| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Greetings everyone. I don't know how to do a proper introduction and I want to get into the meat of the topic already so here we go. I won't talk much about spell slots as they are another topic.
The Good of Striking Spell
First of, the concept/flavor is good. I've seen some people saying they really enjoy the "chess game" of playing Magus, planning your actions ahead etc. And I totally get that, it is a great feeling to plan something and see it pay-off.
Then the mechanic, it has a good idea behind it, delaying the release of a spell you cast through a special metamagic. I presume that the idea would be that it "replaces" or "make up" the Magus' different type of actions that a martial would normally get through feats. And it's definitely an interresting take and a good direction to take, along with some martial oriented actions.
What needs to be "fixed"
The action economy is currently too limiting, and given that the Magus does not have a lot of alternative to Striking Spell, it makes it feel lacking when it cannot or doesn't want to use it.
Double rolls is awkward. That's part of why I suggest that rename, I said it before, but failing an Attack roll on a spell despite having stabbed the foe with the weapon holding the spell is kind of immersion breaking, and does feel rather bad.
This requires good system mastery and teamwork to ensure hitting, and while optimal teamwork and smart play/mastery of the game absolutely should be the way to make each class shine the brightest, it should NOT be required for a class to work. As not all situations will allow for the right conditions to be present.
Spell Combat and Spell Strike
So here I am, with a suggestion. First of, Spell Combat, the new name of Striking Spell.
This works by using the Combat Casting free metamagic. It works mostly the same as Striking Spell, with a few exeptions.
You drastically alter a spell to combine it with a martial attack. If the next action you use is to Cast a Spellthat can target one creature or object, instead of casting it as normal, you hold onto it, this is called "Holding the Charge", for a number of round equal to your Intelligence modifier, after which you have to spend an action with the concentrate trait to keep holding it for a maximum of 1 minute after which it dissipates harmlessly and the spell is lost. During any of the subsequent rounds during which you are Holding the Charge, you can release the spell as a single > Action sharing the spell's normal traits.
The idea here is to keep that "chess/planning ahead" aspect that seems to be liked by some people, while opening it to any spell a Magus can cast. It can be support, AoE, buffs, debuffs, attacks, anything. Scaling the time limit on your Intelligence is here to encourage keeping a high score in this Ability, while not disallowing leaving it low if you don't plan on holding spells for several rounds or using saves, and giving you an option to hold it for a bit in case something unexpected happens.
An example I bring up most of the time is this:Turn 1
Enoriel Combat Cast a "Grease" Spell and Hold its Charge before moving closer to a group of bandit.
Gertrude, his barbarian friend, Suddenly Charges at the bandits and kills one of them with her Battleaxe, and her second swing is deflected by the shield of another bandit.
The remaining bandits are flanking Gertrude and she takes some hits.
Turn 2
Enoriel Strides and finally reach the melee, he has 2 actions remaining, both bandits are at range of his weapon. He Strikes the Bandit holding a bigger weapon, and hits, not enough to kill him though. He uses his second action to release his Grease spell to try to make him drop his weapon. Or he could do it so the other one drops his Shield so Gertrude can focus on him. Or release Grease on the ground to try and make one of them fall. What should he do ? Your choice !
I legitimately could not decide because I had several choices here.
But then, what about the meat of the Magus, the signature ability, the thing everyone dreams to do ? What about Spell Strike.
Well here we are.
Magi are able to channel their spells through their weapon in a unique way in order to both Strike a foe and cast their spells on them in a single, unified movement.
When a Magus casts a Spell with the Attack trait, they can replace the Somatic Component of that Spell by a melee Strike, replacing the Spell Attack Roll. This counts as 2 Attacks when calculating your Multiple Attack Penalty.Roll a melee Attack Roll, on a success you will deal both weapon and spell damage. On a critical success, both the weapon and spell are critical successes. If the spell also require saves, those are rolled normally.
When you are Holding the Charge of a Spell able to target at least one creature other than yourself, you can Spellstrike with that spell as part of the action to release the spell, even if it does not have the Attack Trait, if the Strike is a critical success, saves are rolled with a -2 penalty. This still counts double toward your Multiple Attack Penalty.
So, let's rerun this situation with SpellStrike in mind.
Straight to round 2.Turn 2
Enoriel Strides and finally reach the melee, he has 2 actions remaining, both bandits are at range of his weapon. He Strikes the Bandit holding a bigger weapon, and hits, not enough to kill him though. He uses his second action to SpellStrike Grease on the big weapon bandit, he hits but does not kill him, and the Grease splashes on the impact over the sword hand of the bandits, who attempts to keep a firm grip on the handle but only makes it slip even more, dropping in at his feet.
Here the idea is to allow the Magus to easily do SpellStrike with Attack Spells as his "bread and butter" offensive action.
To avoid spamming save spells, I thought of making it a requirement to Combat Cast them and to be Holding their Charge.(at least at low level, maybe feats would allow to spell strike them directly). Maybe at higher level, the save debuff would increase slightly (to -3 or -4?) so a high level Magus can still be good with save spells, while not allowing multiclass characters to be better than the Magus at being a Magus (so a Fighter with the Spellstrike from Magus Dedication, despite critting more often, would not benefit from it as much)
Conclusion
With those two abilities, despite making setup turns relatively heavy, following ones gives the Magus more flexibility. When you are Holding a Charge, you essentially have a magical Flurry of Blow ready, so you can have your 3 actions in your turn to Move, Strike, Spell Parry or anything.
This would open up space for more multiactions feats in the Magus' progression, stuff like Riving Strike (2 actions, Strike and inflict a save penalty on the target for 1 round) etc.
