| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Trying to hit on your third Strike with a charged weapon is truly an act of desperation.
If your weapon is still charged and you're making your third strike, your spell CANNOT hit. It's at an effective -12 to -15.
I didn't say 3rd strike, I said 2nd.Trying to hit on your third Strike with a charged weapon is truly an act of desperation.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.
Your second attempt should be at 0 penalty if you are spending a spell slot for it. Are you trying to waste your spells?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
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.They get a lot more than that.
They get about the equivalent of two general feats from Shield Block and Battlefield Surveyor, whose initiative boost is on-par with Incredible Initiative.
They also get two bonus class feats that they can swap out each day, as well as Attack of Opportunity, which is also worth a class feat.
Finally, they get armor expertise, as well as access to some extremely powerful feats at level 10, such as Agile Grace, Debilitating Shot, Disarming Twist, and Combat Reflexes. Each of these is on-par with the best core class features of other classes. Agile Grace puts you on-par with a Flurry Ranger, Debilitating Shot and Disarming Twist give your party a devastating action economy advantage against bosses, and Combat Reflexes is pure extra action economy.
6th-level class feat, let's not forget. They also have great combat selections and can support any playstyle you want and be good at it because of the base chassis and feat selection.
If someone thinks that Fighters only gets a +2 accuracy above other classes, they're in for a rude awakening. Rogues and Fighters are Paizo's babies and as such are a cut above.
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.
I would take issue with Magus being a full caster, druid yes, cleric yes, Magus absolutely not. 3 slots per level including 10th level spell access and legendary casting makes a "full caster". And there are Wizards and Sorcerers who have even greater slot access.
I only got to play a level 8 Magus for one test session but I felt constrained heavily by action use, and leaned on haste and first round full buffs to basically function (2-H weapon, MC wiz, Martial Caster,Staff of Divination + potency, striking & shifting runes)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The "math says magus is terrible" stuff floating around the boards is debatable and dependent upon certain assumptions that can be shifted in game play relatively easily.
In play I have found it true that it is a mistake to assume that you will always be able to striking spell and attack every round, and choosing to do so with a spell slot spell when the situation is unfavorable to you is going to lead to frustration, but full casters are often in the same boat math wise.
What I have experienced (with three separate magi in playtest situations) is that it is pretty easy with tactical play to "break" the math in the Magi's favor and make it so that they score crits with their weapon attacks about 20-25% of the time. I make way less attack rolls than I have with any other martial, and it plays much more like a chess match of trying to lure the enemy into where I want them to be at the start of my turn, but it is a great "thinkers" martial class. Right up there with the investigator.
Lining it up so that you can true strike with a weapon attack is way too much work for too little benefit for an every round activity, but when you cast your highest level attack roll spell into a weapon and still have it charged at the start of your turn, having a true strike option (from staff, or extra spell slot) is much better than expecting it to land from swinging twice.
As fun as crits are generally with PF2, I have had the most fun I have ever had with any class landing those double crits with weapon and spell with the magus. It has happened at least once every session (but only once with a spell slot spell). I don't know how much more "better" you can make the magus without creating a broken class.
I do think that the Caster MC path looks really appealing on paper but leads to less fun in play, because getting cool attack feats from your dedication is a lot more fun than just getting more spells. The spells that are the most fun to cast with your striking spell set up are your highest 2 level spell slots followed by cantrips. Any spells you get from a dedication are just buff stuff that are often available through equipment purchases that you have extra wealth for due to your focus powers. I think a lot of people hate that, but it works really well in play. You just lose too many feats that let you be a better magus if you drop half of your class feats to be just slightly better off spell casting-wise than a MC fighter/wizard.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The math is about as debatable as wearing a mask
While I don't disagree with your point, I think you're comparing apples to oranges there.
The math is off if we can only under or over perform.
