| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"the number of spells" not "the spells you know".
So what, a wizard needs a separate page on their spellbook for Shocking Grasp level 2?
Explain to me how someone who knows how to cast Wish wouldn't know how to cast Mage Armor.prepared casters can prepare their spells in heigher level slots as they wish.
No need for extra pages.
BUT
Staves dont give you the opportunity to heighten their spells. They always cast them at the level indicated by the staff.
No one said you forget how to cast Shocking grasp. Just that your Shocking grasp is minimum level 3, while Staff shocking grasp is maximum level 1.
So what ? You're not using your slots, you use Staff charges. You have slots compatibles with the spells (since you can use higher slots) so where is the issue ? It says "of an appropriate level" not "the". Meaning, if we go by raw, that as long as you can cast any of those spells with at least one of your slots, you can use the staff. Since some people love to use RAW.
But honestly it shows how flimsy the magus mechanic is rn, tethering on the edge of a rule interpretation to make it work "optimaly"
"the number"
"The number of spells you can prepare. Prepare if the only word you need to look at.
You can't cast a spell unless you prepare it. In order to prepare it you need a slot. This leads to not having a slot meaning you can cast a spell. It's a simple logical progression of requirements.
So what, a wizard needs a separate page on their spellbook for Shocking Grasp level 2?
Core, Heightened Spells:
"A prepared spellcaster can heighten a spell by preparing it in a higher-level slot than its normal spell level, while a spontaneous spellcaster can heighten a spell by casting it using a higher-level spell slot, so long as they know the spell at that level (see Heightened Spontaneous Spells below). When you heighten your spell, the spell’s level increases to match the higher level of the spell slot you’ve prepared it in or used to cast it."Knowing a spell and being able to cast it are wo different things: for instance, a spell in your book but one you haven't prepared isn't a spell you can cast. As such, there is nothing that stops you from heightening a spell to prepare in in a slot you have. SO you sure don't need more than one Shocking Grasp spell but that in no way means you can cast it as a second level spell: you lost that ability and can only cast it as a second level spell.
Think of it this way: you can heighten a 1st level spell all the way to a 10th level spell. Does that mean my 1st level caster can cast 10th level spells? If you don't think so, why is this different?
"the number of spells" not "the spells you know".
So what, a wizard needs a separate page on their spellbook for Shocking Grasp level 2?
Explain to me how someone who knows how to cast Wish wouldn't know how to cast Mage Armor.
A Sorcerer needs to learn Shocking Grasp level 2 as a separate spell, unless they take Shocking Grasp as one of their Signature Spells.
If they didn't take it as a signature, they would be unable to cast it except out of lvl 1 spell slots (or whichever spell level they know it at).However, since you can still use a staff after expending your spell slots of the appropriate level, I'd say it's obviously intended to be allowed.
It's just not clarified that it's allowed. Frankly there are probably going to be a lot of clarifications added to the weird spellcasting mechanic of the Magus/Summoner.
I think it is valuable to point out that this issue of spells and spell level creates some confusion in the way the playtest document is written. I think it would be a big mistake to playtest the magus with the assumption it is incapable of using a staff, and that is an intended class restriction. Everyone should playtest it as it feels most relevant to you and report that information in your survey, but at best this is just an editing error that will clearly get fixed before the book is published. Otherwise a casting MC dedication and basic spell casting become absolutely mandatory, and everything else about spamming true strike is still on the table as far as striking spell is concerned.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorcerers are not prepared casters. But clearly this is just interpretations at this point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But clearly this is just interpretations at this point.
I'm honestly curious: What isn't clear? I quoted the book that casting a spell requires a prepared spell and that you need a slot of that level to prepare. I'm not sure what more proof you'd need.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Whoa, sure is rough to have whole chapter of my spellbook going to ashes whenever I learn a new spell level eh?
Seriously, use some common sense too. If you know how to cast a 8th level spell, you know how to cast a 1st level one.
Spell slots are just "memory space" in the character's mind to keep the spells ready. The magus has less than the wizard and focuses on keeping what little space he has to hold as much power as possible.
