| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have come to the conclusion that the “4-Slot Casting” approach, despite being an interesting idea, is fundamentally flawed for the Magus. The limited number of top level slots are simultaneously too powerful and not powerful enough for a class to rely on as a key component of its power budget. This may also be true for Summoner, however, this discussion will focus on the Magus. Bear with me while I lay out my reasoning.
I’ll be avoiding hard math/accuracy discussion, because that’s a numbers problem that can be tweaked.
Problem 1: Length of the Adventuring Day
As my and others’ playtesting has shown, 4 powerful spells per day are not enough to keep the Magus feeling satisfying throughout an adventuring day, regardless of the number of combat encounters. You tend to want to reserve your spells for dangerous fights, or key moments, and end up feeling ineffective. Given the limited number of slots, and the importance of surviving combat, you’re also unlikely to memorize utility spells even on days that are likely to be light on combat, leaving you feeling ineffectual there.
I’ve seen people conclude that this iteration of the class is likely to be the minimum number of spells per day we could possibly expect the final class to have, however, there isn’t much room to increase the number of spells per day because…
Problem 2: Top Level Spells Are Powerful
If you start increasing the number of top level spells per day, you’re going to quickly bump into full caster’s daily allotment. These are precious slots that full casters have to anguish over what to place there because they could trivialize certain encounters and challenges at different levels. If you can get the same amount as a full caster, and get the goodies of a martial, we’re likely to see Magus style casters dominating play.
Even without combat spells, getting access to utility spells like Fly at the right level can dramatically change the game and draw a lot of attention during play. A Magus with enough slots to spare for high level utility and damage, while only sacrificing lower level utility and buffs that could otherwise be covered by affordable magic items like scrolls, is going to make full casters feel very hard done by. To the point where we could see full casters moving to Magus style classes in significant numbers.
You can’t just start giving the Magus more lower level slots (6/7/8/9 for example) because…
Problem 3: Low Level Damage Spells are Weak
A big part of the Magus fantasy is delivering damaging spells with their weapon. However, despite low level buffs and debuffs scaling well, damage dealing spells don’t work well in lower slots. They drop off in damage effectiveness quickly enough that cantrips start to become more appealing, and buffs and debuffs + cantrips can easily outweigh some weaker damage spells.
While more lower level slots will certainly help extend the usefulness over the adventuring day, and improve some other quality of life problems, they can’t really be relied upon to be a satisfying damage dealing option even with custom rules, because…
Problem 4: Spellstrike/Spellcombat Must Be Balanced Around Your Highest Spell Level
Imagine that the class is given an acceptably accurate Spellstrike feature that everyone pretty much likes based around reliably delivering single target damage spells. If they can use it to land Big Damage high level spells they’re going to be balanced around that, and other rounds when they run out (since they can’t have as many as a Full Caster, as previously discussed) they’re going to be delivering much less effective damage.
I’d like to pause here to reiterate this, because it’s not immediately obvious that this is the case. It’s a fundamental design principle that you can’t have both all-day effectiveness on par with others AND reliable nova damage. If we can agree that being able to land a max level spell is going to be strong, then landing lower level spells is going to be progressively weaker. The balancing point is going to be weighted by how frequently they can do each. If the top end is allowable because you can only do it a few times a day, the rest of the day needs to be filled with something satisfying, which will either result in bringing down the top end, or overcompensating the lower end resulting in an unfair advantage over full casters again.
This means that a lot of development work will go into essentially equalizing top end Magus spells with other martial damage sources, resulting in a wonkiness like spellstrike spells dealing less damage than normal. This could be similarly achieved by starting at a lower top end spell level and buffing frequency as necessary to come in line with other martials.
More low level spell slots also solves the other issue I’ve touched on here and there...
Problem 5: Low Level Spell Slots are Necessary For Feeling Magical
One of the reasons full casters can get by with having a limited number of top end spells is that they do have lots of lower level spells that can be combined to improve effectiveness of other low level spells (true strike, buffs, and debuffs) but they know they’re also useful out of combat for solving problems with magic. As full casters level up they can take various utility spells that can dramatically alter play, and they get them right at the levels that the game sort of expects them to crop up. Eventually they out-level the lower tier utility (like invisibility and fly) and grab the new hotness (long range teleport, plane hopping), but they don’t lose those low level utilities. In fact, they have the slots spare to cast them more frequently, making them seem even more magical than before.
