
Ludovicus |

The magus's spell attack roll and DC is more or less within sight of a caster's at low levels, but drops off precipitously later. The problem is worst at very high levels, once the caster gets their apex item. (The magus is 3 points behind then, and 4 points behind at 20th.) To mitigate this, the magus should get to use their spellcasting ability score for attacks, which can be flavored as a kind of arcane bond.

HumbleGamer |
Let's see in details
Without Flaw rule variant
-lvl 1-4 = MAGUS DC -1 compared to "pure" spellcasters
-lvl 5-6 = MAGUS equal to "pure" spellcasters
-lvl 7-10 = MAGUS DC -2 compared to "pure" spellcasters
-lvl 11-14 = MAGUS DC equal to "pure spellcasters"
-lvl 15-16 = MAGUS DC -2 compared to "pure" spellcasters
-lvl 17-19 = MAGUS DC -3 compared to "pure" spellcasters
-lvl 20 = MAGUS DC -4 compared to pure spellcasters
With flaw rule variant
-lvl 1-6 = MAGUS equal to "pure" spellcasters-lvl 7-10 = MAGUS DC -2 compared to "pure" spellcasters
-lvl 11-14 = MAGUS DC equal to "pure spellcasters"
-lvl 15-16 = MAGUS DC -2 compared to "pure" spellcasters
-lvl 17-20 = MAGUS DC -3 compared to "pure" spellcasters
Imo, it seems pretty balanced for a combatant class.
Asking to use INT for both physical and spell attack is Imo something definitely out of control ( the class is already soo damn good because it's a full combatant with better armor proficiency which is also able to cast high level spells ).
Lightdroplet |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

I said this before, but I feel like a simpler, more elegant way to do that without relying on ability substitutions or anything like that is to allow Stiking Spell to carry over the weapon's attack roll bonus to the spell attack roll or DC. That way, the disparity become null or only -1, but only when the magus is using their core feature, and it fits with the flavor of using your weapon as a focus for your magic.

Xethik |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Let's see in details
Without Flaw rule variant
Quote:-lvl 1-4 = MAGUS DC -1 compared to "pure" spellcasters
-lvl 5-6 = MAGUS equal to "pure" spellcasters
-lvl 7-10 = MAGUS DC -2 compared to "pure" spellcasters
-lvl 11-14 = MAGUS DC equal to "pure spellcasters"
-lvl 15-16 = MAGUS DC -2 compared to "pure" spellcasters
-lvl 17-19 = MAGUS DC -3 compared to "pure" spellcasters
-lvl 20 = MAGUS DC -4 compared to pure spellcasters
With flaw rule variant
Quote:
-lvl 1-6 = MAGUS equal to "pure" spellcasters-lvl 7-10 = MAGUS DC -2 compared to "pure" spellcasters
-lvl 11-14 = MAGUS DC equal to "pure spellcasters"
-lvl 15-16 = MAGUS DC -2 compared to "pure" spellcasters
-lvl 17-20 = MAGUS DC -3 compared to "pure" spellcasters
Imo, it seems pretty balanced for a combatant class.
Asking to use INT for both physical and spell attack is Imo something definitely out of control ( the class is already soo damn good because it's a full combatant with better armor proficiency which is also able to cast high level spells ).
You can't use a Flaw to end up with an 18 starting Int unless it is your class boost. You can only ever end a character creation step with a net +2 in each attribute.

Ludovicus |

I said this before, but I feel like a simpler, more elegant way to do that without relying on ability substitutions or anything like that is to allow Stiking Spell to carry over the weapon's attack roll bonus to the spell attack roll or DC. That way, the disparity become null or only -1, but only when the magus is using their core feature, and it fits with the flavor of using your weapon as a focus for your magic.
This would be fine, too.