| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is a continuation my other thread
[Actual Play] So I got to play a Magus and it felt awkward....
Last night, I managed to get together a group of friends to playtest the Magus.
We played four encounters as level 10 characters with full rests in between.
The first one was a replay of the purple worm encounter in the previous thread. The second and third one were against 3 and 4 scarlet triad bruisers, respectivelly, and the fourth was against a couple of Adult Black Dragons.
The characters were the same as in the previous post with the exception of the Witch, which got replaced with a Dragon Instinct Barbarian.
Disclaimer I am aware that my experiences may not reflect the ideal and most optimized way to build a Magus nor that they are necessarily representative of the norm for play experiences regarding the class.
The Build
For the Magus, I went the same route, but tweaked a few things. I went with the staff of divination for the first two encounters and a +2 striking bastard sword with shock and fire runes for the last two. I also changed my character's abilities to get str 20 and got an investigator dedication through the human ancestry feat.
The Magus Feats were Eschew Materials, Bespell Strikes, Martial Caster, Energize Strikes and the last feat was used to acquire Investigator's Stratagem from the dedication Archetype.
Spells were a combination of Haste (usually through Martial Caster), True Strike, Cone of Cold and hightened Acid Arrow, Vampiric Touch and Shocking Grasp in different variations.
How it played
- During the first two encounters, I focused on casting Haste, Magus Potency and getting the most out of True Strike or Devise a Stratagem. I managed to crit twice with Devise a Stratagem and went on to deliver my most powerful spells in a successful manner. I still tried to use Striking Spell in every way that I could but did not find it to be very successful, even with Save Spells onboard. Between True Strike and Devise, I found the latter to be better because I could just change the actions I took based on the result of the roll I got.
- I did not bother with cantrips that much, since I thought that striking more and benefitting from the bonuses from Energize, Haste and the occasional True Strike would be better.
- During the third encounter, I focused on that approach and completely ignored Striking Spell. Surprisingly, my experience felt much more rewarding. I used True Strike to deliver a Shocking Grasp like a Wizard would and did not bother much about trying to combine the martial and caster aspects of my class.
- During the fourth encounter, we homebrewed a version of Striking Spell that maintained the action economy but allowed spell attacks to use the weapon strike result with the roll being made at a -2 penalty. That approach seemed to really work. Even though, while hasted, I could employ True Strike along with the Striking Spell, the penalty helped balance things a bit. I tried to spellstrike as often as I could and got three good hits, I think
- Overall, I was behind the Barbarian in durability and damage, although I managed to even the odds a bit due to the two crits I got during the first encounter and the mechanics we implemented during the fourth one.
My Impressions (continued from the other thread)
- I really think that Striking Spell as currently worded is a passable class feat and does not live up to what it should be. I only got the most out of it when I changed its mechanics or managed to compensate with the Investigator ability. I do not intend for the way we found to be the one or to solve all problems, but playing the class seemed to be more satisfying when something is done to improve the ability.
- Similarly, although this might not be the way for some Magi, striking twice with a good weapon tends to be better than spellstriking a cantrip. In addition, more playstyle, equipment configurations and builds need to be effectivelly supported. The barbarian alongside me often fought with different weapons and their rage was always there, consistent, reliable, while I absolutely had to rely on a specific build to get something out of my main gimmick.
- As some have pointed out, there is a way for Magus to shine without having to rely on Striking Spell (or a similarly named ability). This means there could be design space for a swordmage-like class or archetype in the future (does not necessarily have to be magus).
|
We played four encounters as level 10 characters with full rests in between.
Do you mean 4 fights and 4 daily preparations?
If so, wouldn't that be less reliable in terms of data ( since the majority of complains are towards the new spell slots progression for the 2 new classes )?
If the Magus's main ability is underwhelming going all out on full rest for one fight, I don't think the situation is going to be better doing multiple fights/day.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If the Magus's main ability is underwhelming going all out on full rest for one fight, I don't think the situation is going to be better doing multiple fights/day.
We played four encounters as level 10 characters with full rests in between.
Do you mean 4 fights and 4 daily preparations?
If so, wouldn't that be less reliable in terms of data ( since the majority of complains are towards the new spell slots progression for the 2 new classes )?