If you're going to try calling for common sense, you should probably apply some and burn the strawman.
No-one is saying you don't know the spells anymore, or that you can't cast them anymore. Just that you can't cast them at a level beneath your slots anymore.
You still know True Strike. You can't still cast True Strike as a 1st level spell, because you can't cast 1st level spells.
Being able to understand the distinction is important for following this conversation.
I think it is valuable to point out that this issue of spells and spell level creates some confusion in the way the playtest document is written. I think it would be a big mistake to playtest the magus with the assumption it is incapable of using a staff, and that is an intended class restriction. Everyone should playtest it as it feels most relevant to you and report that information in your survey, but at best this is just an editing error that will clearly get fixed before the book is published. Otherwise a casting MC dedication and basic spell casting become absolutely mandatory, and everything else about spamming true strike is still on the table as far as striking spell is concerned.
There is definitely value in playtesting with the assumption that you can cast from the staff, just don't pretend like there's no possible issue with that.
I'm not 100% convinced that it's the intent that you can't, just that the rules don't look like they support it, and we should be pushing for clarification rather than dismissing the idea that it could be a problem out of hand.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
playtest without magical equipment, then with, expecting to be given a true strike staff and all the little things you want is not how you test balance, its how you test one spectrum of said balance.
I agree that the writing in the this playtest makes the staff's wording of being "able to cast spells of an appropriate level" a little confusing but nothing about casting spells from a staff demands that you have spell slots of a specific level, so at best we get a gray area that can't possibly be intended as a long term limit on either the magus or the Summoner, as all that really does is say "you probably have to MC into a caster archetype for these classes to be functional." It doesn't really create an intended limit on a magus wanting to do what ever is necessary to get and use a staff of divination to make their weapon attacks have the highest crit chance possible.
I agree that the writing in the this playtest makes the staff's wording of being "able to cast spells of an appropriate level" a little confusing but nothing about casting spells from a staff demands that you have spell slots of a specific level
Then would you say a 1st level slot would allow you to cast a 5th level spell? If not, is it because that don't have a 5th level slot? What makes it less appropriate that someone with a 5th level slot but not having a 1st level slot?
we can probably let the developers worry about how to fix the wording. Point out that there is ambiguity is probably enough. Even if the answer is that the magus cant use a staff of divination at a base level. The only thing that changes about the value of the staff of divination to magus is that they now have to MC into another casting class to get it. Something that is probably worth your 2nd, 4th on anyway if not also your 12th.
I agree that the writing in the this playtest makes the staff's wording of being "able to cast spells of an appropriate level" a little confusing but nothing about casting spells from a staff demands that you have spell slots of a specific levelThen would you say a 1st level slot would allow you to cast a 5th level spell? If not, is it because that don't have a 5th level slot? What makes it less appropriate that someone with a 5th level slot but not having a 1st level slot?
At a high level sense, it would be appropriate to cast a 1st level spell in a 5th level slot. It would be inappropriate to cast a 5th level spell in a 1st level slot.
Whether or not the rules of the game support that, from a purely understanding level, does that not seem like a possible interpretation?
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
we can probably let the developers worry about how to fix the wording. Point out that there is ambiguity is probably enough. Even if the answer is that the magus cant use a staff of divination at a base level. The only thing that changes about the value of the staff of divination to magus is that they now have to MC into another casting class to get it. Something that is probably worth your 2nd, 4th on anyway if not also your 12th.
hey guys how should i play magus
by not taking magus feats
k
I agree that the writing in the this playtest makes the staff's wording of being "able to cast spells of an appropriate level" a little confusing but nothing about casting spells from a staff demands that you have spell slots of a specific levelThen would you say a 1st level slot would allow you to cast a 5th level spell? If not, is it because that don't have a 5th level slot? What makes it less appropriate that someone with a 5th level slot but not having a 1st level slot?
