thought it would help have one place for all the people who feel dissatisfied with how spellstrike works and they can post their ideas and discuss said ideas.
I know 2e has a kind of unspoken rule with how certain attacks function. moves like doubleslice do not incur map until after the attack is done, essentially making it an accuracy booster.
other moves like flurry of blows, let you combine actions. improving action economy by a value of 1.
currently, spellstrike as written, is the first option. But due to proficiency scaling, using intellect, and item bonuses. The spell aspect of spellstrike functions as if it is experiencing map regardless. worse if you did not build your magus with 18str and 16int from the start.
so, ignoring these unspoken rules. what would a stripped down simple port of magus spell strike look like.
2 actions, you make a strike while casting a spell into the weapon, for this attack, the spell only affects the target and uses your to hit of your melee attack. you do not incur map until the attack is finished.
my wording is bad im sure, but you get the idea. This results in both reducing the actions needed to do the attacks, and increases accuracy as it doesnt incur map. It is, by definition of the system blocks given, but not directly impact, an overpowered ability.
ill leave it up to you people if this unspoken rule of attacks should hold true or not. for now ill post my idea.
my idea is to split spell strike into 3 seperate attacks. one that takes 1 action, one that takes 2, and one that takes 3.
1 action: Bespelled strikes, you infused a small amount of magic into your weapon, you do 1 damage of a magic type you have available to cast for each of your strikes this turn. at higher levels, this 1 damage scales based off your striking runes. if you have bespell weapon feat, when you cast a spell, bespelled strikes also activates along with bespell weapon. you cannot use bespelled strikes action next turn.
ok, so, this is probably way to wordy and needs some things cut from it to make it easier. But its simple. a 1 action attack that adds 1 magical damage per strike, increasing to 4 damage per strike. it only lasts for the round, so you can use it with 2 strikes (3 if hasted i suppose).
2 action: cantrip strike, you infuse a attack cantrip into your strike. Make a strike. add half the cantrip damage rounded down. next turn you cannot use cantrip strike.
so the idea here is the next step up. you combine a cantrip into your strike. but instead of giving you full cantrip damage, its half. so at 20 you will be adding 5d6+2 to your strike from TKP. yes this is less damage than attacking twice, but it also doesnt incur map. its a little like power attack, plus since you have 5 potential cantrips without investment, if you know what damage type you can use you can more easily target weaknesses or avoid resistances.
3 action: spell strike. you infuse a attack spell into your weapon/body to make a strike. roll both attacks separately but do not incur map until after. if you cast bespelled strikes last turn, get a +2 status bonus to your spell hit chance. if you cast cantrip strike last turn. get a +4. you cannot use spell strike next turn.
so, now im done, you can kinda see what im doing. going for a bit of a rotation style gameplay where you are incentivized to rotate your 3 different actions.
i could think of feats to support this playstyle as well and such. but i think this is enough for a base idea. im sure, as i said before, the wording is poor, and the names would need work, but you get the idea.
I like it better than what we have, but don't like that they require only spells with an attack roll. I'd like some clarity on your 2 action version. Half the cantrip damage; does that mean I'm to roll the full amount and then cut it in half, or roll only half the dice? What's your intention with that?
save spells could be added in, though it makes it more wordy. you could also allow the use of save spells via a feat if they wanted. its all up for debate.
as for half cantrip damage, my thought was to roll full damage and cut it in half, rounding down for decimals.
very nice ligraph, inquisitive tieflings idea is a much simpler but pretty clean as well. only thing id note is imbue is only a increase in damage if you target weaknesses. would be nice if it bumped the weapon damage die by 1 step or even just added 1 damage of the chosen type even. just something. kinda like how swashbucklers can attack with a base static precision damage when they have panache but they'd much rather use a finisher.
very nice ligraph, inquisitive tieflings idea is a much simpler but pretty clean as well. only thing id note is imbue is only a increase in damage if you target weaknesses. would be nice if it bumped the weapon damage die by 1 step or even just added 1 damage of the chosen type even. just something. kinda like how swashbucklers can attack with a base static precision damage when they have panache but they'd much rather use a finisher.