Something else I thought of would be giving a "Hold the Charge" reaction. If you were about to lose the charge because of the time limit or because you didn't spend an action concentrating, you can spend your reaction for it instead at the end of your round. However this would only be interresting if the Magus had several interresting reactions they could take, so this feels like a real tradeof. Capture Spell is already a very good one, maybe Deflecting Spellstrike could be one to counter attack on melee strikes by rolling an opposed one, rolling higher than the opponent would nullify their strike, critically succeeding (10 over their roll or nat 20) would unleash the spell on them, you'd lose the spell either way though.
So here I was, writing this up for an hour xD Hoping this isn't lost in the depth of the forum ! I hope you had a good read and you found this interresting.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Greetings everyone. I don't know how to do a proper introduction and I want to get into the meat of the topic already so here we go. I won't talk much about spell slots as they are another topic.
The Good of Striking Spell
First of, the concept/flavor is good. I've seen some people saying they really enjoy the "chess game" of playing Magus, planning your actions ahead etc. And I totally get that, it is a great feeling to plan something and see it pay-off.
Then the mechanic, it has a good idea behind it, delaying the release of a spell you cast through a special metamagic. I presume that the idea would be that it "replaces" or "make up" the Magus' different type of actions that a martial would normally get through feats. And it's definitely an interresting take and a good direction to take, along with some martial oriented actions.
What needs to be "fixed"
The action economy is currently too limiting, and given that the Magus does not have a lot of alternative to Striking Spell, it makes it feel lacking when it cannot or doesn't want to use it.
Double rolls is awkward. That's part of why I suggest that rename, I said it before, but failing an Attack roll on a spell despite having stabbed the foe with the weapon holding the spell is kind of immersion breaking, and does feel rather bad.
This requires good system mastery and teamwork to ensure hitting, and while optimal teamwork and smart play/mastery of the game absolutely should be the way to make each class shine the brightest, it should NOT be required for a class to work. As not all situations will allow for the right conditions to be present.Spell Combat and Spell Strike
So here I am, with a suggestion. First of, Spell Combat, the new name of Striking Spell.
This works by using the Combat Casting free metamagic. It works mostly the same as Striking Spell, with a few exeptions.
You...
Really liked your ideas. I should point out that, in addition to making much more narrative sense, your idea of having both Spell Combat and Spellstrike is a nice nod to the 1e Magus.
I think a solution like this could please both camps. Those that want to 'play chess' could Spell Combat as they see fit while those wanting to have a reliable, not swingy Spellstrike would still have it.
Yes, I tried to make something that could satisfy both those who liked the Striking Spell mechanic (which does have good aspects, the idea of "reducing" the casting time of most spells to 1 action by sacrificing a setup turn gives the Magus a unique flexibility) and those who want something more streamlined and reliable.
I hope we get some fun feats that could build on that like on turning AoE spells (Fireball etc) into cones when spellstriking with them is you so wish, maybe making it a spell metamagic to use on a Held Charge, so it would be back to a 2 action activity on the turn you use it, but the target of the Strike would take extra damage (from the weapon), potentially a worse save and you'd still do an AoE while in melee.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The balance issue has been addressed by theory crafter much more capable than I am and their conclusion is pretty clear. Striking Spell is underpowered, making it a single roll for attack rolls put it slightly under other martials when using cantrips (when using ranger as an example) and above when using one of their precious spell slot for the strongest damage spell they have available.
Numbers can be tweaked fairly easily, I am just addressing mechanics and flavor because I think, from both feedbacks I read and my own experimentation (sadly alone for now) that Striking Spell is extremely clunky as it is.
You are more than welcome to crush some numbers with that alternative system I am proposing and see if the Magus suddenly becomes too powerful.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Have you had the opportunity to test your system?
If so, could you share some insights on how it played?
I haven't had the opportunity yet, I'd like to find people to do it with. (If not I'll just run some test encounters on my own.)
Btw if anyone would like to participate in one, say it here or send me a DM and we could try to set something up during the week or weekend.
Update: Currently preparing the testing setup.
7th level, Half-elf with bastard sword, Spirit Sheath, Spell Parry and Energize Strikes. Haste, Slow, Enervation and Shocking grasp (4th). Spending money on wands/scrolls instead of weapon. Maybe will avoid stuff like rings of wizardry.
Party will consist of Magus, Gertrude, a cleric and a ranger or rogue.
Edit: Thinking of making Spell Strike a reaction to release Held Charges. Since with those you can chose on which strike they'll be release, since some spells could be use differently. That way, especially when you have Capture Spell, it'll make you unable to capture one afterward, leaving you more vulnerable.
Edit 2: From just testing out the first 2 main damage dealers. Their damages seems comparable on single strikes.
Enoriel averages around 25 to 35 with SpellStrike Produce Flame, Around 85 on a crit with very good rolls, 56 on another with bad damage on the spell(counting persistent first tick) and Energize for 2 actions.
Gertrude is also around 20 to 36 on average, but since she has less dices her damage is more swingy. But it only costs her 1 action and she can easily do a second strike. If both hits she usually outdamages Enoriel. On a crit she does not go as high, 52, 36, 54 unless she does a double 12 on her weapon dice which goes up to 72 to maximum.
So on Two Actions, on average for an ennemy at 25 AC on 4 rounds with 2 actions spent attacking each:
Gertrude did 169 damage. 3 misses and 2 crits. (And 147 with another round with 3 misses and no crits)
Enoriel did 62. 2 misses, 2 hits. If I give him a second chance: 99 with 1 miss and 3 hits, no crits. Took 6 attempts to all hit and get one crit for 166 direct damage and a total of 196 with 3 rounds of persistent damage since the first hit critted (assuming the target doesn't get removed)
So, while on individual hits he can outdamage the barbarian, since he hits less often (Despite having +1 to hit over Gertrude thanks to Magus Potency) it seems that Gertrude has more reliable damage. Though on fairly good turns they are comparable.