I agree. It seems like Magus as currently written has a feast or famine playstyle of very large highs and abysmal lows, even more than Swashbuckler. I don't personally think it's a fun design, and it can be overall unhealthy for the game by encouraging stacking everything on one character for exponential returns.
|
The math is about as debatable as wearing a maskWhile I don't disagree with your point, I think you're comparing apples to oranges there.
The math is off if we can only under or over perform.I agree. It seems like Magus as currently written has a feast or famine playstyle of very large highs and abysmal lows, even more than Swashbuckler. I don't personally think it's a fun design, and it can be overall unhealthy for the game by encouraging stacking everything on one character for exponential returns.
Apples and oranges can always be compared, they're both fruit. It's not like I'm comparing apples to steaks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You will be renouncing to skill checks like
...
- Recall Knowledge
The first-level magus feat combat assessment does just that.
Since you have to hit and usually get the knowledge after you've finished your turn, it's not the greatest. However, it still counts as Recall Knowledge while spellstriking.
Yeah, it's not great to figure out what it's worst save is after you use your slot to attack.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
First off I wish people would let us know if they've actually play tested the class or are just crunching numbers and speculating.
Playtested in several different tables online.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
you cannot go invisible and use spell strike in the same round unless you are above 7th level, have quickened spell strike, and burn that once a day ability.
moving to absorb the aoo is pretty gamey but i wont fault you for it.
having shield block outside of the shield cantrip as a magus invalidates your use of any of the 3 synthesis.
i playtested both, you either are ok with multiple rounds of setup before you participate, or you did some things wrong.
having shield block outside of the shield cantrip as a magus invalidates your use of any of the 3 synthesis.
You can use a buckler to keep a free hand for Shooting Star and Slide Casting.
having shield block outside of the shield cantrip as a magus invalidates your use of any of the 3 synthesis.You can use a buckler to keep a free hand for Shooting Star and Slide Casting.
Fair point on the buckler
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Playtested the Magus 5 times, two as a player and 3 as the GM. Our group also found it to be a bit of a feast or famine class. Although our opinion does not necessarily reflect the consensus, the crit fishing aspect only seemed fun in our first playthroughs.
The latest two either had the players completely focusing on cantrip use, multiclassing Investigator or just focusing on combat maneuvers and energized strikes.
|
The math is about as debatable as wearing a maskWhile I don't disagree with your point, I think you're comparing apples to oranges there.
The math is off if we can only under or over perform.I agree. It seems like Magus as currently written has a feast or famine playstyle of very large highs and abysmal lows, even more than Swashbuckler. I don't personally think it's a fun design, and it can be overall unhealthy for the game by encouraging stacking everything on one character for exponential returns.
Here's what I think needs to be done:
1) 2 or 3 spell slots per level, and they don't drop off after leveling up. (This leaves the Magus with lower level slots to spend if needed on weaker enemies or for non-combat spells. There is no need to only allow them 4 spells!)
2) The melee attack is included in the casting of the spell. (Just like the spell attack when making a range touch spell, or a ray. You don't cast Shocking Grasp with 2 actions and then spend another action to actually touch/attack the target, it's included in the spell automatically!)
3) By combining the Spellstrike with the casting of the spell, that saves 1 action, thus helping the Magus' action economy, allowing a stride, metamagic, Sustain, etc.
4) That Sustain from #3 above is important, because if the attack misses, the magus should be able to sustain the spell in the weapon until he hits or he gives up on it/casts another spell instead.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The math is about as debatable as wearing a mask, and everything else you've said has just shown how poorly the crit mechanic works for Striking Spell. The math is off if we can only under or over perform.
I think in general, people generally expect a bell curve of value. Most of the time decent, sometimes bad, sometimes really good.
Now, there can be hiccups and bumps in that bell curve, and its generally preferred that there is to create variation between classes. Circumstances then help vary the curve further.
I'm with you in feeling the curve may average to be a "good number" but that the curve feels inverted a bit for Striking Spell and a bit polarizing (in both senses).
