
Unicore |

Unless something radically shifts in the class design, I would personally be pretty worried that allowing the Magus to have an 18 INT instead of putting the class bonus towards a weapon accuracy attribute would be a massive trap option.
The class doesn't get enough skills and skill feats to make being a knowledge based character viable (like for the investigator and the rogue) AND their spell proficiency progression and access to spells is too far behind full casters for it to make any sense to have an 18 in INT.
Even if there was a class build that gave MC spell slot progression on top of what Magus already gets from in class spell progression, you are still just sitting on top of a character that probably should have been a full caster MC'd into a martial class.
Master weapon proficiency is nice, but if the purpose of your character is to cast a spell first, and then swing a weapon when able, then you are paying way too much class resources for the benefits.
While I could see how a caster focused Magus could be a cool and interesting build, I am not sure the way PF2 handles proficiencies makes such a build competitive enough with what you can already make.

Midnightoker |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

Hard disagree Unicore pretty much for a lot of reasons.
One, having 16 DEX/STR doesn't make you ineffective in combat, nor does it really change anything other than moves the burder of power to Spell Proficiency. Weapons and Armor make far more of a difference here.
The only issue with that is that at level 1, you have the same Prof bonus as Full casters. However, you still do not have enough spells for that to be a problem.
The only thing that changes by allowing INT as a primary (even if for only a single Class Path) is that the person could use weapon attacks, which they still would and would be optimal for them to do so, with a lower value and slightly better spells.
This in no way competes with Full casters because they are relegated to mostly Cantrips during this period. And then, shortly thereafter Proficiency further puts them behind.
And it requires no "radical shifts" in the Class design for it to be balanced. It wouldn't even be more optimal for them to go 18 INT right now, as there are far more incentives to focus on attacking than there is to even cast spells that benefit from INT.

Unicore |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Hard disagree Unicore pretty much for a lot of reasons.
One, having 16 DEX/STR doesn't make you ineffective in combat, nor does it really change anything other than moves the burder of power to Spell Proficiency. Weapons and Armor make far more of a difference here.
The only issue with that is that at level 1, you have the same Prof bonus as Full casters. However, you still do not have enough spells for that to be a problem.
The only thing that changes by allowing INT as a primary (even if for only a single Class Path) is that the person could use weapon attacks, which they still would and would be optimal for them to do so, with a lower value and slightly better spells.
This in no way competes with Full casters because they are relegated to mostly Cantrips during this period. And then, shortly thereafter Proficiency further puts them behind.
And it requires no "radical shifts" in the Class design for it to be balanced. It wouldn't even be more optimal for them to go 18 INT right now, as there are far more incentives to focus on attacking than there is to even cast spells that benefit from INT.
Maybe this is a very difficult discussion to have at this point in the design process, because we are so uncertain about what is going to happen with the striking spell feature and with the classes spell slot progression. As it is currently designed, reducing your accuracy with weapon attacks hurts your spell accuracy as well, which is why an 18 INT seems like a trap to me. At 1st level , it will feel fine, but as you level up, it will become more and more apparent that you have invested in an attribute that has a flat cap on how valuable it is to your class. Your proficiency falls behind anyway, and your number of spell slots plateau at 4.
Now it would be possible for changes to spell progression and the spell striking feature to make INT more valuable to the magus class, but it would be equally possible for those changes to make it less valuable, which is why I am cautious of the idea. I don't think it would make the magus too powerful, rather, the current magus design doesn't use INT enough for it to be valuable primary attribute.

drakinar 451 |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe this is a very difficult discussion to have at this point in the design process, because we are so uncertain about what is going to happen with the striking spell feature and with the classes spell slot progression. As it is currently designed, reducing your accuracy with weapon attacks hurts your spell accuracy as well, which is why an 18 INT seems like a trap to me. At 1st level , it will feel fine, but as you level up, it will become more and more apparent that you have invested in an attribute that has a flat cap on how valuable it is to your class. Your proficiency falls behind anyway, and your number of spell slots plateau at 4.
Now it would be possible for changes to spell progression and the spell striking feature to make INT more valuable to the magus class, but it would be equally possible for those changes to make it less valuable, which is why...
I think it is a discussion that needs to happen regardless of the point in play testing. Since the beginning many have voiced the opinion that the magus seems to be somewhat disjointed like a really bad dual class rather than a single class that blends the facets of martial and arcane together. Moving the primary stat to Int has many benefits and combined with the martial proficiency helps to present a blend and not a martial class with some arcane tricks bolted on. Give a magus a melee strike option that lets them use the martial proficiency with Int stat to discharge a striking spell and you end up with a martial who excels at what he should be doing (using his core class feature) and is still passable at normal attacks. Do the same for the spell attack roll on a discharge (note still two rolls) and you end up with a caster who is good (but not better than a full caster) at using his core class feature and passable to less than passable in hard casting spells. This gives you a blend of martial and arcane that works better together and makes it seem like a whole class.