I just realized that I forgot that on misses Enoriel could hold the charge for a few more turns thanks to his intelligence modifier.
So I ran ONE set of 4 round where he did nothing but attacking and recasting only when the spell was discharged.
Turn 1:
2 Action Spellstrike: Miss (21 vs 25)
1 Action Spellstrike: Miss (12 vs 25)
Turn 2:
1 Action SpellStrike: CRIT (37 vs 25) 64 + 4d4 persistent.
2 Action Spellstrike: Miss (18 vs 25)
Turn 3: 12 Persistent (failed flat check)
1 Action Spellstrike: Miss (22 vs 25)
1 Action Spellstrike: Miss (17 vs 25)
1 Action Spellstrike: Miss (6 vs 25)
Turn 4: 11 Persistent (failed flat check)
1 Action Spellstrike: Hit (29 vs 25) 26 damage
2 Action Spellstrike: Miss (18 vs 25)
Total damage: 113. If I had taken flanking into acount 2 more attacks would have resulted into hits, which would have added 58 damage for a total of 171 but then I would have had to change the action economy 'cause it would have required to recast etc so...
Not sure what to do with that data.
EDIT: Wait no forgot to count the penalty as double on the same turn. Correcting it... oh wait no, it's ok, it would'nt change anything in that situation since all 2nd attacks in the same turn missed. So MAP wasn't an issue. Still will adjust the actual scores to reflect the real MAP. Done.
It makes me realize that it is unclear when to declare a Spellstrike. Should it be before doing a strike ? (announcing it, maybe adding a flourish trait then, or not but still having to announce it and doubling MAP) or make it a reaction on hitting (and so taking the MAP only on a success?)
What do you guys think ? (I'm having great fun running those experiments btw)
Ok so, just ran a normal/hard encounter with the characters I had ready ('cause tired of filling sheets).
Gertrude (giant instinct barbarian) and Enoriel (sliding magus) against a Flesh Goldem (2 lvl 7 characters vs level 8 monster).
TLDR: Gertrude tanked and did good damage for 2 or 3 turns before being put down, an early crit really was hard on her but she managed to land one too.
Enoriel took 2 turns to setup. First one was Magus Potency and Recall Knowledge on the Golem (which he succeeded) so he knew not to use shocking grasp.
Second turn, Gertrude was in melee trading hits.
Enoriel casts Haste and Slides to Flank the Golem before Striking, he misses.
Third turn, Gertrude does a crit thanks to the flank, crit fails a Grapple and end up prone.
Enoriel sadly misses all his Strikes.
4th turn Gertrude Stands with only an inch of life left and lands a final hit.
Enoriel misses again and set up spell parry.
5th turn Gertrude goes down, the Golem doing exactly the amount of HP she had left, he misses Enoriel.
6th turn, Enoriel finally lands a SpellStrike Produce flame, triggering the weird weakness of the Golem (takes 5d8 instead of 4d4). He takes 2 hits.
7th turn, he fails his strikes again, spell parry.
The Golem puts him at about a third of his HP.
8th turn he lands his Produce Flame again and downs the Golem.
Globally, Enoriel was very unlucky with rolls (almost all misses were 8 or less on the d20, he technically had more accuracy than Gertrude) but his landed strikes did very good damage, since the fire damage bypassed the damage resistance of the Golem. However he clearly was squishy and couldn't have lasted longer than Gertrude, who even took a crit head on.
I had chosen the foe randomly but it was interresting to see. The Golem had 26 AC, I don't think that with normal Striking Spell Enoriel could have downed it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hi again, new update.
So I ran a few more encounters (nothing really noteworthy, I just did basic mook stuff to see "basic dungeon encounters").
I noticed a few things:
-First: Yeah, Sliding Synthesis with that system is quite strong. I still think it could be part of the base class, but maybe then limit it to a Step.
-Second: To those afraid that the Magus would become bland and would do the same thing every turn, fear not! Whenever you miss a spellstrike, it completely changes your routine. If you miss it on the turn you cast, you have one action left but you are at -10 (or -8 if you use an agile weapon). So you'll likely move, recall knowledge, Spell parry or something like that.
Then on the second turn, you still have a possible Spellstrike for 1 action and a total or 3 actions. So you suddenly have way more possibilities. You could try a manoeuver like a Trip (you have one hand free after all) and then try the spellstrike a -5 but on a prone opponent, which would serve your team, you could just do the spellstrike, hit and then cast another spell for the next turn or even attempt a second spellstrike at -10 if you're a madman.
That made me realize that with this system, the Magus would gain a lot from getting other offensive feats (like Riving Strike etc) to juggle with in his action economy. If Riving Strike was a thing (say...2 actions, debuff the target's saves) you could then do Riving Strike and Spellstrike on your third action at -5, but increasing the likelyhood that the target fails their save.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I did some testing with your version. Had a party of 1 Magus, 1 Champion, 1 Witch and 1 Flurry Bow Ranger (lvl. 12) against four weakened Vrykolakas Ancients. This was the same party as I described in my first thread about the Purple Worm encounter.
Overall, I felt your system did wonders for the Magus. Holding the spell really added some interesting tactical options and removed some of the pressure of having to really rely on the next attack roll you made to do the Magus' main thing.
I thought my Magus did more and played more fluidly.
Thank you for running tests with it.
What synthesis did you use with it ? I was afraid Sliding might get too powerful with it without a nerf.
By the way, if you're available sometime we could run some test encounter together too, you see to have better system mastery than I do.
Was there areas that felt heavy or clunky ?
With that system do you think limiting the magus to 4 slots is still an issue or not ?