Eldritch Shot is mathematically on point for instance, but if Striking Spell were to work that way and Class Paths were to stay the same I don't know that'd feel satisfying to me personally either.
Some people see the Magus as a big risk class (though I'd argue they should feel less "risky" than at least the Swashbuckler). I personally don't see them that way always (Kensai definitely) but they did derive a lot of value from Keen weapons and critical hits, so that theme was present.
How risky do you think the Magus should feel?
I think that would be a good indicator of how often each of us expect them to succeed and how great that success should be when they do succeed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I personally want them to be a very low risk class. I want to feel like I outwitted and out maneuvered my opponents, not out lucked them. I think there's a place for high risk/high reward play as the default, but I don't want Magus to be it.The math is about as debatable as wearing a mask, and everything else you've said has just shown how poorly the crit mechanic works for Striking Spell. The math is off if we can only under or over perform.I think in general, people generally expect a bell curve of value. Most of the time decent, sometimes bad, sometimes really good.
Now, there can be hiccups and bumps in that bell curve, and its generally preferred that there is to create variation between classes. Circumstances then help vary the curve further.
I'm with you in feeling the curve may average to be a "good number" but that the curve feels inverted a bit for Striking Spell and a bit polarizing (in both senses).
Eldritch Shot is mathematically on point for instance, but if Striking Spell were to work that way and Class Paths were to stay the same I don't know that'd feel satisfying to me personally either.
Some people see the Magus as a big risk class (though I'd argue they should feel less "risky" than at least the Swashbuckler). I personally don't see them that way always (Kensai definitely) but they did derive a lot of value from Keen weapons and critical hits, so that theme was present.
How risky do you think the Magus should feel?
I think that would be a good indicator of how often each of us expect them to succeed and how great that success should be when they do succeed.
Is this not the definition of tactical play? Getting flanking, finding circumstance bonuses, taking advantage of the environment? No class gets more benefit from doing this.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is this not the definition of tactical play? Getting flanking, finding circumstance bonuses, taking advantage of the environment? No class gets more benefit from doing this.I personally want them to be a very low risk class. I want to feel like I outwitted and out maneuvered my opponents, not out lucked them. I think there's a place for high risk/high reward play as the default, but I don't want Magus to be it.The math is about as debatable as wearing a mask, and everything else you've said has just shown how poorly the crit mechanic works for Striking Spell. The math is off if we can only under or over perform.I think in general, people generally expect a bell curve of value. Most of the time decent, sometimes bad, sometimes really good.
Now, there can be hiccups and bumps in that bell curve, and its generally preferred that there is to create variation between classes. Circumstances then help vary the curve further.
I'm with you in feeling the curve may average to be a "good number" but that the curve feels inverted a bit for Striking Spell and a bit polarizing (in both senses).
Eldritch Shot is mathematically on point for instance, but if Striking Spell were to work that way and Class Paths were to stay the same I don't know that'd feel satisfying to me personally either.
Some people see the Magus as a big risk class (though I'd argue they should feel less "risky" than at least the Swashbuckler). I personally don't see them that way always (Kensai definitely) but they did derive a lot of value from Keen weapons and critical hits, so that theme was present.
How risky do you think the Magus should feel?
I think that would be a good indicator of how often each of us expect them to succeed and how great that success should be when they do succeed.
That's actually part of the problem for Magus and the game.
If he gets more benefit than anyone her doesn't scale like anyone so he will have less tables where he's fun to play.
Rather he should scale similarly to other classes not better. This way we have a class that is balanced along all levels of play as opposed to weak at one end just to get to on par at the other.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I personally want them to be a very low risk class. I want to feel like I outwitted and out maneuvered my opponents, not out lucked them. I think there's a place for high risk/high reward play as the default, but I don't want Magus to be it.The math is about as debatable as wearing a mask, and everything else you've said has just shown how poorly the crit mechanic works for Striking Spell. The math is off if we can only under or over perform.I think in general, people generally expect a bell curve of value. Most of the time decent, sometimes bad, sometimes really good.