The magus is not meant to use all 4 big spells during a single fight, as any other spellcaster.
Different situation is if you find yourself into a "boss fight" after the daily preparations.
Otherwise, if you expend 4 spells per fight, you are playing it wrong.
I'm not saying that you should. But if you expend all 4 spells in a single fight and still feel like you are underwhelming compared to other classes, that's a problem.
EDIT: But just to add to that, I think, especially for something like PFS, saving your resources for the boss fight is a perfectly valid playstyle, provided that you are at least somewhat effective when you aren't expending those resources. Given all of the numbers that have been run on using Striking Spell and cantrips, it does not make you more effective unless you are benefitting from the extra Stride/temp hit points, or you are expending resources.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not saying that you should. But if you expend all 4 spells in a single fight and still feel like you are underwhelming compared to other classes, that's a problem.If the Magus's main ability is underwhelming going all out on full rest for one fight, I don't think the situation is going to be better doing multiple fights/day.
We played four encounters as level 10 characters with full rests in between.
Do you mean 4 fights and 4 daily preparations?
If so, wouldn't that be less reliable in terms of data ( since the majority of complains are towards the new spell slots progression for the 2 new classes )?
The magus is not meant to use all 4 big spells during a single fight, as any other spellcaster.
Different situation is if you find yourself into a "boss fight" after the daily preparations.
Otherwise, if you expend 4 spells per fight, you are playing it wrong.
The issue here is that people think that spellstrike is not well designed around cantrips ( and that it would be more efficient to perform 2 strikes ) for what concerns damage.
A lvl 7 magus ( which is equal to any other combatant class but barbarian because flat dmg rage and fighter, because +1 extra dmg ), could do
strike (MAP 0)+ strike (MAP -5)
2d8+6 + 2d8+6 = 32dmg
or
Spellstrike Cantrip (MAP 0 / MAP-2* )
2d8+6 + 4d6+3 = 31
I understand that in terms of action management it leaves room for nothing else ( intimidate, feint, etc... ) but if you want to deal a consisten amount of damage I am pretty ok with how spellstrike works with cantrips.
Unless I am missing something else, it seems a good trade ( no extra action but less map on your second attack, and also elemental effect ).
*Trained proficiency vs expert proficiency.
Just to be clear, there is a reason why I had a full rest between each fight. If you read my other thread, I had a lot of problems when using the 4 slots with Strinking Spell on a boss fight type of encounter (I did not connect once with the spell).
Based on what I have seen so far, I don't think the problem is just with the cantrips. It is even worse when you try to use the slots with Spell Striking.
I am just attempting to test the other end of the spectrum: if Magus is able effectively capitalize on their slots to deliver damaging spells. So far, my answer has been a big no.
The point I am trying to make is that the problem we are experiencing is even worse when the Magi try to use their main ability with something other than a cantrip, which is something that they are occasionally expected to do.
If you try to use Striking Spell with something like Shocking Grasp, Acid Arrow or any other spell that requires an attack roll without something like Devise a Stratagem to fish for a crit, you tend to be very likely to just waste the slot.
With cantrips, its even worse. Let's assume I only used the slots once. Then, at the level I played, continously Striking, especially if I spend money on a weapon with multiple runes is just strictly better
|
|
I'm not saying that you should. But if you expend all 4 spells in a single fight and still feel like you are underwhelming compared to other classes, that's a problem.If the Magus's main ability is underwhelming going all out on full rest for one fight, I don't think the situation is going to be better doing multiple fights/day.
We played four encounters as level 10 characters with full rests in between.
Do you mean 4 fights and 4 daily preparations?
If so, wouldn't that be less reliable in terms of data ( since the majority of complains are towards the new spell slots progression for the 2 new classes )?
The magus is not meant to use all 4 big spells during a single fight, as any other spellcaster.
Different situation is if you find yourself into a "boss fight" after the daily preparations.
Otherwise, if you expend 4 spells per fight, you are playing it wrong.
The issue here is that people think that spellstrike is not well designed around cantrips ( and that it would be more efficient to perform 2 strikes ) for what concerns damage.