Arcane spell casting tells you that you don't get the ability to cast higher level spells than what is listed on the chart. It doesn't say anything about losing the ability to cast spells of a level that you no longer have slots for.
we can probably let the developers worry about how to fix the wording. Point out that there is ambiguity is probably enough. Even if the answer is that the magus cant use a staff of divination at a base level. The only thing that changes about the value of the staff of divination to magus is that they now have to MC into another casting class to get it. Something that is probably worth your 2nd, 4th on anyway if not also your 12th.hey guys how should i play magus
by not taking magus feats
k
Which is why I don't think the intention is that the magus will not be able to use a staff. I am just saying that arguing that the current wording makes using the staff of divination more difficult doesn't make getting access to it any worse of a magus build. Especially when those other feats give you so much casting versatility. I don't really see the point of pushing that issue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
we can probably let the developers worry about how to fix the wording.
As a playtest like this is often about pushing things to see it they break, I'm not sure there is anything to fix: They might be using the playtest to see how it shakes out and may change it depending on how it plays out.
Point out that there is ambiguity is probably enough.
Not if they want to know how it works not being able to use a lower level staff.
Even if the answer is that the magus cant use a staff of divination at a base level. The only thing that changes about the value of the staff of divination to magus is that they now have to MC into another casting class to get it.
To be fair, there are a lot of other reasons they might want to MC.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To be fair, there are a lot of other reasons they might want to MC.
Off topic, but gits & shiggles is a good reason, right?
I've played a couple of sessions now with as vanilla a magus as I could think to pull together.I'm toying with trying something with sentinel dedication for scaling heavy armour prof, shield cantrip, and never using Striking Spell at all, 'spellstriking' only after capturing.
Off topic, but gits & shiggles is a good reason, right?
Sure! *thumbs up* Have at it. :)
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just popping in here to voice my opinion, which is that I feel when people are doing calculations for how much damage a magus should do, they shouldn't use spells from spell slots. It seems impressive, but you can only do it once, maaaybe twice a day. Cantrips should really be the only thing we're focusing on. It's not like when people look at monk dpr they factor in ki blast.
I also found myself disagreeing more and more with the initial post in this thread the more assumed buffs the magus had. Okay he cast two focus spells (only have one focus point, two actions)... Okay he's hasted, so needs party support to pull off these combos at all... Okay he's got +2 stat boost, more party support... Okay he used fiery body, more prep time and a precious spell slot... It's just too much.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not factoring in spell slot spells is a mistake against a major target. You use your limited resources in these encounters (this one was a level +2 ancient dragon) and the magus should be using their focus spells in them as well. I also spent all of 750 gold out of the total wealth of a 13th level character. A real 13th level character should have lots of items to throw at a serious enemy as well. You have to look at the optimal sitation a magus can be in when facing this opposition as well as the bad. Everyone else's math has been focused on a magus with minimal equipment using cantrips against a serious threat. That is only telling one story at not a very authentic one to my actual play in PF2.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just popping in here to voice my opinion, which is that I feel when people are doing calculations for how much damage a magus should do, they shouldn't use spells from spell slots. It seems impressive, but you can only do it once, maaaybe twice a day. Cantrips should really be the only thing we're focusing on. It's not like when people look at monk dpr they factor in ki blast.
That's been done too. Electric Arc (2 targets) + Strike out-damages anything the magus can do with Spellstrike.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just popping in here to voice my opinion, which is that I feel when people are doing calculations for how much damage a magus should do, they shouldn't use spells from spell slots. It seems impressive, but you can only do it once, maaaybe twice a day. Cantrips should really be the only thing we're focusing on. It's not like when people look at monk dpr they factor in ki blast.That's been done too. Electric Arc (2 targets) + Strike out-damages anything the magus can do with Spellstrike.
Wich is g&* d&+n hilarious
I apologize for my tone last night.
At this point, when going all in against a powerful enemy, it is extremely likely that you are working with at least a +2 status bonus to attacks, and against a solo monster, the whole party should be down to help make sure you get flanking. You also might be dealing with a frightened condition, from dealing with a dragon, so we will wash out any potential debuff your party will have worked out.
You ended up including the +2 status bonus in your strike and spell success stats. Looks like an error?
Appreciate your choice of items, a staff of divination with shifting is really helpful for the truestrikes. In my playtest yesterday (level 8) I used one.