Now, there can be hiccups and bumps in that bell curve, and its generally preferred that there is to create variation between classes. Circumstances then help vary the curve further.
I'm with you in feeling the curve may average to be a "good number" but that the curve feels inverted a bit for Striking Spell and a bit polarizing (in both senses).
Eldritch Shot is mathematically on point for instance, but if Striking Spell were to work that way and Class Paths were to stay the same I don't know that'd feel satisfying to me personally either.
Some people see the Magus as a big risk class (though I'd argue they should feel less "risky" than at least the Swashbuckler). I personally don't see them that way always (Kensai definitely) but they did derive a lot of value from Keen weapons and critical hits, so that theme was present.
How risky do you think the Magus should feel?
I think that would be a good indicator of how often each of us expect them to succeed and how great that success should be when they do succeed.
Completely agree. Magi spend a lot of time honing combat and magic to blend them effectively. They are not a Warlord that spends their years fighting in formation and participating in super elaborate drills.
Moreover, the narrative of spellstrike should indicate reliability. You’re imbuing a spell to deliver it through a weapon, not aiming it with a finger, wand or focus, so when said weapon deals, lets say, piercing damage, the odds should be for the spell to do something. At the very least the target should be considered flat-footed. The weapon has already hit.
The way it currently works, the weapon only discharges reliably when the Magus crits, which would mean a Magus would have to imbue their spell and then try hard as hell to hit that vital spot. Stabbing, slashing and bludgeoning at every other part is likely causing the spell to disperse, which is odd. Narratively, at least, this does not add up, because the point of delivering a weapon through a strike is for it to affect the target if said strike hits.
The Magus’ accuracy should be as reliable as their martial prowess.
High risk/reward could be a feat tree or even a Synthesis. That feels like one very specific type of Magus
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Completely agree. Magi spend a lot of time honing combat and magic to blend them effectively. They are not a Warlord that spends their years fighting in formation and participating in super elaborate drills.
Moreover, the narrative of spellstrike should indicate reliability. You’re imbuing a...
I agree. If you have a flaming & shock magic weapon, you don't need to make additional attack rolls for the flaming and shock effects. So why should a weapon with Shocking Grasp imbued in it that hits the target have to make a separate attack for the spell? I thought the spell merely required a touch (or at least it used to), and that touch has obviously taken place on a hit.
Perhaps, at the very least, it the weapon attack succeeds, the spell cannot crit fail, any crit fails become failures instead. Or use the result of the weapon attack for the spell too.
|
Completely agree. Magi spend a lot of time honing combat and magic to blend them effectively. They are not a Warlord that spends their years fighting in formation and participating in super elaborate drills.
Moreover, the narrative of spellstrike should indicate reliability. You’re imbuing a...
I agree. If you have a flaming & shock magic weapon, you don't need to make additional attack rolls for the flaming and shock effects. So why should a weapon with Shocking Grasp imbued in it that hits the target have to make a separate attack for the spell? I thought the spell merely required a touch (or at least it used to), and that touch has obviously taken place on a hit.
Perhaps, at the very least, it the weapon attack succeeds, the spell cannot crit fail, any crit fails become failures instead. Or use the result of the weapon attack for the spell too.
The latter works for attack spells, and is how the eldritch archer archetype handles it, but would be a bad idea for save spells. Critting a low AC, high will save caster shouldn’t mean the Dominate automatically works at maximum effect. It also means you can completely ignore the lowered spell attack roll/save DC which is presumably one of the balance points of the Magus.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The latter works for attack spells, and is how the eldritch archer archetype handles it, but would be a bad idea for save spells. Critting a low AC, high will save caster shouldn’t mean the Dominate automatically works at maximum effect. It also means you can completely ignore the lowered spell attack roll/save DC which is presumably one of the balance points of the Magus.Completely agree. Magi spend a lot of time honing combat and magic to blend them effectively. They are not a Warlord that spends their years fighting in formation and participating in super elaborate drills.