Greg.Everham |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
One, having 16 DEX/STR doesn't make you ineffective in combat...
And therein lies one of the major problems of the game system that will be entirely inescapable going forward: It was balanced around the assumption of an 18 in your key stat at level 1 and advancing it fully as you level. Because of this "split" builds with 16s get punished harshly. That 5% hit difference didn't matter so much in a game where your attack would well outpace most monster's defenses,* but it sure does matter in a game that keeps the math tightly bound. Balancing the game just a little lower and allowing characters to skate just slightly ahead (or simply widening the bandwidth some) would have allowed for greater player creativity within the system.
*To be clear, the way players could break the numbers in PF1e was heinous and completely a problem. As typical with Paizo, overcorrection is their middle name.

kripdenn |
I think it is a discussion that needs to happen regardless of the point in play testing. Since the beginning many have voiced the opinion that the magus seems to be somewhat disjointed like a really bad dual class rather than a single class that blends the facets of martial and arcane together. Moving the primary stat to Int has many benefits and combined with the martial proficiency helps to present a blend and not a martial class with some arcane tricks bolted on. Give a magus a melee strike option that lets them use the martial proficiency with Int stat to discharge a striking spell and you end up with a martial who excels at what he should be doing (using his core class feature) and is still passable at normal attacks. Do the same for the spell attack roll on a discharge (note still two rolls) and you end up with a caster who is good (but not better than a full caster) at using his core class feature and passable to less than passable in hard casting spells. This gives you a blend of martial and arcane that works better together and makes it seem like a whole class.
Making them able to use int for their attack is not going to fix anything. All this would do is give a +1 to the spell attack or save DC and make it more attractive for them to apex int. A +1 or +2 to spells is not going to make the difference with their bad accuracy.

Loreguard |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

What about a Raise a Scroll or Scroll Parry?
with the Scroll Parry, you hold a scroll in one hand(of a kind you would be able to cast from, and that targets an individual/object), and you preform an interact(parry) action with the scroll. You place it in between yourself and your enemy. It gives you a reaction similar to when raising a shield called scroll block. It gives you a +1 AC circumstance bonus.
If used it can blocks 1HP per level of spell held on the scroll. If the scroll blocks all the damage it can the scroll flares in some fantastic display, and the spell it contains is released targeting the attacker. (target must be in range of the spell on the scroll, as if the magus were the caster)
Perhaps limit the ability to spells to ones below your highest spell level. DC/Spell attack being set as if the Magus cast the spell, or perhaps adjusted down depending on the normal number of actions to cast the spell.
A variant on the Raise a Tome, which despite me not being sure I can imagine myself wanting to play the character with the ability myself, I think it is absolutely a cool concept to have available. I hope they improve Raise a Tome's ability to be used by individuals of any/all of the Synthesis choices somehow.
edit: also the feat Spell Parry, should have the option to be used with a Synthesis that uses a shield. Alternately, simply allow it to be used with a free hand, or a hand with a shield. Maybe even just allow it when you have a free hand, a hand with a shield, or a hand with a weapon with a parry trait with which you are at least trained?

drakinar 451 |
drakinar 451 wrote:I think it is a discussion that needs to happen regardless of the point in play testing. Since the beginning many have voiced the opinion that the magus seems to be somewhat disjointed like a really bad dual class rather than a single class that blends the facets of martial and arcane together. Moving the primary stat to Int has many benefits and combined with the martial proficiency helps to present a blend and not a martial class with some arcane tricks bolted on. Give a magus a melee strike option that lets them use the martial proficiency with Int stat to discharge a striking spell and you end up with a martial who excels at what he should be doing (using his core class feature) and is still passable at normal attacks. Do the same for the spell attack roll on a discharge (note still two rolls) and you end up with a caster who is good (but not better than a full caster) at using his core class feature and passable to less than passable in hard casting spells. This gives you a blend of martial and arcane that works better together and makes it seem like a whole class.Making them able to use int for their attack is not going to fix anything. All this would do is give a +1 to the spell attack or save DC and make it more attractive for them to apex int. A +1 or +2 to spells is not going to make the difference with their bad accuracy.
You miss that the spell attack would also use the martial prof. So your looking at +1 stat and +2 prof. That actually helps quite a bit.