I was able to prebuff with haste in 1 encounter, but I don't think having a round to buff is the default in Pathfinder 2e. With 1 min buff durations and in combat action costs, I think we need to assume our first round as a Magus is all buffs (haste + magus potency), which didn't feel great in our playtest.
I posted a little more detail from our playtest here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/iqnmn3/magus_summoner_playte st_results/
Your probabilities aren't right for striking or striking with true strike. 29 attack modifier vs 34 AC can only miss on rolls 1 through 4 which is 20% not 25%. The formula for rolling a specific number when you roll twice and take the highest is (2*X-1)/D^2 where X is the desired number and D is the dice size.
Oh thank you. I've been using a graphic to figure this out. I supposed I would have stumbled on the formulas eventually, but not soon.
Somebody got a C in precalc.
That somebody is me.
Any character playing a "striker"(or big single target damage) role is going to benefit massively from a party taking steps to focus on making their attacks as accurate and supported as possible. Almost any martial except the champion can easily fill this role now, but what moves the Magus into the "dependent upon party support" role is how differently critical hits work in PF2 and how much more possible it is in this edition to accomplish big shifts in player accuracy based upon tactical play.
By level 13, it is pretty easy for a party to have a reliable way of putting a +2 status bonus on their striker, just as it is to make sure the striker is hasted within the first round. Not every party likes to play tactically like this, but all the parties that I GM for do, and it is also not uncommon. It is data that has to be considered in the overall balance of the class, not dismissed as circumstantial, especially when it seems pretty clear that the developers (by adding that crit rider) were encouraging players to look at it as a feature of the class and find ways to exploit it.
I am not saying that the exact implementation is perfect as is, but I do find it occupying some interesting design space that opens up ways to exploit spells in combats against powerful enemies that is not very effective with other casters. I am enjoying play testing this version and seeing what new things it brings to casting that had previously been too difficult to pull off.
Looking only at how the spell striking feature interacts with cantrips is a big mistake because, by level 13 all casters should have access to items that can make sure that they have better things to do, at least once or twice a big combat, than cast a cantrip spell against a higher threat encounter. There is long going discussions about the mistake that many players make with casters in thinking that cantrips are a better option than using consumable resources to get more active spell slots per encounter. The 4 spells a day thing highlights this, but spell slots are crunched across the board for casters and looking at that as a hard limit when scrolls of spells 1 level down from your highest slot become pretty affordable. For the magus, this can be loading your weapon up with a scroll in every short rest and it almost gives you an extra spell an encounter.
@kripdenn thanks for double checking the math, it is not my specialty which is why I wanted to be sure to show my work. How is the magus casting true strike on 3 attacks with the sword? Also my assumption was that the Magus that needed to buff for the first round, wasn't going to start off or easily maintain being close enough to not need the sliding ability.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No, measuring it with cantrips is important still because for a Magus your never going to have enough slots to do an adventuring day with just your slots unless every fight lasts one round.
Cantrip spell strike is your work horse, or should be, spell spell strike is for your burst moments.
Even with setup your damage is unimpressive as well as swingy. And that swingy nature is strictly a non starter when you combine it with sucking when you don't play at the bleeding edge of competence on a team level.
No, measuring it with cantrips is important still because for a Magus your never going to have enough slots to do an adventuring day with just your slots unless every fight lasts one round.
Cantrip spell strike is your work horse, or should be, spell spell strike is for your burst moments.
Even with setup your damage is unimpressive as well as swingy. And that swingy nature is strictly a non starter when you combine it with sucking when you don't play at the bleeding edge of competence on a team level.
I never said that evaluating it with cantrips is not important. Everyone else seems happy to run that math and it seems like it is getting plenty of attention. I am saying measuring what the magus can do against high threat encounters, with only cantrips is massively underselling the class, in the same way that evaluating the wizard with only cantrips against a higher level opponent. For challenging encounters, you use your limited resources. Challenging fights are where we should be trying to figure out what is the best that this build of the magus can accomplish?