Thank you for running tests with it.
What synthesis did you use with it ? I was afraid Sliding might get too powerful with it without a nerf.By the way, if you're available sometime we could run some test encounter together too, you see to have better system mastery than I do.
Was there areas that felt heavy or clunky ?
With that system do you think limiting the magus to 4 slots is still an issue or not ?
Sure! We could sort something out.
I ran with Sustaining Steel because my Magus wielded a Bastard Sword and I really wanted to capitalize on the two-handed trait.
That said, I agree that your changes already improve the action economy in a way that slide casting is either too powerful or feels out of place. Maybe give a free Step instead of it allowing to Stride?
Overall, I found the rules to be lightweight and easy to understand, although I'm going to be honest and say that pretty much every alternative I have seen around these forums seems to relieve the clunkiness of the current version.
I know I already stressed that out, but what I really liked about your mechanic was the versatility of choosing when to unleash a spell or even when to spellstrike with it.
One doubt I had though: when you replace the Somatic component with a Strike, does it still retain its Manipulate trait. Because if it doesn't, then it no longer provokes Attacks of Opportunity and I don't know if that was your intention.
I also think that the four slot system works better with your mechanics.
I hadn't thought about removing the manipulate trait. Spell Strike should still give the Concentrate trait at the very least (so there is some risks) but it's true that removing Manipulate might be too strong.
I did not intend it that way, since often the somatic component is attempting to touch or aim at the opponent I was thinking of it being replaced by the strike. But yeah, maybe it should keep the manipulate trait (and maybe a feat at higher level could remove that trait, maybe as a replacement for steady spellcasting, naming it something like "Fluid Spellstrike")
I was also thinking that Sliding should be a Step OR a half-stride at most (if you take it as a synthesis and the step is a natural part of spellstrike/spell combat, though it is less necessary now)
There is some parts I'd like to rewrite to make things extra clear, since some of the things I said were just suggestions/hypothesis (like spending a reaction to Hold a Charge which is likely way too strong if the Magus doesn't get other reactions to choose from. That, again, could be a feat, just like releasing a spell as a reaction for a normal spell attack roll).
My DMs are open if you want to talk so we can set something up. ^^
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Kalaam, I think that you have some really creative ideas here and I don't want you to feel like my perspective is a personal attack, because I see you earnestly trying to put these ideas forward as ones for adoption into the game as a whole and not as homebrew/house rule content, and you asked me to take a look at them.
In that mindset, of trying to constructively discuss a potential mechanic to built into the core of a new class, I do have some big concerns about the spell combat feature in particular.
The idea of it is really cool, and I can see how the idea of being able to have a charged spell ready to deliver in advance sounds fun, but without pretty severe restrictions it is a real game breaker of an ability. The ability to hold the charge for a full minute, right out of the gate at level 1 is basically giving a class the equivalent of a quickened spell at level 1 that is useable in every combat. It completely wrecks havoc on the action economy of spell casting, and I think you would really see its downside when it is used against players with NPCs that are sitting in ambush with really powerful spells.
There is definitely a reason why the default striking spell mechanic, which does do a version of what you have here, only lasts 1 round and only works with spells delivered through a weapon to one target. Those are important balancing factors in how holding a spell charge can work in PF2, and why the rune that can let it happen outside of a class feature is 13th level, and has severe limits on the spell that can be placed in it.
At most the class feature could give you the ability to hold a spell for 1 round beyond the round the spell was cast, and even then it would require a lot of high level playtesting looking to push the seams of the spell combat mechanic without even considering how it would fold into a striking spell mechanic. I definitely want to be able to ask the developers why they limited the spell storing rune the way they have before releasing a class that gets that ability on steroids at level 1.
For example, I think that being able to cast a summon or other 3 action spell and hold it before releasing it is probably going to have some unintended consequences that might do weird things like making the magus the best conjurer/summoner class.
I am sorry to intrude, but having toyed a bit with Kalaam, idea, I think that it could work on smaller time frame like you have mentioned, Unicore! Had not thought of what you pointed out, but a Magus could really benefit from combat casting a spell early on, like you have pointed out!
Maybe removing the option to keep it for 1 minute and having it just happen on an Int modifier rounds time frame? That would be an 18 to 30 second duration on most cases.
Or maybe the charge lasts for 1 round and then you get a focus spell that works like Lingering Composition to extend it?
True that the one minute limit is probably too generous, limiting it to 1 round or just INT mod/round would be better.
Or even harsher, spend an action (or reaction) to hold it UP to your int-mod/rounds.
So at 16 INT you can spend an action/reaction (with concentrate trait?) to hold it for up to 3 turns.
This was one of the abilities I'm the most unsure about, because I want to add an incentive to keep a high INT score (aside from save DCs).
Thank you Unicore for giving it a look, if you have other suggestions please tell me !^^
Alright, managed to have a session with other people today, as the magus player.
Sadly it didn't really go as planned, you'll see (but it's fun).
So, group was made of 3 people:
Me, Sliding Magus (+1 silver cold bastard sword etc, playing with my modifications)
A Shooting Star Magus with Eldritch Archer dedication (playing "vanilla" playtest magus)
An Archer Monk (with a super fun concept of one-inch punching his arrows)
All level 15, characters made like 1h before starting, not knowing what we'll fight and barely any equipment.
Combat starts right away, some sort of dragon, everyone does Fortitude and Reflex saves. We take some damage, and the area is now void, no air, so no vocal component.
Archers start shooting, I use Magus Potency to get my sword to +3 Greater Striking and slide into melee while spellcasting a Level 2 shocking Grasp (ring of wizardry II) since i'm not sure about its weaknesses and I don't want to waste a big spell. Nat 20, so a crit for about 70 or so damage total. Bespell and persistence, both with terrible 1 damage but eh. Ennemy uses a reaction to make me take 6d6 persistent bleed.