A Magus who levels up passes through these phases, potentially stealing the spotlight from the full casters at the levels new abilities come online, then abandoning them as they outgrow them. They either switch to scrolls/potions/magic items like a fighter or beg the wizard for their low level slots, either of which doesn’t sit right with me.
All of the above problems contribute to the main problem which is:
Problem 6: The Magus’ Cool Signature Abilities are Hampered by the 4-Slot Paradigm
If you entertain the idea of a Magus without access to 4 top end slots, you will see that there are a lot of new options unlocked that wouldn’t be fair with big damage max level spells at the magus’ disposal. Here are just a few things that I feel might be being lost due to the current 4-slot paradigm:
* In-battle focus recharge mechanic for a damaging focus spell
* New ways of powering up favorite low level damage spells that other casters grow out of (e.g. bonus damage to shocking grasp/spontaneous heightening)
* Magus-only single action damage cantrips that are the class’ go-to tool for damage like rage or sneak attack
* More accurate spell strikes (auto-hit with the spell when you land a weapon attack, or longer charge holding)
Conclusion
Since a magus wants to deliver spells with their blade all day, they’re fundamentally badly matched with a super limited number of spell slots. Their low number of high level slots being reserved for dealing damage in combat also limits how they can go about their non-combat adventuring career in a magical manner.
Solutions to the above problems can be created with keeping the 4-slot paradigm, but I think it would be easier and more freeing for the designers to start from a reduced top-end perspective.
Overall, the 4-slot paradigm doesn’t feel like the 50-50 martial-caster that I wanted ever since the 75-25 wizard-fighter multiclass was introduced.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the Magus could choose to prepare a small number of high level spells versus a large number of low level spells, would that be a choice that varies from day to day?
I feel like there's just such a huge swing between "the magus with the true strike disintegrate thing set up" (which is really very powerful) versus "the magus who is trying to land an acid splash through striking spell" (which is mediocre) that I really don't know how to read the class.
On one hand, the Magus was *the* Nova class in PF1. On the other hand, that wasn't really a good thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Problem 1 can be remedied with new features. I made a thread that may be a solution to it, and its origins are back in PF1: Arcane Recall. With the way Focus Spells work, I imagine Paizo can create a feature that will make the 4 spell slot system viable and compelling that blows my version out of the water.
Problem 2 I disagree with. Just because they are your most powerful spells doesn't mean that you will be A. Using them all the time, and B. Will always be effective no matter what. I've gone into boss fights where two of my 3 highest level spell slots were ineffective to the fight at hand, or that I simply didn't have them because the situations called for them. So, I've had to rely on 4th and 5th (and even 3rd) level spells to get us through the fight. Plus, with how limited and precious your high end level spells are (you only get 4, right?), Magi have to be much more careful in deciding how to burn their spell slots, and learn to stick to cantrips until the chips are down and the nova needs to come. That's the Magi's true power, and demonstrates the difference between a player who knows what to do and what not to do.
Problem 3 is just the nature of damage spells in PF2, and it's no surprise, it's just more prevalent now with the Magus since the differences between a 3rd level Fireball and an Electric Arc are quite vast (though plateaus by the endgame). If anything, it could be the reason why Paizo decided to try out the 4 slot casting mechanic, because they don't want Magi being trapped with having pointless slots to keep track of and mis-gauging how to nova. But honestly, this has been an issue with any blaster caster type character, and when you get 3rd+ level spells, the issue shows and magnifies greatly. But just like with Wizards and Sorcerers, they have tools and abilities which help with those very issues; Spell Blending and Dangerous Sorcery in particular.
