at all: you asked what was different. The Magus doesn't have those attack options OR those the number of spell slots to cast their spells more than 4 times. THAT is what if different: the magus DOES NOT have interesting options past basic Strike/skill checks and 4 spells per day if you ignore their main class feature. The fighter/wizard has much, much, much MORE to do.
Heck, even a Fighter's Double Slice or Power Attack or even Reactive Shield are a mere 2 feats away.
Sure, but that wasn't the question so asking now what a magus/fighter can do vs a fighter/wizard is beside the point: we're playtesting the magus not multiclass feats...
So a Magus has a lot of options too.
Cool, cool... Please make me a list of MAGUS options. Not ones from multiclass [which ANY clad could get] but pure 100% magus options. I await the massive list of unique options that where hidden from me. :P
First, your fighter does all of that better than any other class due to proficiency - and has access to unique options as well. Fighters don't really have a "main class feature" but they can do all the combat stuff and do it better.
Second, Sudden Charge happens in 3/4 combats I've run and seen in Age of Ashes and PFS.
Third, how is it different from a wizard casting a spell and using a bow? It's worse than that, that's the problem.
All of that? Really? The one thing Fighters have over other martials is +2 accuracy. With one weapon group. No rage or totems, no Sneak Attack, no Inspiration or Panache. And no spells of course.
And in case it eluded you: Trip and Disarm, while counting as attacks, are still very much skill checks, where a Fighter has no advantage over any other class at all.
As for Sudden Charge, table variance is a thing. I can not say I did get to use it often.
As for third... Spellstrike is basically Double Slice for an attack spell/cantrip and a melee strike. With the downside that you only get to roll your spell attack if your melee attack hits, but both rolls are made at full attack bonus. And seeing that a Magus gets Master proficiency in weapon attacks, just like any martial class, the fact that their casting proficiency lags a tier just means their second attack isn't made with an Agile weapon (for comparison with Double Slice).
So what the Wizard lacks in weapon proficiency, the Magus lacks in spell proficiency. Looks like an even trade.
Not at all: you asked what was different. The Magus doesn't have those attack options OR those the number of spell slots to cast their spells more than 4 times. THAT is what if different: the magus DOES NOT have interesting options past basic Strike/skill checks and 4 spells per day if you ignore their main class feature. The fighter/wizard has much, much, much MORE to do.
Uh what? The Magus gets 2 slots per spell level and, like any other caster, can use his scaling cantrips at will, a.k.a. 'all day long'.
You make it sound like the Magus can't Spell Strike once out of slots, and that is disingenuous.
Sure, outside of Spell Strike the Magus doesn't have much else going for him... except his Master proficiency at simple and martial weapons and medium armour proficiency. And he can use shields too, if he builds for it, so ignoring the options the Magus has access to, just because they are outside their own class is disingenuous too. The class does not exist in a vacuum!
And just because Spell Strike, the ONE defining thing for a Magus, is limiting, does NOT mean that other options are barred to him.
A Magus is not required to use Spell Strike, he just has that as an additional option that others don't have. With his proficiencies alone, the Magus is a full-fledged martial class. AND on top of that has access to 10th level spells, and 2 spell slots for every spell level. No class can match that with dedication feats, not even if they spend a full half of their own class feats for access to magic, and casters (currently) have no way of getting master proficiency with weapons.
If your gripe is that Spell Strike is boring, what features do you think a Magus should have instead? Because making Spell Strike a two-action activity would break action economy in a big way. What price are you willing to pay then? Go back to Expert weapon proficiency? Lose Master armour proficiency? Because if they get that extra action they can damn well shell out for Raise Shield or casting Shield.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
As for third... Spellstrike is basically Double Slice for an attack spell/cantrip and a melee strike. With the downside that you only get to roll your spell attack if your melee attack hits, but both rolls are made at full attack bonus. And seeing that a Magus gets Master proficiency in weapon attacks, just like any martial class, the fact that their casting proficiency lags a tier just means their second attack isn't made with an Agile weapon (for comparison with Double Slice).
Its Double Slice...if Double Slice cost 3 actions, the second roll didn't get Item bonuses to the roll, used a different stat, didn't happen until the first succeeded, and the damage doesn't combine for the purposes of weakness and resistance.
So.
Not really Double Slice at all.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Magus gets 2 slots per spell level
No it doesn't. If it did, there would be a lot less issues with it.