Unicore |

There are a lot of classes that don't really need an 18 in their primary stat, but, for the most part, those are classes where you are split between things you might be spending actions on. If you have one primary attack routine, and that routine is predicated on trying to maximize your accuracy, because everything else in the turn chains off of it, an 18 in your primary attack stat is pretty important.
Again, a lot is likely to change between now and the book's release, so who knows what will or will not be viable by the end, but the playtest Magus needs an 18 in their attack stat pretty badly. You can't hit with the spell if you don't hit with the weapon.
Now I get that you are proposing a total rehaul of the class to be based off of INT, but that would be a pretty radical shift in the class, and in general design principles of avoiding using replacement stats for attack and damage except in exceptional circumstances. Maybe this will be one of those, but it probably qualifies as a major change to the class.

Midnightoker |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Midnightoker wrote:One, having 16 DEX/STR doesn't make you ineffective in combat...And therein lies one of the major problems of the game system that will be entirely inescapable going forward: It was balanced around the assumption of an 18 in your key stat at level 1 and advancing it fully as you level.
To be clear, I consider INT 18 to be "18 in a primary stat".
The only place it isn't exemplified as such as in the instance where you use Striking Spell and miss the attack.
If you're just casting, it's fine. If you land the strike, its fine.
Now if we consider a non-critical focused Striking Spell, it becomes even less of an issue.

Martialmasters |

I can not understand why the magus is a Str primary class when even the investigator gets Int to attacks via devise stratagem and has class abilities that key off of getting Int to attacks yet the magus is left with a massive split in Stat requirements. If you want to make a hybrid martial caster then Use your weapon Proficiency and casting stat to make an attack. It just seems cleaner and more thematically sound IMO.
We'd get stuck with a severe limitation for int to hit and damage.
Investigator gets to do it once per round.
Thief rogue can only do it with specific melee weapons.

Martialmasters |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Having a 16 in your primary stat either means you are doing a build that doesn't rely on your primary stat or you have made the decision to never get to 22 in your main stat.
Does it have you ineffective? Probably not. But it does make you less effective.
I'll never admonish anyone at a table for doing it but I have no idea why you would other than lack of system mastery or lack of care if your character's performance.
So 16 in str is a no go for me for a Magus. Monk. Barbarian. Fighter. Champion. Ruffian rogue. Gymnast swashbuckler. Etc.

VictorFafnir |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would also like to have choice between str/dex/int as primaly, even having 12 or 14 in int is not good option, You are better of with str/dex, and then full con.
Even investigator have better use of int in his melee attack rolls than magus.
Add int to magus dmg while using spell strike or attack roll to hit and take away his weapon mastery or something

Martialmasters |

I would also like to have choice between str/dex/int as primaly, even having 12 or 14 in int is not good option, You are better of with str/dex, and then full con.
Even investigator have better use of int in his melee attack rolls than magus.
Add int to magus dmg while using spell strike or attack roll to hit and take away his weapon mastery or something
You lost me so hard at the end that I actually sucked hard cider into my nose and coughed all over my phone.
Do not...I repeat.. Do not, touch, martial proficiencies. That's really all I have to say. We already have warpriest.

Martialmasters |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Well then I guess its bad idea.
What I am getting at is including int to spell strike or synthesis that would let us benefit from int.
Because right now what is rly int usefull for magus ? Would it be a problem if his int mod was 0 ?
As it is right now?
It's needed for the spell roll/dc portion of spell strike.
If it became one roll? Any time you use a spell outside of spell strike you'd need int. And given the power of even a -2 proficiency fireball against numerous -lvl mooks. It's more mileage than spell strike can ever dream.

VictorFafnir |
Honestly, spell roll/dc portion of spell strike, you are actually better of trying to have 18 in str and a bit more survalibility, as it will be easier to crit with weapon that you have runes and better proff and increase success of spell roll by 1 lvl rather than being squishy and trying your chance that you succeed on both rolls for spell strike.
Any spell you would want to cast outside of spell strike would be some sort of buff, I would leave fireball spells be used by other casters that can alter it to some degree making it bigger or from larger distance or benefit more from casting it. They also have better proff than magus and more spells.