Then I get swallowed and just roll saves not to faint immediately. Thanks Master Fortitude save.
Next turn the second Magus shoots a Striking Spell Eldritch Shot, it will likely be something addressed in the final book but as of now, you can mix the two for a mega nova nuke. Using polar ray and another spell I forgot, sadly the thing is immune to cold damage despite his crit (19 on the roll, added keen effect with runic impression, which technically says adding the effect of a rune and not inscribing a rune).
Monk does his one inch arrows dealing pretty good damage too.
Dragon's goes to Shooting star, casts a darkness spell and attacks, Shooting star is swallowed too.
After a crit fail at the previous turn I manage to escape the belly of the beast, i'm at 22HP on 207, in complete darkness.
The Monk keeps dealing damage so the dragon moves to him, he manages to hold him of one half of a turn (oh yes, the dragon had double initiative) and move away while keeping shooting then gets swallowed and fails the first fortitude check getting in so he faints inside.
I get out of the dark so I can see stuff and Spell Combat a Disintegrate while waiting. The thing comes out of the dark and just uses its breath weapon, I die.
Apparently it was super close to death and if Shooting star had used shocking grasp, or if I had used a spellslot at first we would have won. Too bad!
TLDR: DM threw us against a CR 17 "champion of rovagug" void dragon at level 15, apparently it had mythic levels or something.
The only thing I learned from that encounter is: if I played vanilla magus I wouldn't have had time to land a spellstrike before getting eaten alive xD
Then we had a pretty heated but interresting conversation about what should change or not on the magus, Shooting Star was on the opinion of keeping the double roll and add weapon potency rune on it because otherwise, using a single roll makes the Magus too strong compared to other fighters at level 13 to 16 or so.
Next time we'll play a more balanced encounters and we'll both use our Magi with the adjustment we feel fair, so him with double roll+weapon potency and me with single roll. His save based spells will likely be better than mines and I expect my attack spells to hit more often than his.
To be honest, I don't fully support these proposals.
I think "Holding the Charge" up to a minute with Concentration (or even just up to INT mod without) changes the dynamic too drastically to be a pre-buffing class, which seems something Paizo wants to avoid over all... Giving reason to not do other Exploration activities because you want to hold spell to relase with 1 action also seems boring in gameplay ("don't worry guys, my action economy will be great when combat starts" does not build immersion and atmosphere).
I think the single combined attack is misguided, first by focusing so much on Attack spells vs other currently Spellstrike eligible spells, and second because it seems premised on current version being unreliable... When that isn't really true when you look at compound chances until end of 2nd round, which considering spell upgrade from weapon crits is probably MORE reliable to not waste spell slot compared to Wizard. But fair to say, when you do depend on 2nd round of strikes to have very high chances of triggering spell, it does mean the spell effect can be DELAYED and not happen immediatley after spending actions to cast it, which is suboptimal and might feel frustrating. Given the validity of overall probabilities behind this, I don't feel the "dual roll" (weapon strike trigger to spell) needs to be changed in itself, but perhaps we could address the over-all action economy on round when you use Spellstrike but end up missing on weapon attack.
So what if Spellstrike let you split the actions of casting up? ...Reducing the casting by 1 action (to be considered "partial casting"), but you then need to spend 1 action to "release spell" on a triggering weapon strike? No net change in actions needed for casting, and no real difference if you do hit 1st weapon strike and trigger spell immediately... But if you miss on 1st weapon strike, you now have free action to use for something else... whether moving, raising shield, intimidate, or another weapon strike. Of course if you make weapon strike with last remaining action of turn, you wouldn't have action to release the spell, but it could still persist until end of next round as normal. Since this would work similarly to Spell Storing Runes, asking how they can or can't stack might be wortwhile.
That would also open the possibility to using Spellstrike with 3-action spells. One, they could be cast & delivered immediately if you have Haste up (for 2-action partial casting, weapon strike, and releasing spell). Or without Haste, you can "partially" cast it with 2 actions, make a weapon Strike despite not having actions remaining to trigger spell (or do whatever else instead of Strike), and NEXT ROUND make Strike(s) that you can trigger spell with using 1 action.
Right now if you miss one 1st attack you may not accomplish anything at all in 1st round, but you enter 2nd round "juiced up" (with "held" spell) and can be extremely effective in what you accomplish. With my above change, the 1st round gains possibilities for additional actions so that you are able to accomplish "something" (albeit a 2nd attack would have MAP), while the 2nd round isn't as strongly "super charged" since you need one action to trigger spell.
Using the above approach alone would impede triggering the Spell Strike via an AoO or Reaction. Currently, grabbing those via Archetypes seems solid build to be able to trigger Spell Strike faster & more consistently... which is a bit weird considering the Magus class doesn't provide any native AoO/Reaction. I've proposed providing those in-class, but with additional action needed to release spell, AoO/Reaction would not normally be able to trigger them... Which is fine, if they persist being "held" until end of 2nd turn, it just makes AoO/Reaction not relevant to Spellstrike, but still viable on own merit. Still, it does seem reasonable to allow spending single action in order to "Ready" a "Release Spell" along with AoO/Reaction, which would return AoO/Reactions to relevance for Spellstrike, albeit you are risking to waste the action for "Readying" a "Release Spell" if AoO/Reaction isn't triggered or misses. Considering the efficiency of getting 2nd chance for triggering Spellstrike with 0-MAP AoO before waiting for next turn, that seems a reasonable risk to take, though.
Alright, managed to have a session with other people today, as the magus player.