I am thinking that disintegrate may not be the best option here, but I am not sure that @kripdenn factored in the way that striking spell cascades when the strike is a crit and how that shifts the fort save effect as well . Kripdenn is better at math than me, so they might have, but they just didn't show that work, which was too complicated for me to try to really attempt.
Flanking, a +2 status bonus, and haste for the party strike, by the time a party have been playing together to level 13 is pretty middle of the road team tactics.
The current version of Striking spell is swingy, but it is being misrepresented in a lot of the math I have seen, because, and certainly by level 13, Crits with the weapon attack against all enemies should be at 10% or better. Meaning that every spell strike spell by level 13 should be shifted up a tier of success by at least 10%, or 1 in 10 times the magus casts an attack spell they should be getting a free +10 to the attack roll or -10 to the enemy save.
Figuring out how to exploit this is still something that is worth exploring, whether you love the mechanic or hate it or somewhere in between because that is why this version was put forward to playtest. The developers want to see what this does to the game.
For example, much has been made of how terrible the 2 handed synthesis is and how Magus *must MC into a casting class for spell access, but what about a magus that MC's to fighter for feats like Intimidating strike and builds around powering up their blade and moving one round and delivering a brutal hit the second round? Critting with a Great pick and pinning frightened 2 on the enemy right before they face the spell? There are a lot if interesting possiblities still to test before we officially write this system off because it doesn't look that impressive when being paired with cantrips and unfavorable tactics.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think I'll spend some time this weekend adding the magus to my statistics tool. Though it may not work out as desired.
But I think in general if you can say "its better casting a cantrip, then attacking" then replacing "cantrip" with "spell" should be just as true.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Critical aspect of spell strike will lead to taking up Magus kit budget and result in a unfun class for many.
As it is right now, I don't see a reason to play either class, and I don't see a reason to purchase the book.
I'll keep play testing but if spell strike doesn't get a complete rework and the entire summoner class. I just don't see the point.
I'm done participating in this forum for now. Best of luck to you all.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
One thing that kept bugging me was that I think the OP has a valid point when they mention that a tactically sound group could make Magus' Striking Spell work.
However, I am a bit reluctant to have that be the norm against which the class needs to operate for a number of reasons.
You won't always have companions able to spam fear effects or flank alongside you. Some parties, like my own, will have a lot of martial characters and no bard or blesser and they will compete for the flank too.
Likewise, the availability of certain items won't be guaranteed.
These do not mean that tactical play should be disconsidered or not taken into account. The point I am trying to make is that Magus cannot be expected to function only with specific builds or around a group that works for them.
This means that, assuming we consider that Striking Spell is fine as is and does not need fine tuning (I don't think that, but entertain me), then the Magus would need to have additional tools to make using their main ability more reliable (in the form of feats, other focus spells, etc) .
For instance, a Rogue needs to flat-foot their foe so they can apply Sneak Attack. Sure they can do this the old-fashioned way, but they also get a plethora of feats that can help with that.
In a similar manner, a Barbarian will also benefit from Inspire Courage and other similar effects, but their Rage is mighty and consistent from the moment they spend that first action.
I may be missing something, but I just cannot see this for the Magus. Sure, you could take a Divination Staff and have everyone aid you, but what if you get separated from the party or start a fight in less than ideal conditions? What if your group hates tactics? A Rogue could Twin Feint; a Swashbuckler could just gain Panache and go for a finisher; A monk could flurry of blows. The Magus better forget about their main gimmick or start praying they get two very favorable results in a row...
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
I just don't think having a subscription to Spreadsheet Enthusiast Quarterly should be a prerequisite to "getting" a class. Nor should one spell (true strike) be allowed to warp a class' design to such an extent that it feels bad to play without it.
Especially not for something as visceral and exciting as a battle mage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
and saving those slots for high-yield fireball/chain lightning opportunities.
Those don't exist. As in that thing you said is a capstone feat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just don't think having a subscription to Spreadsheet Enthusiast Quarterly should be a prerequisite to "getting" a class.
Blasphemy!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One thing that kept bugging me was that I think the OP has a valid point when they mention that a tactically sound group could make Magus' Striking Spell work.