A lvl 7 magus ( which is equal to any other combatant class but barbarian because flat dmg rage and fighter, because +1 extra dmg ), could do
strike (MAP 0)+ strike (MAP -5)
2d8+6 + 2d8+6 = 32dmg
or
Spellstrike Cantrip (MAP 0 / MAP-2* )
2d8+6 + 4d6+3 = 31
I understand that in terms of action management it leaves room for nothing else ( intimidate, feint, etc... ) but if you want to deal a consisten amount of damage I am pretty ok with how spellstrike works with cantrips.
Unless I am missing something else, it seems a good trade ( no extra action but less map on your second attack, and also elemental effect ).
*Trained proficiency vs expert proficiency.
It's more like -3 most of the time, because you also have an item bonus to your weapon attack. And there are levels where there is an extra +1 for the weapon from stat differences.
That does not account for the fact that 40-50% of the time, you do not get to make the spell attack roll on round 1.
Weapons have things like deadly that trigger on crits for additional damage or agile that make it more likely your other attacks hit/crit.
This is assuming you can only attack twice. Add a third attack in. It would surprise a lot of people how much of a difference that makes. It also reinforces what I've been saying most places, which is that the real benefit of using Striking Spell with a cantrip is the free Stride, not any extra damage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have to agree. During my little experiment, I got the most out of the class when I just ignored Striking Spell and swung away to capitalize on weapon specialization and energize strikes, even though what I really wanted was to spam Striking Spell.
Based on what I have seen so far, I don't think the problem is just with the cantrips. It is even worse when you try to use the slots with Spell Striking.I am just attempting to test the other end of the spectrum: if Magus is able effectively capitalize on their slots to deliver damaging spells. So far, my answer has been a big no.
The point I am trying to make is that the problem we are experiencing is even worse when the Magi try to use their main ability with something other than a cantrip, which is something that they are occasionally expected to do.
If you try to use Striking Spell with something like Shocking Grasp, Acid Arrow or any other spell that requires an attack roll without something like Devise a Stratagem to fish for a crit, you tend to be very likely to just waste the slot.
With cantrips, its even worse. Let's assume I only used the slots once. Then, at the level I played, continously Striking, especially if I spend money on a weapon with multiple runes is just strictly
betterSo, apart from a boss, spellstrike is fine?
Given a lvl 10, that's the level you played, against a lvl 13 boss (Adult bronze Dragon), your chances to hit would be.
MELEE HIT
+10 (lvl)
+4 (Trained)
+5 (str)
+2 (Potency Rune)
+2 (flat footed-not).+23 vs AC 34
50% Chance to hit
5% Chance to critSPELL HIT
+10 (lvl)
+2 (Trained)
+4 (int)+2 (flat footed-not sure if this would work or not ).
+16/18 vs AC 34
15/25% Chance to hit
5% Chance to critPretty hard time indeed (whether it's a spell or a cantrip).
I also noticed that being lvl 11 against a lvl 14 would have been even worse ( regardless the expert spell proficiency ).Against lvl +0 enemies seems totally fine.
I honestly don’t know if that is even the case. When my group played against lvl+0, I was only able to spam striking spell due to Devise a Stratagem.
I am no expert on math, but from what I read on other forums and topics in this one, the advantage is not so clear in the cantrip side. To me (and I am talking about my impression), striking twice had more juice with the same MAP (-5). Sure, the cantrips may be save or suck or have riders and this means versatility, but you get this odd picture in which you’re kind of lagging during boss fights and just okay on regular ones.
I really think Striking Spell needs adjustments, maybe not something drastic, but tools and resources (stemming from the class) to enable it to be more consistent, whether used with cantrips or slotted spells (save and attacking ones)
Suggestion. When you land a melee strike with spell strike you get a +2/4 to hit with said spell.
Still not a fan of the critical mechanic.
I really think Striking Spell needs adjustments, maybe not something drastic, but tools and resources (stemming from the class) to enable it to be more consistent, whether used with cantrips or slotted spells (save and attacking ones)To work around spellstrike seems reasonable.
Maybe, a circumstance bonus to spell hit while using spellstrike might do the trick.
To be honest, what scares me, and I'd like they to avoid, is to give the magus the possibility to blast like a pure caster ( better proficiency all day long instead of just while using spellstrike ).