You make it sound like the Magus can't Spell Strike once out of slots, and that is disingenuous.
No, I'm acting like it's not WORTH using Spell Strike with a cantrip: that is both different and not disingenuous. Even WITH slots, it's questionable if it's worth it.
Sure, outside of Spell Strike the Magus doesn't have much else going for him... except his Master proficiency at simple and martial weapons and medium armour proficiency.
LOL So he's as awesome as a ranger without a companion or as many hp or really any class feature other than 4 slots and cantrips you can pick up with ancestry. Excuse me if I don't fall over from all that excitement!
And he can use shields too, if he builds for it, so ignoring the options the Magus has access to, just because they are outside their own class is disingenuous too. The class does not exist in a vacuum!
Anyone can use shields: nothing to build for.
As for outside abilities, sure you can use them but you then can't say 'this class is SURE cool! Why? Because I can use another classes abilities with it!!! If anything, that's telling me the base class isn't bringing enough to the table.
A Magus is not required to use Spell Strike, he just has that as an additional option that others don't have. With his proficiencies alone, the Magus is a full-fledged martial class. AND on top of that has access to 10th level spells, and 2 spell slots for every spell level. No class can match that with dedication feats, not even if they spend a full half of their own class feats for access to magic, and casters (currently) have no way of getting master proficiency with weapons.
LOL They don't really WANT to use Spell Strike, which is a bigger issue that not having to but OK.
As to additional option that others don't have:
full-fledged martial class? Really, there don't?
access to 10th level spells? Do they? My pdf says 9th And even if they do, it's unique?
2 spell slots for every spell level? Do they? My pdf says 2 slots for their top 2 spell levels And even if they do, it's unique?
No class can match that with dedication feat? True, dedication can get MORE spell slots and up to 8th from a single dedication. Sign my up for dedications or 2.
master proficiency with weapons? Sure, but what to they have to back it up? Without that, they are a ranger without abilities.
If your gripe is that Spell Strike is boring, what features do you think a Magus should have instead? Because making Spell Strike a two-action activity would break action economy in a big way. What price are you willing to pay then? Go back to Expert weapon proficiency? Lose Master armour proficiency? Because if they get that extra action they can damn well shell out for Raise Shield or casting Shield.
My gripe is that it isn't worth using, boring is beside the point. Myself, I'd drop casting proficiency to expert and allow Spell Strike to use your proficiency/bonuses for your weapon for your spellcasting rolls for it. That way, you aren't making crappy spell rolls with a lower check and stat and no bonus for magic items...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The one handed Magus seems to be doing just fine action, economy wise. They are basically quickened when it comes to moving around the battlefield, something which normal casters don't get. Also, the ignoring MAP bit means they can use spells that normal gishes can't effectively combine with strikes.
Also, the Magus is the first class to be able to "hold the charge" since PF1. That is going to lead to more action variety than people think. When the Strike misses, the Magus starts their next turn with an already charged blade. From there a lot of things can happen, to the charged blade killing the enemy and the Magus needing to pivot to a new foe, to the Magus missing the first strike and landing a -5 strike.
The class may have other problems (low number of slots, low odds of landing both hits) but I don't think action economy compared to core casters is one of them. The two handed version has it slightly worse, but they can still hold the charge too, which is going to lead to turn variety.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, the ignoring MAP bit means they can use spells that normal gishes can't effectively combine with strikes.
This isn't really true. First, the MAO of the strike you hit with if also the MAP of the spell so you hit on that -5, so is the spell. Even without MAP's, you have a lower casting stat and proficiency so you have a pseudo-MAP from that. Now if you hit on that -5 hit you get both that AND the lower from your casting.
This is what I see a lot of the Magus defenders ignoring. If you hit on your 2nd weapon strike your spell is at an effective -8 to -10 due to lower ability mod, lower proficiency, no potency bonus, etc.Also, the ignoring MAP bit means they can use spells that normal gishes can't effectively combine with strikes.This isn't really true. First, the MAO of the strike you hit with if also the MAP of the spell so you hit on that -5, so is the spell. Even without MAP's, you have a lower casting stat and proficiency so you have a pseudo-MAP from that. Now if you hit on that -5 hit you get both that AND the lower from your casting.
Trying to hit on your third Strike with a charged weapon is truly an act of desperation.