Problem 4 I also disagree with. Striking Spells needs to be balanced against an already existing feature: Channel Smite. Yes, Channel Smite only works with 2 spells, but if you are a Negative Font Cleric with Harming Hands, you're able to nova XD10 + Weapon Damage + additional riders like Blessed Weapon. Plus have an action left over to either strike or do another XD10 single action touch Fortitude Save spell, or Strike again at -5, or do some other shenanigans. And they can reliably do this for 2-3 combats depending on difficulty by the endgame and if they decide to prepare more. Can you do that with Striking Spells? Not really, even if the Synthesis abilities help in this department, they aren't anywhere near as flexible or powerful. And with Magi having the better offensive proficiencies and incentives, they should be wanting to use these features with as much stuff as possible.
Problem 5 I do agree with, though. There shouldn't be any reason for Magi and Summoners to not be able to cast lower level spells. It doesn't make much sense thematically, and it creates issues with certain interactions mechanically (staves and wands in particular). Additionally, I've had a Magus player in PF1 absolutely enjoy being able to do at least some of the basic Wizard stuff like Mirror Images, Invisibility, Shield, and so on. It's definitely part of Magi and Summoner flavor, and I don't see how it can be broken, mechanically, especially with Spell DCs and investments being a balancing factor.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don’t mind the 4 slot casting for summoners, in fact I’d rather just see them not have casting at all, and have better focus powers. Casting on a summoner just seems awkward given the current way act together works, while at the same time feeling unnecessary.
4 slot for magus, given how much they want to put levelled spells into spell strike, and how many of their abilities want or trigger off non cantrip spells, isn’t right. All magi, as current, want true Strike. Without clear staff shifting rules, martial caster doesn’t provide enough. So they’ll archetype for it.
All magi, as current, only feel powerful using slotted spells. They don’t need to be damage, but cantrips aren’t cutting it mathematically. Again, archetyping provides a way to get more of these spells.
With the limited casting and the reliance on non cantrip spells, archetyping on a magus feels forced, and that isn’t a good place to be.
I’m not sure what the solution is here, because there’s multiple issues. True Strike being too good on striking spell - add fortune to striking spell? Over reliance on non cantrip spells - add more slots or remove all the non cantrip slots and make them a pure focus caster (with focus cantrips)?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
My perspective on this is that I want the magus to be fundamentally different from Fighter w/ Wizard dedication, while enabling some action economy that smoothes over strike and spell-casting.
In that regard Slide casting and 4-slots are actually great design as far as I'm concerned, because they occupy new space, i.e. taking a few high level spells.
Taking a smathering of low level spells is already covered by spell-casting archetypes. And if you WANT a mixture of both, archetypes and 4-slot casting synergise for that very well.
Problem 1: Length of the Adventuring Day
Should be solved if Striking Spells in whatever their final iteration makes fighting with weapon and cantrip an effective and satisfying turn. I'm not sure the current iteration does that, but I also think it's on the way.
Problem 2: Top Level Spells Are Powerful
Again, a feature not a bug. Spellcasting archetypes on martials already do that get spells except the powerful combat spells of the highest two levels. I like that the magus is the opposite, while again allowing someone who wants utility to buy it at the same value as an martial. That's good non-exclusionary design IMO.
A handful of big powerful moments a day is actually an attractive space for a magus to occupy if their cantrip turns are still satisfying enough to feel useful.
Problem 3: Low Level Damage Spells are Weak
Precisely the problem that 4-slot casting is a good solution for!
Your top 2 levels of spell are what you want to cast in combat!
Problem 4: Spellstrike/Spellcombat Must Be Balanced Around Your Highest Spell Level
Which is fine if the balance is a handful of really powerful spells every day, and then it makes cantrips decent otherwise!
Problem 5: Low Level Spell Slots are Necessary For Feeling Magical
That's entirely subjective, I actually don't find low-level utility slots particularly magical feeling, which is why I wasn't satisfied with the Fighter/Wizard. But a spell-strike designed to make me cast cantrips every turn, and a few legitimately powerful spells is new and magical feeling to me.
And you can still take the archetype and do both.
The issue here is assuming the archetype is mandatory because YOU want and like it.
Overall, the 4-slot paradigm doesn’t feel like the 50-50 martial-caster that I wanted ever since the 75-25 wizard-fighter multiclass was introduced.