Sadly it didn't really go as planned, you'll see (but it's fun).So, group was made of 3 people:
Me, Sliding Magus (+1 silver cold bastard sword etc, playing with my modifications)
A Shooting Star Magus with Eldritch Archer dedication (playing "vanilla" playtest magus)
An Archer Monk (with a super fun concept of one-inch punching his arrows)All level 15, characters made like 1h before starting, not knowing what we'll fight and barely any equipment.
Combat starts right away, some sort of dragon, everyone does Fortitude and Reflex saves. We take some damage, and the area is now void, no air, so no vocal component.
Archers start shooting, I use Magus Potency to get my sword to +3 Greater Striking and slide into melee while spellcasting a Level 2 shocking Grasp (ring of wizardry II) since i'm not sure about its weaknesses and I don't want to waste a big spell. Nat 20, so a crit for about 70 or so damage total. Bespell and persistence, both with terrible 1 damage but eh. Ennemy uses a reaction to make me take 6d6 persistent bleed.
Then I get swallowed and just roll saves not to faint immediately. Thanks Master Fortitude save.Next turn the second Magus shoots a Striking Spell Eldritch Shot, it will likely be something addressed in the final book but as of now, you can mix the two for a mega nova nuke. Using polar ray and another spell I forgot, sadly the thing is immune to cold damage despite his crit (19 on the roll, added keen effect with runic impression, which technically says adding the effect of a rune and not inscribing a rune).
Monk does his one inch arrows dealing pretty good damage too.
Dragon's goes to Shooting star, casts a darkness spell and attacks, Shooting star is swallowed too.
After a crit fail at the previous turn I manage to escape the belly of the beast, i'm at 22HP on 207, in complete darkness.
The Monk keeps dealing damage so the dragon moves to him, he manages to hold him of one...
Really nice report! That dragon seemed a little too much, but also a nice BBEG type of enemy.
I found it curious that the Shooting Star player argued that the one-roll system you proposed to be OP when they had Eldritch Archer, which uses a very similar system, and also attempted to stack it with Striking Spell.
To be honest, I don't fully support these proposals.
I think "Holding the Charge" up to a minute with Concentration (or even just up to INT mod without) changes the dynamic too drastically to be a pre-buffing class, which seems something Paizo wants to avoid over all... Giving reason to not do other Exploration activities because you want to hold spell to relase with 1 action also seems boring in gameplay ("don't worry guys, my action economy will be great when combat starts" does not build immersion and atmosphere).
I think the single combined attack is misguided, first by focusing so much on Attack spells vs other currently Spellstrike eligible spells, and second because it seems premised on current version being unreliable... When that isn't really true when you look at compound chances until end of 2nd round, which considering spell upgrade from weapon crits is probably MORE reliable to not waste spell slot compared to Wizard. But fair to say, when you do depend on 2nd round of strikes to have very high chances of triggering spell, it does mean the spell effect can be DELAYED and not happen immediatley after spending actions to cast it, which is suboptimal and might feel frustrating. Given the validity of overall probabilities behind this, I don't feel the "dual roll" (weapon strike trigger to spell) needs to be changed in itself, but perhaps we could address the over-all action economy on round when you use Spellstrike but end up missing on weapon attack.
So what if Spellstrike let you split the actions of casting up? ...Reducing the casting by 1 action (to be considered "partial casting"), but you then need to spend 1 action to "release spell" on a triggering weapon strike? No net change in actions needed for casting, and no real difference if you do hit 1st weapon strike and trigger spell immediately... But if you miss on 1st weapon strike, you now have free action to use for something else... whether moving, raising shield, intimidate, or another weapon strike. Of course if you make weapon...
I like your idea, but am not sold on the two-roll system receiving no change at all.
I think that what’s in question is not the Magus’ ability to hit with the Melee Strike, but rather the fact that, unless they crit with it, that Spell Attack roll has quite a chance to miss, especially against level+ foes.
Eldritch Archer already has a one-roll system that is at least enticing to the point where we’ve already discussing whether there’s any reason for shooting star Magi to not get the archetype.
I don’t mean to derail Kalaam’s thread, but I think the whole assumption for it being over the edge is a bit flawed. I mean, we already had two NPCs and an Archetype doing it. And the NPCs get it as a two-action activity. I think a fair compromise could be to keep the action economy as is and folding the two rolls in one. That way, the NPCs are still more powerful and the Eldritch Archer becomes something like a Martial Artist to the Magus’ Monk. Save spells still work as intended and the Magus really gets that much needed incentive to striking spell their cantrips as opposed to striking multiple times.
However, I’d be interested to see how an improved action economy system turns out =)
That said, I think a more conservative way to adress the matter could be by striking spell leaving its target flat-footed regarding the spell attack. Doesn’t break anything (because you could get it with a flank) and helps sustaining steel and shooting star Magi
To be honest, I don't fully support these proposals.
I think "Holding the Charge" up to a minute with Concentration (or even just up to INT mod without) changes the dynamic too drastically to be a pre-buffing class, which seems something Paizo wants to avoid over all... Giving reason to not do other Exploration activities because you want to hold spell to relase with 1 action also seems boring in gameplay ("don't worry guys, my action economy will be great when combat starts" does not build immersion and atmosphere).
Thanks for your feedback, I'll try to address everything.
First of, true, one minute may be too much. Though I never thought of holding it during exploration since...well one minute is not that much, unless you are expecting a combat right behind a door you'll just waste a spell. I forgot to add that after 1 minute the character would be Tired, like with any sustained spells.
But it's true that 1 minute is overkill, int-mod/round would probably be more than enough to give some flexibility when you have time to prepare before a fight, maybe forcing you to use an action to hold it up to int-mod/round.