Moreover, the narrative of spellstrike should indicate reliability. You’re imbuing a...
I agree. If you have a flaming & shock magic weapon, you don't need to make additional attack rolls for the flaming and shock effects. So why should a weapon with Shocking Grasp imbued in it that hits the target have to make a separate attack for the spell? I thought the spell merely required a touch (or at least it used to), and that touch has obviously taken place on a hit.
Perhaps, at the very least, it the weapon attack succeeds, the spell cannot crit fail, any crit fails become failures instead. Or use the result of the weapon attack for the spell too.
Actually, I quite agree with you, but let me just point out that save spells usually inflict lesser versions of their effects or half damage on a success by their target, so, narratively, they would not feel as out of place as attack spells, where its either, crit, hit or miss.
Taking your own example, I do not think that a Dominate delivered through spellstrike should mean a failure on the save, but its only going to do nothing if the target crits their save. In addition to that, you can kind of narratively justify it doing nothing on Fortitude and Will saves (Reflex its trickier).
Which is why I think the best mechanic (I'm not saying balanced) in the rules that narratively translates how spellstrike should work is rinnarv bontimar (the NPC on Age of Ashes)'s version of it. For attack spells, a hit with the weapon is a hit. For save spells, its a penalty.
Spell Strike (Free Action) Frequency once per round; Trigger Rinnarv begins to Cast a Spell that targets at least 1 creature; Effect Rinnarv channels his spell through his blade. He makes a Strike with his blade against a target within reach. If the Strike is successful, the target is automatically subject to the spell. If the spell required an attack roll, the target is hit. If the spell required a saving throw, the target takes a –4 status penalty to its saving throw instead. If the spell could target multiple creatures, it targets only the creature Rinnarv hit with his Strike.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like having striking spell, and it’s benefits work on as many spells as possible. I really hope they don’t alter the mechanic to provide a benefit on fewer spells. Right now the crit adjustment on striking spell is most fun on nondamage spells because the magus can actually end up with a higher chance of landing a critical fail effect than a full caster because a full caster. Which is really cool when you land a decent weapon crit against a solo boss monster and get to reverse incapacitation on it.
As far as 2 handed weapon damage, that is something that almost needs its own full thread. A magus with a two handed weapon is nearly a full fighter ( on 1 point of accuracy behind at nearly half of levels, since you don’t get on level runes at the beginning of the level outside of using subsystems that aren’t designed to play well with magus potency anyway). How on earth are cantrips supposed to compete damagewise with the best single target damage weapon attack builds and not tip everything over into the casters favor generally?
Making sure that spells have interesting and unique effects on crit sand giving magi better access to those cries than traditional casters is an interesting way to make those cantrips worth it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Right now the crit adjustment on striking spell is most fun on nondamage spells because the magus can actually end up with a higher chance of landing a critical fail effect than a full caster because a full caster. Which is really cool when you land a decent weapon crit against a solo boss monster and get to reverse incapacitation on it.
I can't say I can agree. It doesn't happen often enough to be fun to me. I personally am not into the true strike 2 rounds to hit crit fishing method [it's super un-fun to me]. Myself, I'd rather see the crit effect dropped so we can get something better for the magus.
How on earth are cantrips supposed to compete damagewise with the best single target damage weapon attack builds and not tip everything over into the casters favor generally?
I don't know that they have to. Myself, I prefer to cast message for the temp hp and then get 2 actions [like strike]. The best way to deal with cantrip damage is to ignore it. ;)
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
if cantrip spell strike isnt your bread and butter
and spell slots are y our burst
and the class doesnt scale equally to other classes, as opposed to what it is currently, underperforming in exchange to be on par at higher teamwork/competency.
then i'll write magus off.
im not playing a magus to attack 2-3 times with a weapon 90% of my career
im not playing a magus to cast fear into my weapon, though i have nothing against it
and i definitely dont play any class for it to be weak at the low end in exchange to be mostly at par at the higher end, thats not fun at all.