Martialmasters |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Honestly, spell roll/dc portion of spell strike, you are actually better of trying to have 18 in str and a bit more survalibility, as it will be easier to crit with weapon that you have runes and better proff and increase success of spell roll by 1 lvl rather than being squishy and trying your chance that you succeed on both rolls for spell strike.
I never said you wouldn't put str to 18. But you'd also put your int to 16.
This is not an either or scenario is a both. You invest in both
Any spell you would want to cast outside of spell strike would be some sort of buff, I would leave fireball spells be used by other casters that can alter it to some degree making it bigger or from larger distance or benefit more from casting it. They also have better proff than magus and more spells.
If you want to do damage to mooks, you do aeo. Magus can still fireball even if a wizard is a bit better, and it will do more damage than any spell strike when there be 4+ enemies to hit. It's just simple math.
Either way, spell strike is a terrible ability to deal with mooks. Better off just swinging your weapon multiple times.

![]() |

I'm not a fan of having Int as a primary, I'd rather make spells more of a rider with striking spell or have that use the same attack bonus as your weapon - while I know the thread isn't about Striking Spell I can't help but mention that with regards to the stat spread issue. It's a root cause of that pain point.

Inquisitive Tiefling |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |

This is some very last-second feedback of my own, but something I've been told about from the latest Lost Omens book: a feat called "Mobile Magic Combat" for the Pathfinder Society archetype, Spellmaster.
Mobile Magic Combat: Level 16
Prerequisites: Spellmaster Dedication
Requirements: You're wielding a melee weapon and have Cast a Spell requiring at least 1 action this turn.
"You dart around the battlefield, casting spells while you carefully make strikes with your melee weapon. Stride once. If you end your movement within melee reach of at least one enemy, you can make a melee strike against that enemy. You can use Mobile Magic Combat while Burrowing, Climbing, Flying, or Swimming instead of Striding if you have the corresponding movement type."
I read this feat and I immediately fell into a love-hate relationship with it. I love it because it's such an incredibly cool feat despite being so remarkably simple. There's so much flexibility you can do with this kind of feat; cast a one-action spell and then stride and strike twice. Cast Haste on yourself, then stride/strike/strike or stride/strike/stride, then get similar flexibility for the next minute.
I hate it because this absolutely screams being a Magus feat. I know playtests are for only the most radical and experimental feats/aspects of a class, but if this isn't a roughly mid-level Magus feat I am absolutely going to cry. Not even talking about how it might interact with "that feature", thematically speaking it's just.... it's too perfect! If Paizo somehow doesn't make this a Magus feat, I can only call it an utter waste.

richienvh |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

So cool! This feat harkens to the 1e Magus’ spell combat.
I know Magus has their merits but its kind of sad to see so many nice Magus-like abilities outside of the class, whether in the NPCs , Eldritch Archer or the new Spellmaster.
Hope the final Magus gets a working core mechanic and some great feats as well

VictorFafnir |
Don't know if I got in time but
Suggestion and explanation why removing "spell need to target one creature or object/target" from spell strike can be benefitial to how magus play, also changing how magus will pick spells.
Of course some sepll might now work but those are expections that magus wouldn't use anyway.
Let's take teleport for example, you target yourself by imbuing yourself with a spell what lead to you being teleported, if it would be haste you need to be 1 of possible targets.
Chain lightning, target of your weapon becomes first target of spell if spell can target multiple creatures. Versatility, is that when melee you will be limited to options who you can hit and if multiple enemies are close enough for you to risk casting spell targeting 3 creates or use shocking grasp for example or vampiric touch.
If it would be haste or another spell that would target friendly creatures it is the same, you have to be one or first target of your spell. Being in first line and with limited spell economy you can chose to buff yourself along your teammates or let other spellcaster handle it while you be more focused on dealing dmg or surviving.
As Melee you would want to chave some options, Using fireball is Kamikaze and buffing aren't that worthy if you need to keep concentration spells and front line don't come very well together, but are always a choice for something,
Slide pethaps would want some more dmg or protection and because of them being mobile you can get away more easly using multiple target spells, while sustaning steel could focus more on single target spells
It open new way to play your magus, for sure you would chose spells diffrently when playing ranged magus, perhaps more aoe combined with your arrows being center of spell.
One of restrictions that can help balance it out is that you would need to hit with your spell strike, if you miss then spell is lost. Its stupid one but currently its only fair when melee synthesis miss then they lose spell. But if we get fix on spell strike letting us hold spells for rounds then instead of that letting shooting star discharge their spell when they miss is fair enough IMO. But feel fre to critic
Second one is leaving "one target or creature when spell deal dmg or require attack roll" on shooting star, but that would be lame, but yet again you could use some kind of ammunition that deal non lethal dmg as arrows without tip or something like that when casting buff on your party, of course that would be poor choise because you should be more on distance side (currently you are fighting along side other casters what's kinda lame, you should be able to attack from bigger distance like 30ft more at cost of something)
Its just idea but letting it life can benefit players and magus class in an interesting way and don't force pressure on some players to go spell strike with shocking grasp like in previous edditions.
And biggest benefit are feats, 2 of them require you for it to be attack spell that deals elemental dmg, 4 of them are on the same lvl and 3 are tied to you synthesis, so its more like you benefit from 2 feats, slide casting already can do it with 4 specific feats that only work with it and some of them being able to be use by monk feat.