It actually feels very close to what I would want out of it, I just think some of the tuning on spell-striking is like 10% or so off where I'd like it be, and that the "hit so that you can roll" paradigm is fundamentally unsatisfying in high-variance games.
4 slot casting is one of the things that I think is closest to right about the class, because I WANT big spells every now and then, and highest two-level spell slots are the best way to do that. And I think losing the utility slots in exchange is a fair trade, WHILE synergising near perfectly with what wizard dedications already give you so that people can freely mix and match magus, martial w/ dedication, or magus w/dedication for any combination of level of spell-casting. Nothing is invalidated, completely new character building space is opened, and I'm yet to see any alternative proposed that offers that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that a solid Focus spell could fix a lot of issues: the Magus would have a strong spellstrike once per combat, unless they choose to use their focus for something else, and if it misses it wouldn't feel too bad since it's rechargeable.
I don't like Magus Potency, at least not in its current shape.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I assume we'll get more damage focus spells and probably some new 1 action spells in the full book that'll synergise well with the Magus.
However I think the class should be fun to play even without those spells. Having some lower level slots for simpler spells, not damaging ones but utility/control ones would be interresting, a built in "recharge" going with focus point would be an interresting way to balance a very limited number of spells (I'd also bump those to 3/3 or 2/2/2 if we keep that concept). The Magus would have limited slots, but means to recharge them in combat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that a solid Focus spell could fix a lot of issues: the Magus would have a strong spellstrike once per combat, unless they choose to use their focus for something else, and if it misses it wouldn't feel too bad since it's rechargeable.
I don't like Magus Potency, at least not in its current shape.
Agreed, Magus Potency and Spell Striking with cantrips are only a good option at some levels, and that's my second biggest issue with the playtest. You shouldn't have to run the math to figure out if this a good level of magus potency, etc. If magus potency was just a +1 status bonus to attack rolls, it would also solve some of the accuracy issues for the spells, and reliably improve the magus by the same amount at all levels, even though I would also prefer spell-strike math be a bit more forgiving and the default magus spell be an attack spell to take the load off your spell slots.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Problem 2: Top Level Spells Are PowerfulAgain, a feature not a bug. Spellcasting archetypes on martials already do that get spells except the powerful combat spells of the highest two levels. I like that the magus is the opposite, while again allowing someone who wants utility to buy it at the same value as an martial. That's good non-exclusionary design IMO.
You're not wrong that it's "a feature not a bug" but that wasn't WatersLethe's remark. His remark was that because its a feature, the magus can't have more high level spells. Its a problem-of-design-space, not a flaw-of-the-system, that is: finding a solution is bounded by this feature.
I forget which spellcasting class had this as an option(might have been arcanist in PF1 but not sure) but I'd like to see the 4-spell slots have the option to be paired down. Namely, take your 9th level slot and prep multiple spells in that slot up to the levels of spells that the slot allowed.
Thus you could break it up into 9 level 1 slots, or 2 4's and 1 or whatever you needed as long as it didn't exceed the level of spells that the original slot possessed.
I think this is something that people who are suggestion Staffs could already get behind since they are already suggesting burning spells to recharge staves, might as well kill a higher level spell slot for some utility when able.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If we agree that the design philosophy behind Magus is that it's a warrior first, mage second
I could even agree with you, but a player don't take magus to be a mundane fighter and a caster if needed, they take magus to spellstrike.
IMO if a class has a unique feature, the player should be able to use it at least once per combat. Relliable spellstrike being so limited takes out the fantasy of playing with magus.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
While I agree with your reasoning, I think it's important to consider that Magus might not be designed to feel magical in the first place. If we agree that the design philosophy behind Magus is that it's a warrior first, mage second, then 4 spell slots look much more sensible.
Magus augments his martial prowess and physical power with magic, not the other way around. Therefore, when a Magus ecnounters a problem, his first instinct should be to resolve it through mundane means. Use academic knowledge, muscles, people skills etc. Magus uses his magical powers only when truly needed (Cantrips aside), which usually means combat.