Perhaps, at the very least, it the weapon attack succeeds, the spell cannot crit fail, any crit fails become failures instead. Or use the result of the weapon attack for the spell too.
Fail and Crit-Fail with a spell with an attack roll are the same thing: nothing.
For saving throw spells you'd have used the wrong words, and regardless, I would say that whatever you do, you have to make it make sense for both types of spell.
if cantrip spell strike isnt your bread and butter
and spell slots are y our burst
and the class doesnt scale equally to other classes, as opposed to what it is currently, underperforming in exchange to be on par at higher teamwork/competency.
then i'll write magus off.
im not playing a magus to attack 2-3 times with a weapon 90% of my career
im not playing a magus to cast fear into my weapon, though i have nothing against it
and i definitely dont play any class for it to be weak at the low end in exchange to be mostly at par at the higher end, thats not fun at all.
Myself I hope they get single action cantrips and focus spells that DO make it worth while: my comments are on it's current form. Honestly, for the most part spellstrike as it is is more for the synthesis abilities then for any real benefit to that turns damage: the lone benefit other than that is a 2nd rounds true strike crit fishing expedition.
|
|
Rinnarv Bontimar wrote:
Spell Strike (Free Action) Frequency once per round; Trigger Rinnarv begins to Cast a Spell that targets at least 1 creature; Effect Rinnarv channels his spell through his blade. He makes a Strike with his blade against a target within reach. If the Strike is successful, the target is automatically subject to the spell. If the spell required an attack roll, the target is hit. If the spell required a saving throw, the target takes a –4 status penalty to its saving throw instead. If the spell could target multiple creatures, it targets only the creature Rinnarv hit with his Strike.
Yes, that should work fine. It uses 1 roll for spell attack spells, and gives a bonus on save spells.
While I bought the first 5 Age of Ashes books, I never got the last one because I couldn't find anyone willing to play it with me, so I stopped buying them. Interesting that Paizo included a Magus before they created the actual class, but why would they change Spellstrike for the class playtest? The AoA version is MUCH better! Rinnarv has 4 spellslots for every spell level, including 1st through 9th!
|
Rinnarv Bontimar wrote:
Spell Strike (Free Action) Frequency once per round; Trigger Rinnarv begins to Cast a Spell that targets at least 1 creature; Effect Rinnarv channels his spell through his blade. He makes a Strike with his blade against a target within reach. If the Strike is successful, the target is automatically subject to the spell. If the spell required an attack roll, the target is hit. If the spell required a saving throw, the target takes a –4 status penalty to its saving throw instead. If the spell could target multiple creatures, it targets only the creature Rinnarv hit with his Strike.
Yes, that should work fine. It uses 1 roll for spell attack spells, and gives a bonus on save spells.
While I bought the first 5 Age of Ashes books, I never got the last one because I couldn't find anyone willing to play it with me, so I stopped buying them. Interesting that Paizo included a Magus before they created the actual class, but why would they change Spellstrike for the class playtest? The AoA version is MUCH better! Rinnarv has 4 spellslots for every spell level, including 1st through 9th!
Rinnarv is also an NPC who is an angelic Sorc (only slightly lower spell proficiency) with the proficiency and damage of a fighter otherwise. Way too much for a PC class, and heck even that version of spellstrike might be a bit much. -4 on a save is big, contingent on hitting your attack I guess and you lose the slot with no effect if you miss. But still Rinnarv has no way to boost his accuracy, outside of a 3rd level heroism. PC abilities have to be balanced such that they’re good at base, and not broken when boosts are applied. Rinnarv’s version is certainly good at base, but might be a little bit broken when boosts are applied.
I’m of the opinion that simply lowering it to a -2 on the save (-4 on crit) is enough to use it as written though.