I think the single combined attack is misguided, first by focusing so much on Attack spells vs other currently Spellstrike eligible spells, and second because it seems premised on current version being unreliable... When that isn't really true when you look at compound chances until end of 2nd round, which considering spell upgrade from weapon crits is probably MORE reliable to not waste spell slot compared to Wizard. But fair to say, when you do depend on 2nd round of strikes to have very high chances of triggering spell, it does mean the spell effect can be DELAYED and not happen immediatley after spending actions to cast it, which is suboptimal and might feel frustrating. Given the validity of overall probabilities behind this, I don't feel the "dual roll" (weapon strike trigger to spell) needs to be changed in itself, but perhaps we could address the over-all action economy on round when you use Spellstrike but end up missing on weapon attack.
Here it is more a matter of personnal preferences. I think the dual roll makes ZERO sense narratively if you strike with a spell that is inside the weapon, that's one more reason I removed that. It slows down the table too much, for a very high high when you crit, and disappointing middle and very low lows when you crit fail. To me it's particularly unfun.
So what if Spellstrike let you split the actions of casting up? ...Reducing the casting by 1 action (to be considered "partial casting"), but you then need to spend 1 action to "release spell" on a triggering weapon strike? No net change in actions needed for casting, and no real difference if you do hit 1st weapon strike and trigger spell immediately... But if you miss on 1st weapon strike, you now have free action to use for something else... whether moving, raising shield, intimidate, or another weapon strike. Of course if you make weapon strike with last remaining action of turn, you wouldn't have action to release the spell, but it could still persist until end of next round as normal. Since this would work similarly to Spell Storing Runes, asking how they can or can't stack might be wortwhile.
That would also open the possibility to using Spellstrike with 3-action spells. One, they could be cast & delivered immediately if you have Haste up (for 2-action partial casting, weapon strike, and releasing spell). Or without Haste, you can "partially" cast it with 2 actions, make a weapon Strike despite not having actions remaining to trigger spell (or do whatever else instead of Strike), and NEXT ROUND make Strike(s) that you can trigger spell with using 1 action.
Right now if you miss one 1st attack you may not accomplish anything at all in 1st round, but you enter 2nd round "juiced up" (with "held" spell) and can be extremely effective in what you accomplish. With my above change, the 1st round gains possibilities for additional actions so that you are able to accomplish "something" (albeit a 2nd attack would have MAP), while the 2nd round isn't as strongly "super charged" since you need one action to trigger spell.
I also considered and mentionned making the "release" an action. It's already the case if you wish to release it "normally" at a later turn. But I also considered making it a reaction to a successful strike.
That way it could work like a "reverse devise stratagem" where you react to an opportunity rather than plan it. "Oh nice I did a high roll on that Strike, I'll use my reaction to release the spell to benefit from the bonus". This would naturally have the fortune trait so you wouldn't be able to stack it with a prior True Strike spam (I think?). But it doesn't really address the crit fishing issue, it just makes it less reliant on exterior "fixes".Plus, if the Magus had several interresting reactions, it would make for an real tradeof to release the spell on a Crit Strike, or to hold it for, say, a Magus AoO.
However I don't see how it's impossible to use 3 actions spells with my version. You have to wait the next turn to Strike with them, but it's still possible. Maybe making the Strike part of any spell target someone else or any spell period would be easier but I feel like it'd be too strong. (That's one thing Shooting Star and I debated quite a lot yesterday, wether or not the Spellstrike could be only 2 actions even for stuff like Fireball)
As of right now, I'm not fond of the "if you failed your first turn using 3 actions for a spellstrike you start your next turn juiced up". It's still a good benefit, but you are so dependant on luck, you need the first Strike of your round 2 to hit or else you're most likely going to lose your spell since 2nd and 3rd strikes will be at -5/-10.
The idea of partial casting is interresting, though I feel a bit too convoluted (yeah, that's rich coming from me) and ultimately it achieves the same thing as my suggestion.
Lead Designer
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
The ability to hold the charge for a full minute, right out of the gate at level 1 is basically giving a class the equivalent of a quickened spell at level 1 that is useable in every combat. It completely wrecks havoc on the action economy of spell casting (snip)
This would be one of my main concerns to. One of the options we're looking at is somewhat similar, in that you have the option to not trigger a spell till later (and get a buff while the spell is held). Solving this action economy issue is one challenge of that. Having it so you can effectively only do it in combat is the most direct path, but a bit narratively weird in the same way stances can be.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The ability to hold the charge for a full minute, right out of the gate at level 1 is basically giving a class the equivalent of a quickened spell at level 1 that is useable in every combat. It completely wrecks havoc on the action economy of spell casting (snip)This would be one of my main concerns to. One of the options we're looking at is somewhat similar, in that you have the option to not trigger a spell till later (and get a buff while the spell is held). Solving this action economy issue is one challenge of that. Having it so you can effectively only do it in combat is the most direct path, but a bit narratively weird in the same way stances can be.
Holding the spell is well and good but the issue the class is experiencing is accuracy and a valid reason to use spell strike with cantrips over just doing basic attacks as of you were a fighter.
It's an interesting issue.
Perhaps going back to the PF1 rule, where if the weapon leaves the hand, or touches anything (or the caster touches anything if the spell is held in an unarmed strike) it discharges the spell?
Alternatively, you could attach a penalty to initiative while a spell is held as a disincentive?
Or possibly split the actions to cast the spell, say require 1 action to "cast" the spell, and the remainder of the actions to deliver it after striking?
Or if the spell is charging the weapon for more than the initial round it takes an action to "activate" it again for casting?
So it's charging the weapon, sitting there giving it benefits, but it has to be primed again to discharge.
Although I’m for folding the two rolls into one, I’d like to post an idea by one of my players had an idea that could work in a ‘hold the charge’ manner and still keep the ability as is. It shares some similarities with Kalaam’s but maintains the action economy.