I'm sorry but I just.... entirely disagree with this.
Magus is not "warrior first, mage second"; that's a martial class with a caster dedication, or an Eldritch Trickster. The Magus' biggest thing, it's central theme before even spellstrike or spell combat, is that it uses magic and weaponry in equal measure. Magus uses not sword first, magic second; it uses whatever the situation calls for. It doesn't have the extensive capabilities of a true specialist in either field, but it's also much more than one dabbling in the other.
Magus is the iconic "gish" class that's supposed to be a 50/50 mix. It's a casting class, and it's being introduced in a rulebook that is literally "Secrets of Magic". I'm sorry but in what way or what understanding is the Magus not a class defined as much by its casting as it is its martial prowess?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My only worry is getting more slots they will take away our martial effectiveness.
My only worry is getting more slots they will take away our martial effectiveness.
Maybe limiting cantrips and making their progession similar to archetype caster would make it both versatile and limited?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My only worry is getting more slots they will take away our martial effectiveness.Maybe limiting cantrips and making their progession similar to archetype caster would make it both versatile and limited?
So I get less cantrips to target weaknesses
I get even slower spell progression not getting my first slot until level 4
I top out at a single 8th level spell
All that I view as a no. In my playtests the 4 slots haven't been a major issue. A wizard has 8 and other casters have 6. It's in line.
If it affects my martial proficiency or performance at all I'll need against it. But it would be pretty boring to not get spells until later in exchange for low level Slots.
Rather my hope is if they give us more slots it is because we added under par and we just recieve them without the need for compensation elsewhere.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My only worry is getting more slots they will take away our martial effectiveness.As it has to be ( not to forget the better armor proficiency than any non tank combatant class ).
But I wouldn't worry, since I really doubt they will move on from the 4 slots/day.
Instead I think they'd work on spellstrike and cantrips ( I also don't think we will see damaging focus spells ).
If they take away martial effectiveness I walk from this class and playtest lol.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I argue that the current iteration does not feel powerful enough overall, and that getting top end spells a level later than full casters, never getting 10th level spells, getting only one top end spell, and having a max 16 starting offensive casting stat together gives sufficient room for maintaining its current martial prowess and potentially more.
It is a d8 HD class, with a high level of MADness.
I strongly believe magus needs to be the 50-50 martial-caster that we currently can't build, because if magus isn't that then who will be? Right now it's not hitting that mark for me.
I do agree that the martial ability it currently has should not be reduced in any way. That's why in the playtest poll I specifically didn't select the "reduced martial abilities to get spellcasting like a warpriest" option.
The 4 slot casting feels MUCH more like a bloodrager.
Just... Keep with the current martial prowess please lol. Please paizo
I will say: if they keep 4-slot casting and require you to multiclass into a caster to get the 50-50 feel that's significantly better than nerfing the martial aspect to fit more casting natively. You can't really patch a bad martial chassis with feats.
I still believe as-is the class feels weak, so it needs either more slots, a good focus spell, or some other oomph.
If they stick with "4-slot" casting I will pretty much only play a Magus using Free Archetype rules or double class feats.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, ignoring spell strike.
You have full martial defenses and offenses.
With intelligence your skill options are fairly good along with dex/str skills. I actually find the int skills quite powerful.
D8hp I think is fair
The saving throws are fine I think.
Then you have spell Slots, cantrips, focus stuff and spell strike.
If they make it so spell strike is stronger then attacking 3x when you use a cantrip, at least for the non sustaining steel synthesis. I'll be ok with the current 4 slot system. There is a lot of variation within how you can leverage spell strike that I'll feel I'll have options from round to round and combat to combat similar but different from say a fighter using different feat investments to use different tactics.
The fact that you also have the option to combine it from various attacks via dedications is also pretty cool and makes it work well within the system of the game. Something I don't see summoner doing at all.
The focus stuff while nice, none of it sticks out to me a lot. Unicore seems really into them and I recognize their situational benefits, and maybe that's how it should be. Other than hasted assault, it's amazing, but once you get it you will be using it every combat you can easily. Thankfully it's a once a combat setup as opposed to once a round that summoner has with boost. Not a fan of doing it that way.