VictorFafnir |
Also if we could ask for more than 2 trained skills + int and arcana ?
Magus with int as 3 or 4th abilty they need is limited when others have 6 without int...
I men come on men, class that should have higher int will have less than other class with int mod -1, isn't it wrong ?
Oracle for example having 5 trained skills with 10 in comparing to magus int 16 and they have the same numbers of trained skills.

richienvh |

Damn that looks like such a cool feat !
Almost feel like being a martial with caster dedi and spellmaster will make a much better magus than the magus at this point Q_Q
But I have hope that the final result will be great.
Imagine if you could somehow squeeze Eldritch Shot in there. You’d have versatility and Magus abilities for both melee and ranged attacks.

Kalaam |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Kalaam wrote:Imagine if you could somehow squeeze Eldritch Shot in there. You’d have versatility and Magus abilities for both melee and ranged attacks.Damn that looks like such a cool feat !
Almost feel like being a martial with caster dedi and spellmaster will make a much better magus than the magus at this point Q_Q
But I have hope that the final result will be great.
That seems pretty doable for a Fighter, they'd even have a few feats to have alternative strikes.
It would take 1 feat from Eldritch Archer, 2 from Spellmaster and...4 from Wizard ? Just have have spells, 2 more from wizard to get Bespell Strike. So 9 ? If you take EA last, tho actually you need focus spells so maybe more than that with the fighter. Ranger could get it fairly easily since they have focus spells.

Unicore |

I haven't gotten the new book yet, but it seems like some information about this ability is missing from inquisitive tiefling's post. Is this ability a one action ability for after you have cast a spell? A reaction? A free action? It seems like some information is missing. That makes it seems like there might be some confusion about how Mobile Magic Combat works.
I do think it is very reminiscent of the PF1 Magus Spell combat ability. It seems like it lets you cast a one or two action spell, and then probably use one action afterwards to move and then strike. That is a powerful ability, but it is also apparently a 16th level ability that a 1st level sliding spell magus can essentially do now, from the playtest, at level 1. So I guess the magus did get this ability? It just only works when they cast a spell through striking spell, and there is an extra accuracy issue of the spell being tied to the accuracy of the weapon strike. Are those really unreasonable additions to turn a 16th level ability into a 1st level one?

richienvh |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Got the book. Here's how it works (will post the part that matters, assuming it will eventually get to AoN):
Effect: You dart around the battlefield casting spells while you carefully make melee attacks with your weapons. Stride once. If you end your movement within melee reach of at least one enemy, you can make a melee strike against that enemy
It does seem to be reminescent of Spell Combat.
The Spellmaster also has a Recover Spell 10th level ability that lets them recover a spell that has been disrupted by an Aoo, which I think is very Magus-like

Unicore |

That is what it seems like.
I mean, the fact that you fully cast the spell first and then attack, makes it much better for full casters that have martial weapon proficiencies, rather than for a martial first character, as you gain nothing from your additional weapon accuracy than a normal strike, so it is kind of more of great caster-centered gish feat, than a full magus ability of having a spell strike through a well placed weapon attack.

richienvh |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

This could be interesting for Sustaining Steel Magi to get some mobility outside of Haste.
Another take:
Couldn't we pair it with slide casting for a spellstriking sudden charge?
I'm thinking of something like this:
Turn starts:
Casts, slides
Then last action is Magic Combat.

Draco18s |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Oh, combining it with Slide Casting would be amazing.
In terms of "better for martial with spellcasting or caster with martial" I'm not sure. I could see it going both ways.
But yeah, on the face it looks like "this was designed for the Magus." Its fine that it's a dedication feat at 16th and that the Magus has a similar ability from the get-go.
But the fact that it's better than any of the Magus's existing feats (i.e. the magus would hard prefer the dedication feats required to get it) is a problem.