To be fair, increasing your damage by one of a type is already present in the class in the form of Energize Strikes. I could see Energize strikes being rolled into a class feature, rather than a feat though. And since it's a new feat, easy to do.
And really, Bespell Strikes should probably just be removed from the class if it can't proc on Cantrips, or if the Magus doesn't gain more spell slots. The mileage just isn't there imo for it to be worth it.
very nice ligraph, inquisitive tieflings idea is a much simpler but pretty clean as well. only thing id note is imbue is only a increase in damage if you target weaknesses. would be nice if it bumped the weapon damage die by 1 step or even just added 1 damage of the chosen type even. just something. kinda like how swashbucklers can attack with a base static precision damage when they have panache but they'd much rather use a finisher.To be fair, increasing your damage by one of a type is already present in the class in the form of Energize Strikes. I could see Energize strikes being rolled into a class feature, rather than a feat though. And since it's a new feat, easy to do.
And really, Bespell Strikes should probably just be removed from the class if it can't proc on Cantrips, or if the Magus doesn't gain more spell slots. The mileage just isn't there imo for it to be worth it.
the argument is that since you can aquire scrolls, staff, rings, wands, etc, that you get more mileage out of bespell strikes feat that way.
that said, id prefer it if magus got a modified version that worked with cantrips as well.
I think spell strike should be able to leverage three separate areas, these are accuracy boosting, action economy manipulation, and cool abilities. With my idea it leans on all three without being fully invested in changing one of them, which can allow for a player to change how much spell striking should steer towards one of the three areas.
Spell striking is now split into two actions and a passive:
Spell Combat:
Some magi abilities interact with your spell combat bonus.
Levels 1 – 6: Spell combat = 1
Levels 7 – 15ish: Spell combat = 2
Levels 16+: Spell combat = 3
Overcharge
1 action
Cast a spell, but instead of the effect of the spell going off it is charged into a weapon (or yourself). The spell has the same qualifiers as the current spell strike.
If a spell has variable actions, you must decide whether you have cast the one action version or the two action version when you Overcharge.
Whilst you are wielding a charged weapon (or you are charged), you count as being Charged (or Enspelled or whatever), certain abilities activiate whilst you are Charged.
For the purpose of feats like bespell this action counts as casting the spell.
Additionally whilst being Charged you gain access to the Discharge Action
Discharge
Free Action or 1 Action
Requirement: Your last action was a successful attack
You discharge the spell. Immediately causing the target of the attack to be subject to the spell. If the spell requires an attack roll, it gains a circ bonus equal to spell combat, if a saving throw, the enemy takes a circ penalty to the save. (In my games I use a spell glove for potency runes on attack spells, if that is not a thing then the attack roll could have spell combat x2 instead, this does increase a Magi spell attacks beyond full casters but I think this is a fitting niche for them).
The amount of actions this takes depends on the actions normally used to cast the spell cast during overcharge.
If 1 action, then discharge is a free action
If 2 actions, then 1 action or a free action, if casting a free action here you a slowed 1. (this helps action economy manipulation as you can eat into your next turns actions to pull of stuff this turn).
I would like this to be paired with a variable action focus spell that when cast as one action follows similar scaling to Swashbuckler finisher damage, but can be cast as two actions for a bit more oomf. (I am thinking d6 normally and d10 as two action) Additionally, I would like this focus spell to be customisable based on a spell school you choose at level 1 (when you gain this spell). Something like Necromancy doing negative damage, gaining the necromancy trait and giving temp HP on a crit.
For cool abilities, I would like to see these come from the synthesis and feats.