I agree.. I think that whatever adjustments, boosts and enhancers need to be applied only when using spellstrike.
My whole problem with it is just making a striking spell mechanic that is reliable and works with the few slots they have.
To me, the Magus should play like a combatant that holds their own in a moderate way through cantrips and strikes and kind of saves those big slots to have their moment during those boss fights. They don’t outshine anyone nor should be better at magic than your Wizard. However, when they put the spell they have been saving on their blades, bodies, arrows, they should have a fair chance of using their main ability.
Leave the blasting and aoe for the casters
Suggestion. When you land a melee strike with spell strike you get a +2/4 to hit with said spell.
Still not a fan of the critical mechanic.
This could work. A +2 would be akin to flat-footed and maybe harken to the rogue’s Twin Feint
Suggestion. When you land a melee strike with spell strike you get a +2/4 to hit with said spell.
Still not a fan of the critical mechanic.
I'm not the mathiest, but why not automatically connect with the spell if it's a spell attack roll and you hit the attack (a la eldritch archer or channel smite), but if it's a saving throw, the target takes a -4 to their throw on a hit and a -6 on a crit (incapacitation applied after)?
This would make delivering a saving throw spell through the spell strike a tiny touch more likely than if a full caster were delivering it. But only probably a single point (if that, we keep assuming every magus is gonna start with 16 INT).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Suggestion. When you land a melee strike with spell strike you get a +2/4 to hit with said spell.
Still not a fan of the critical mechanic.
I'm not the mathiest, but why not automatically connect with the spell if it's a spell attack roll and you hit the attack (a la eldritch archer or channel smite), but if it's a saving throw, the target takes a -4 to their throw on a hit and a -6 on a crit (incapacitation applied after)?
This would make delivering a saving throw spell through the spell strike a tiny touch more likely than if a full caster were delivering it. But only probably a single point (if that, we keep assuming every magus is gonna start with 16 INT).
The NPC they had in Age of Ashes had this mechanic
Suggestion. When you land a melee strike with spell strike you get a +2/4 to hit with said spell.
Still not a fan of the critical mechanic.
I'm not the mathiest, but why not automatically connect with the spell if it's a spell attack roll and you hit the attack (a la eldritch archer or channel smite), but if it's a saving throw, the target takes a -4 to their throw on a hit and a -6 on a crit (incapacitation applied after)?
This would make delivering a saving throw spell through the spell strike a tiny touch more likely than if a full caster were delivering it. But only probably a single point (if that, we keep assuming every magus is gonna start with 16 INT).
I dunno, ask paizo
What kinds of buffs did you have up or debuffs to the enemy? We’re you consistently flanking?
The NPC they had in Age of Ashes had this mechanicSuggestion. When you land a melee strike with spell strike you get a +2/4 to hit with said spell.
Still not a fan of the critical mechanic.
I'm not the mathiest, but why not automatically connect with the spell if it's a spell attack roll and you hit the attack (a la eldritch archer or channel smite), but if it's a saving throw, the target takes a -4 to their throw on a hit and a -6 on a crit (incapacitation applied after)?
This would make delivering a saving throw spell through the spell strike a tiny touch more likely than if a full caster were delivering it. But only probably a single point (if that, we keep assuming every magus is gonna start with 16 INT).
I'm running AoA and I don't recall this NPC... who?
I'm running AoA and I don't recall this NPC... who?The NPC they had in Age of Ashes had this mechanicSuggestion. When you land a melee strike with spell strike you get a +2/4 to hit with said spell.
Still not a fan of the critical mechanic.
I'm not the mathiest, but why not automatically connect with the spell if it's a spell attack roll and you hit the attack (a la eldritch archer or channel smite), but if it's a saving throw, the target takes a -4 to their throw on a hit and a -6 on a crit (incapacitation applied after)?
This would make delivering a saving throw spell through the spell strike a tiny touch more likely than if a full caster were delivering it. But only probably a single point (if that, we keep assuming every magus is gonna start with 16 INT).
Rinnarv Bontimar (high level)
What kinds of buffs did you have up or debuffs to the enemy? We’re you consistently flanking?
Flanking most of the time. Was hasted and we had frightened during the first round of fight 1 and 2 due to the barbarian’s battle cry