However, I am a bit reluctant to have that be the norm against which the class needs to operate for a number of reasons.
You won't always have companions able to spam fear effects or flank alongside you. Some parties, like my own, will have a lot of martial characters and no bard or blesser and they will compete for the flank too.
Likewise, the availability of certain items won't be guaranteed.
These do not mean that tactical play should be disconsidered or not taken into account. The point I am trying to make is that Magus cannot be expected to function only with specific builds or around a group that works for them.
This means that, assuming we consider that Striking Spell is fine as is and does not need fine tuning (I don't think that, but entertain me), then the Magus would need to have additional tools to make using their main ability more reliable (in the form of feats, other focus spells, etc) .
For instance, a Rogue needs to flat-foot their foe so they can apply Sneak Attack. Sure they can do this the old-fashioned way, but they also get a plethora of feats that can help with that.
In a similar manner, a Barbarian will also benefit from Inspire Courage and other similar effects, but their Rage is mighty and consistent from the moment they spend that first action.
I may be missing something, but I just cannot see this for the Magus. Sure, you could take a Divination Staff and have everyone aid you, but what if you get separated from the party or start a fight in less than ideal conditions? What if your group hates tactics? A Rogue could Twin Feint; a Swashbuckler could just gain Panache and go for a finisher; A monk could flurry of blows. The Magus better forget about their main gimmick or start praying they get two very favorable results in a row...
SO SO SO MUCH THIS. The baseline functionality of a class shouldnt be balanced around ideal conditions. The ceiling should just be appropriately lowered when those ideal conditions are met so bosses aren't killed in two novas.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
SO SO SO MUCH...One thing that kept bugging me was that I think the OP has a valid point when they mention that a tactically sound group could make Magus' Striking Spell work.
However, I am a bit reluctant to have that be the norm against which the class needs to operate for a number of reasons.
You won't always have companions able to spam fear effects or flank alongside you. Some parties, like my own, will have a lot of martial characters and no bard or blesser and they will compete for the flank too.
Likewise, the availability of certain items won't be guaranteed.
These do not mean that tactical play should be disconsidered or not taken into account. The point I am trying to make is that Magus cannot be expected to function only with specific builds or around a group that works for them.
This means that, assuming we consider that Striking Spell is fine as is and does not need fine tuning (I don't think that, but entertain me), then the Magus would need to have additional tools to make using their main ability more reliable (in the form of feats, other focus spells, etc) .
For instance, a Rogue needs to flat-foot their foe so they can apply Sneak Attack. Sure they can do this the old-fashioned way, but they also get a plethora of feats that can help with that.
In a similar manner, a Barbarian will also benefit from Inspire Courage and other similar effects, but their Rage is mighty and consistent from the moment they spend that first action.
I may be missing something, but I just cannot see this for the Magus. Sure, you could take a Divination Staff and have everyone aid you, but what if you get separated from the party or start a fight in less than ideal conditions? What if your group hates tactics? A Rogue could Twin Feint; a Swashbuckler could just gain Panache and go for a finisher; A monk could flurry of blows. The Magus better forget about their main gimmick or start praying they get two very favorable results in a row...
Exactly! Adjust it, nerf it as necessary, but Spell Strike, Spell combat, strinking spell or whatever Paizo chooses to call the Magus' ability to blend might and magic is what, in my opinion, makes the class be arguably the best gish around.
That feature should not be looked at as the icing on top of the cake, only going online when the stars align. It should be the class' bread and butter, with respectable functionality whether with cantrips or spells. It needs to be available and achievable as a barbarian's rage, a monk's flurry of blows, a rogue's sneak attack or a cleric's divine font. Each of these classes have setbacks and limits to how they utilize their abilities, but they are there when they need to call upon them for reliable healing, power, durability or whatever. And that is what I feel the current Striking Spell, like the first Investigator's Study Suspect, lacks
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Magus was defined by two abilities: Spell Combat and Spell Strike.