Right now I think Magus is close to good. It's dependant on making spell strike with cantrips better than just attacking 3x. That's what I need to sell me on the class as it is ATM. But I could see some sprucing to it's focus stuff maybe.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Part of the reason I like the focus cantrips is that they alleviate the need for spending 60%+ of your wealth on having a fully on level magic item and that gives you a lot more space for things like wands, scrolls and staves. Eventually you have to abandon Magus potency if you want to use runic impression, which is annoying, at least until the magus has a way to get 2 focus points back but being able to have a weapon that is runed out exactly as you need it to be against the foes your are fighting is really cool, AND you are accurate enough that the crit effects of the greater runes (as a level 7 spell) go off at least once a combat and are just devastating. The Magus as the martial who gets to use the best rune for the current situation makes the 2 handed magus way more fun than it looks on paper when set against the slide casting magus.
I also agree that the magus is not lacking anything on the martial side of the equation. I just think items do a pretty good job of covering the caster side, leaving you the feat slots to gobble up the martial goodness of the magus. I tried the castery side with a caster dedication and I just felt like I was missing out on too much.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The main issue I have with your stance on the focus spells is that having the only reason for them to exist is to save your wealth by level income at specific points feels gamey even for me, and unfun, and uninteresting especially as a class feature that I can't get rid of. Because, I'd retrain out if it the moment it's not useful to me.
Cut the fat, how often does your DM take your weapon away. How often outside of those levels where it benefits is it actually useful. How often do you end up impotent because you relied on it but entered into a fight with no focus.
For these reasons I specifically am not on bored with the current version of the potency focus spell. If it had use every level, even if it wasn't every round or every combat. But I can go entire levels without it being useful. That's not fun to me for something I can't shed off when it ceases being useful
PS: I know I misspoke when I said focus cantrips instead of focus spells.
Those are arguments against Magus potency, but honestly being able to just by potency runes 1 tier behind maximum for the sake of essential runes (like shifting), but boost it when you need it is pretty nice.
But it is really when Runic Impression kicks in where things get fun. Which is why I am on board for a smoother way to combine the two.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You know,the survey offers the possibility of a magus that drops slotted spellcasting in favor of a strong emphasis on focus spells and other 'magicsl' abilities. I'm starting to think that might be a better model, heck they could even put archetype style basic/expert/master class feats for spellcasting in our basic class feats, letting people who really want real casting on the magus skip the normal dedication feat.
PS: I know I misspoke when I said focus cantrips instead of focus spells.
Those are arguments against Magus potency, but honestly being able to just by potency runes 1 tier behind maximum for the sake of essential runes (like shifting), but boost it when you need it is pretty nice.
But it is really when Runic Impression kicks in where things get fun. Which is why I am on board for a smoother way to combine the two.
I want it simply because Potency doesn't work well with a magical weapon.
I mean I guess Magus could just use it to allocate resources elsewhere, but a magical warrior not feeling more effective when they gain a magical weapon feels kinda wrong.
You know,the survey offers the possibility of a magus that drops slotted spellcasting in favor of a strong emphasis on focus spells and other 'magicsl' abilities. I'm starting to think that might be a better model, heck they could even put archetype style basic/expert/master class feats for spellcasting in our basic class feats, letting people who really want real casting on the magus skip the normal dedication feat.
Hard disagree, but then I made a whole proposal to avoid that.
Focus Spells, even if they had 3 at level one, means 3 Spells per combat, which is effectively less slots than currently.
Even if you gave them mechanics that restored Focus points, which in general would be problematic just in terms of MCDs, that's still pretty sad.
Runic impressions I am actually ok with. I guess my only issue is potency. But it more annoys me rather than something that breaks the class for me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the Magus received cantrips
and have their spell casting dc scaling as it is right now.
But don't get spell slots (but do get some via feats)
But had automatic focus scaling like the Oracle.