Some synthesis ideas I have are Sustaining Steel been given to a shield version, that grants shield block feat for free and the ability to discharge if an attack crit misses or you use a shield block. Magic marauder for two handers gaining a damage buff equal to spell combat (or double if you overcharge with a slot/focus spell) and reach whilst Charged. An unarmed version that gains the Arcane fists feat for free, and backswing whilst Charged, and can trigger discharge after a successful athletic checks to trip, disarm, grapple and shove.
Edit: Charged status last until the end of your next turn your you discharge, whichever is first
and attack spells do not suffer from map when discharged, but still contribute to it
Personally, I wouldn't be opposed to splitting the current 'cast a real spell through your weapon' part of Spellstrike off into its own feature, similar to the Eldritch Archer one, and then making their primary extra damage feature its own version of the concept.
Like, 2 actions, if you hit then the target takes some magic damage with a basic save. Heighten +2 instead of Heighten +1, so that the damage progression of normal spells doesn't prevent it from getting away with its action economy.
Dunno how that works into the rest of the class as it is, but that was something I had considered.
Have to admit, I'm happy to see that some people like the idea I had for Spell Combat, or at least the basic concept of splitting Striking Spell into two separate features that can be balanced a bit more cleanly.
As I said in the initial post of my idea, I'm not at all opposed to, instead of changing the weapon's damage type, it adds on a slight amount of elemental damage to the weapon instead. But both options can potentially be very powerful, especially when you're exploiting weaknesses. PF2e's math is very tight, after all.
What if we looked at the Magus as being for spells what the Fighter is for weapon strikes? If all that Striking Spell did was use your current melee weapon's bonus to hit for a spell requiring an attack roll then they would be more accurate with spells than any other caster. Then have it so that any rider effects that trigger on a successful hit or crit with that weapon still trigger so you still get your property runes and bespell weapon type effects.
This way it wouldn't require extra actions than the casting of the spell itself, the magus gets something that its the best at (spell attacks) and having limited spell slots doesn't feel as bad since you're the most likely to use them effectively.
Adapting the idea of Inquisitive Tiefling and Clinton here of separating the feature into smaller ones.
Imbue Weapon (1 action)
Once per round.
Cast a spell of 2 actions or lower that can target 1 creature into the weapon. The spell stays in the weapon until the end of your next turn.
Discharge Spell (1 action)
Requirement: The last action was a successful strike.
You Discharge the spell into the target, if the spell had an spell attack roll use your attack roll result to determine the effects of both the Strike and the spell, if it required a save the target takes -2 status penalty to their save before applying the spell effect. This counts as two attacks for your multiple attack penalty, but you don't apply the penalty until after you've completed both attacks.
Adapting the idea of Inquisitive Tiefling and Clinton here of separating the feature into smaller ones.
Imbue Weapon (1 action)
Once per round.
Cast a spell of 2 actions or lower that can target 1 creature into the weapon. The spell stays in the weapon until the end of your next turn.Discharge Spell (1 action)
Requirement: The last action was a successful strike.
You Discharge the spell into the target, if the spell had an spell attack roll use your attack roll result to determine the effects of both the Strike and the spell, if it required a save the target takes -2 status penalty to their save before applying the spell effect. This counts as two attacks for your multiple attack penalty, but you don't apply the penalty until after you've completed both attacks.
Probably change Discharge to note that it doesn't apply the triggering Strike's MAP until after the spell.
Also, note that doing it like this may prevent it from being used with actions that have a strike as part of them like Combat Assessment, which is one thing I quite liked about the current setup. Probably would just have to word it carefully to allow this.
I still think this and Tiefling's suggestion are a bit to hard on the action economy, you're adding 2 to the current setup. Unless you mean you cast the spell as part of Imbue without adding actions, which isn't clear.
At least for me, that was the intent. Imbue Weapon as a single action, with casting the spell into the weapon as part of said action. I put the "metamagic" tag on mine to ensure that people couldn't do anything abusive like try to imbue their weapon with a metamagic-empowered spell.