Spell Combat seems "impossible" to implement in 2E because the action system already allows to cast and strike in a single turn by using all of your actions. However I think the current Striking Spell is very close to what a 2E Spell Combat feature could be. I said it several times before, but just remove the "imbue in your weapon" part, make it "invest the spell in yourself" or "hold the charge within your mind" to give you the ability to release the spell either as a single action in subsequent turns, with its own attack rolls (giving you new action economy options) or on a Strike as a reaction (so that would be SpellStrike, unless SpellStrike is simply allowing you to replace the Somatic Component of a Spell by a Strike). Give an action/reaction to "Hold the Charge" for one more round (max 1 minute) so you can adjust to changes in the fight and we would have both Spell Combat (weaving spells in middle of attacks like no other) and Spell Strike (Shocking Grasp goes "Clang!")
Striking Spell as it is has potential, just not as "Spellstrike"
just remove the "imbue in your weapon" part, make it "invest the spell in yourself" or "hold the charge within your mind" to give you the ability to release the spell either as a single action in subsequent turns, with its own attack rolls (giving you new action economy options) or on a Strike as a reaction (so that would be SpellStrike, unless SpellStrike is simply allowing you to replace the Somatic Component of a Spell by a Strike). Give an action/reaction to "Hold the Charge" for one more round (max 1 minute) so you can adjust to changes in the fight and we would have both Spell Combat (weaving spells in middle of attacks like no other) and Spell Strike (Shocking Grasp goes "Clang!")
That's basically an action-cost for something that doesn't normally cost an action. I don't see the value.
Maybe I wasn't clear.
I meant to infuse the spell in "yourself" as it currently works. Then, in following turns you can release that spell as a single action. So it would cost you a round of setup, but it opens other possibilities for later turns.
No, I got that. I'm saying I don't see the value.
"Maybe doing things" on a later turn means it is not something I'm doing all the time.
Smacking people with a spellstick is the magus's thing. Let me do the thing. All the time.
Well one big advantage of being able to wait until the next round to unleash the spell, and not having the action of casting the spell tied to the specific strike roll you use to make the attack, is that you can use striking spell with a lot of interesting MC martial abilities this way on that second round, pretty much any one that gives you a strike, and it lets you use true strike on the attack without haste. Going 2 hander and charging up your weapon with a spell, then unleashing it with a true strike power attack can be pretty devastating and epic. If you try the class in play, you will see that really setting up your powerhouse round can be pretty fun, especially when the bard uses inspire heroics on you. It also doesn't prevent you from doing it all at once when the situation is right for it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, we are looking at it as all of nothing I think that's the wrong way to go.
Storing a spell as one action. With the caveat that you can only cast said spell with a 2 action strike. This inverts the current way spell strike works where you spend two actions to store the spell then one action to deliver the spell and strike.
But it frees up your first turn when storing the spell a lot.
Then you have the two action strike that delivers the spell as well as the strike. You still spend 3 actions but it's more manageable.
But wait there is more!
We need a reason to even want to do this yes? Otherwise your not really saving actions and not receiving any benefits other than shuffling things around.
Remove energized strikes and fold it into this new spell strike.
You get 1 extra damage for every die of your weapon that matches the element of the spell you have stored. And can hold onto the spell for up to a minute.
End result. Cast a spell one action faster, but only to store it within your body or weapon and recieve +1 damage per weapon dice of the type of spell you have stored. You can store it in this way for up to a minute.
2 action spell strike, deliver the spell and the strike. You could still ignore map though given this action economy. Regardless I think this would flow better and feel better in practice.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well one big advantage of being able to wait until the next round to unleash the spell, and not having the action of casting the spell tied to the specific strike roll you use to make the attack, is that you can use striking spell with a lot of interesting MC martial abilities this way on that second round, pretty much any one that gives you a strike, and it lets you use true strike on the attack without haste. Going 2 hander and charging up your weapon with a spell, then unleashing it with a true strike power attack can be pretty devastating and epic. If you try the class in play, you will see that really setting up your powerhouse round can be pretty fun, especially when the bard uses inspire heroics on you. It also doesn't prevent you from doing it all at once when the situation is right for it.
I've playtested this exact thing. It's not fun no matter how many times you insist.