.... Not against it? You'd have focus points almost every fight to use instead of 4 spells per day. Still have cantrips for bread and butter. You wouldn't have to invest into focus feats directly if it works like Oracle you'd get automatic focus point and refocus progression.
I'm not OMG for it, but I'd definitely be curious to see that version of a Magus.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that a solid Focus spell could fix a lot of issues: the Magus would have a strong spellstrike once per combat, unless they choose to use their focus for something else, and if it misses it wouldn't feel too bad since it's rechargeable.
I don't like Magus Potency, at least not in its current shape.
I don't want spellstrike to be something I can do reliably once per combat. I want martial first swing chances of hitting and then action cost and damage nerfs that allow for it
I saw this mentioned before.
A better base focus spell feature than potency imo.
Is one you can use to extend the duration you can hold the spell.
Similar to cackle for witches and sustain spells.
Free action, 1 focus point, extend the duration you can hold the spell by 1 round.
Thus if you would lose the spell due to missing, you can expend a focus point to retain that spell for next round.
I think this is a great idea because it's unmistakably useful. But isn't something you will use every single round.
Free action, 1 focus point, extend the duration you can hold the spell by 1 round.
Hard disagree. Because the problem isn't missing with your melee, it is having a spell to USE with spellstrike.
Hard disagree. Because the problem isn't missing with your melee, it is having a spell to USE with spellstrike.
Free action, 1 focus point, extend the duration you can hold the spell by 1 round.
You don't?
And I think you haven't thought this through beyond face value.
What does potency give you? Occasional levels of a to hit increase by 1. It's non intuitive, doesn't translate well, is situationally useful across levels, not situations
But my idea? Say you missed and are going to lose that spell, resulting in you needing to start the spell strike 3 action investment completely over without ever making an impact and losing one of your few spell slots.
Instead you can spend this focus point and have a full round next round with that spell and try again.
They shores up the low side of the Magus turns SO MUCH while still requiring a choice and investment of resources.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Potency also plays into the issue of the magus having to crit fish to use it's spellstrike effectively
I don't want spellstrike to be something I can do reliably once per combat. I want martial first swing chances of hitting and then action cost and damage nerfs that allow for itI think that a solid Focus spell could fix a lot of issues: the Magus would have a strong spellstrike once per combat, unless they choose to use their focus for something else, and if it misses it wouldn't feel too bad since it's rechargeable.
I don't like Magus Potency, at least not in its current shape.
My whole idea, as I expressed in another thread, changes two main things for the Magus:
1) Magus Potency becomes an automatic effect that your receptacle gets as long as it's charged with a spell, and the item bonus to hit applies to the spell attack too. Remove from Striking Spell the clause that increases the spell effect on a critical hit.Spells that require a save come out worse than they are now; I don't know if that's really a problem, anyway.
2) Instead of getting Magus Potency as a focus spell, at level 1 the Magus gets a damage-dealing one. I'm not sure if 1 or 2 actions would be better. Damage should be in line with things like Elemental Toss or Fire Ray. The Magus chooses one type of damage and sticks with that (unless they retrain), with 'better' ones like sonic or force getting a smaller die.
While the focus spell is once per combat, your Spell Strike lets you land all other spells based on attack rolls (including cantrips) with greater accuracy than if you cast them normally, in addition to the lack of MAP and the synthesis effect. Depending on level, the physical part of the attack also comes out automatically better when you are using Spell Strike.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Does anyone else use Magical Potency so they are armed with the correct type of magic weapon?
In my playtest I had a regular sword and one made from Low Grade Silver. As a Strength Magus, I know that I would carry a golf-bag of weapons to bypass DR. Have my main weapon kitted out with potency and striking runes so I don’t waste an action at the beginning of combat, but have other weapons for when DR is an issue.
I actually like Magical Potency as a way to get past DR.
|
|
Does anyone else use Magical Potency so they are armed with the correct type of magic weapon?
In my playtest I had a regular sword and one made from Low Grade Silver. As a Strength Magus, I know that I would carry a golf-bag of weapons to bypass DR. Have my main weapon kitted out with potency and striking runes so I don’t waste an action at the beginning of combat, but have other weapons for when DR is an issue.
I actually like Magical Potency as a way to get past DR.
I think there's a dev commentary on this regarding doubling rings and as such it is not intended to work this way.
Not intended to work what way?
For easy reference:
UNCOMMON EVOCATION MAGUS
Cast [one-action] somatic
Range touch; Targets you or one weapon you’re wielding
Duration 1 minute
The target gains the benefit of a +1 weapon potency rune, granting a +1 item bonus to attack rolls with the targeted weapon or your unarmed attacks, if you targeted yourself. If cast on a weapon, this spell ends if you cease holding the weapon.
Heightened (3rd) The unarmed attacks or weapons are +1 striking.
Heightened (4th) The unarmed attacks or weapons are +2 striking
Heightened (7th) The unarmed attacks or weapons are +3 greater striking.
Costs one action and makes a weapon you are wielding act as if it had potency (and at higher levels striking) runes on it. I don't see what would be questionable about pulling a non-magical weapon made of a special material and then using this on the weapon.
Doubling Rings are totally different, they copy effects from a weapon to a different weapon.
Does anyone else use Magical Potency so they are armed with the correct type of magic weapon?
In my playtest I had a regular sword and one made from Low Grade Silver. As a Strength Magus, I know that I would carry a golf-bag of weapons to bypass DR. Have my main weapon kitted out with potency and striking runes so I don’t waste an action at the beginning of combat, but have other weapons for when DR is an issue.
I actually like Magical Potency as a way to get past DR.
Yeah, between Magus Potency and Energize Strikes/Runic Impression, a magus can come to any battle with the perfect combination of physical and energy damage. They can bypass resistance and trigger weaknesses better than any other martial.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
i would really like the magus to have a way to get two focus points back, but probably the feat for that requires no testing and would be so popular at its level that other feats wouldn't get tested.
With respect to the original post, I think that there are better options than the current scheme that wouldn't cause problems.
I do not think we should increase the number of highest level spells that the Magus gets. It is mostly for the reasons you give, especially #4. This is true because of the possibility of a double-crit on Striking Spell. Critting on the melee attack benefits the spell by increasing the spell attack result or decreasing the save result by one category which is huge. You are most likely going to get weapon critical combined with failed save against the spell. It isn't that the spell caster can't criticize -- it is that you have an increased chance of a double critical.
If we change the crit-melee hit mechanism of striking spell, I believe that #4 becomes less of an issue. A large part of that is that the spells a Magus would most want are often different than what a wizard or other arcane full caster (sorcerer, witch, etc) would want. There is overlap, but there are significant differences as well.
I am wondering if the answer might be a spell progression where it is 1 spell at highest, 2 at highest-1, 2 at highest-2, 1 for the rest of the lower level spells. That way you only have the single shot that you save for that boss fight with some reasonable spells at slightly lower levels. That feels like it would be about the right power level, but I would really want to do a more thorough analysis of available spells and relative power of them vs cantrips.
Has anyone done analysis of how Striking Spell changes if you take racial weaponry for the critical specialization? The Magus generally doesn't get the critical specialization -- most likely because they already were giving enough benefit on a critical.
i would really like the magus to have a way to get two focus points back, but probably the feat for that requires no testing and would be so popular at its level that other feats wouldn't get tested.
Take a Familiar with the Master Ability Familiar Focus. Once per day, you can regain a Focus Point without having to have spent a Focus Point. You Refocus for the first point, then Familiar Focus for the second point.
|
|
Not intended to work what way?
For easy reference:
** spoiler omitted **Costs one action and makes a weapon you are wielding act as if it had potency (and at higher levels striking) runes on it. I don't see what would be questionable about pulling a non-magical weapon made of a special material and then using this on the weapon.
Doubling Rings are totally different, they copy effects from a weapon to a different weapon.
I think it's something about precious material weapons being intended to be unable to benefit from a rune above their level cap, and perhaps magus potency which would give them high(er) level runes than low-grade can allow would go against the intention. I don't know the dev intent though, perhaps we'll see with the errata.
Ah, that makes sense. You would want to upgrade the special material weapons as you got more powerful.