They proposed that Striking Spell worked as follows
Striking Spell (Free Action) Metamagic, Concentrate, Magus
Frequency: once per round
You drastically alter a spell to combine it with a martial attack. If the next action you use is to Cast a Spell that can target one creature or object, instead of casting it as normal, you place its magic into one melee weapon you’re wielding or into your body to use with an unarmed attack.
You gain the Release the Charge reaction (or free action).
Release the Charge (reaction)
Trigger: You hit a creature with a melee Strike and the weapon you used was the receptacle of a spell cast through Striking Spell.
Effect. Your spell is discharged and causes its effects. The spell still requires its normal spell attack roll or saving throw, but you don’t increase your multiple attack penalty until after the spell attack roll. If your discharging Strike was a critical success, the degree of success is one better than you rolled for a spell attack roll or one worse than the target rolls for a saving throw.
Then the spell would stay on for Int modifier rounds
What they argued was that this delivery system could allow rhe Magus to choose when to discharge the spell, which meant they could wait for a crit or still try their luck with the normal spell resolution.
The difference would be that the player would have more agency on when to bet their chips.
I don’t know whether this solves anything, but my player said he’d feel more comfortable choosing which strike that would trigger a precious slot
Although I’m for folding the two rolls into one, I’d like to post an idea by one of my players had an idea that could work in a ‘hold the charge’ manner and still keep the ability as is. It shares some similarities with Kalaam’s but maintains the action economy.
They proposed that Striking Spell worked as follows
Striking Spell (Free Action) Metamagic, Concentrate, Magus
Frequency: once per roundYou drastically alter a spell to combine it with a martial attack. If the next action you use is to Cast a Spell that can target one creature or object, instead of casting it as normal, you place its magic into one melee weapon you’re wielding or into your body to use with an unarmed attack.
You gain the Release the Charge reaction (or free action).
Release the Charge (reaction)
Trigger: You hit a creature with a melee Strike and the weapon you used was the receptacle of a spell cast through Striking Spell.
Effect. Your spell is discharged and causes its effects. The spell still requires its normal spell attack roll or saving throw, but you don’t increase your multiple attack penalty until after the spell attack roll. If your discharging Strike was a critical success, the degree of success is one better than you rolled for a spell attack roll or one worse than the target rolls for a saving throw.Then the spell would stay on for Int modifier rounds
What they argued was that this delivery system could allow rhe Magus to choose when to discharge the spell, which meant they could wait for a crit or still try their luck with the normal spell resolution.
The difference would be that the player would have more agency on when to bet their chips.
I don’t know whether this solves anything, but my player said he’d feel more comfortable choosing which strike that would trigger a precious slot
Could bake energized strikes into the class as well giving you a sort of panache system so you get some kind of small buff when your holding that charge as well. I also like the idea of using your reaction.
Would make them play like a paladin in 5e though
Yeah. I don`t know if that`d be my ideal version for what the Magus should or does represent (still would rather get a fix to striking spell). Still, the reaction makes the crit fishing be less unsavory.
Your idea is nice. The routine, I`d suppose, would be to keep Striking with the energized buff and wait for the crit to release the charge. Even though its not my favorite solution, I`d still favor it over the current one. You could even go greenflameblade style and have the Energized damage be Splash.
One thing to be pointed about the 5e Paladin, although they are very very different from Magi, is that there`s nothing that makes them lose their slot when they say `I Divine Smite`=)
The ability to hold the charge for a full minute, right out of the gate at level 1 is basically giving a class the equivalent of a quickened spell at level 1 that is useable in every combat. It completely wrecks havoc on the action economy of spell casting (snip)This would be one of my main concerns to. One of the options we're looking at is somewhat similar, in that you have the option to not trigger a spell till later (and get a buff while the spell is held). Solving this action economy issue is one challenge of that. Having it so you can effectively only do it in combat is the most direct path, but a bit narratively weird in the same way stances can be.
I wasn't expecting you to pop on this thread, that's great ! o/
And yeah i wish I could edit that part out and limit it to the INT-mod >.> but well, cannot edit it now.
What narrative weirdness are you thinking about exactly ? That's one thing I try to avoid too and if there was one in my suggestion I'd like to be made aware of it.
Although I’m for folding the two rolls into one, I’d like to post an idea by one of my players had an idea that could work in a ‘hold the charge’ manner and still keep the ability as is. It shares some similarities with Kalaam’s but maintains the action economy.
They proposed that Striking Spell worked as follows
Striking Spell (Free Action) Metamagic, Concentrate, Magus
Frequency: once per roundYou drastically alter a spell to combine it with a martial attack. If the next action you use is to Cast a Spell that can target one creature or object, instead of casting it as normal, you place its magic into one melee weapon you’re wielding or into your body to use with an unarmed attack.
You gain the Release the Charge reaction (or free action).
Release the Charge (reaction)
Trigger: You hit a creature with a melee Strike and the weapon you used was the receptacle of a spell cast through Striking Spell.
Effect. Your spell is discharged and causes its effects. The spell still requires its normal spell attack roll or saving throw, but you don’t increase your multiple attack penalty until after the spell attack roll. If your discharging Strike was a critical success, the degree of success is one better than you rolled for a spell attack roll or one worse than the target rolls for a saving throw.Then the spell would stay on for Int modifier rounds
What they argued was that this delivery system could allow rhe Magus to choose when to discharge the spell, which meant they could wait for a crit or still try their luck with the normal spell resolution.
The difference would be that the player would have more agency on when to bet their chips.
I don’t know whether this solves anything, but my player said he’d feel more comfortable choosing which strike that would trigger a precious slot
I'm sharing your player's opinion that having a reaction to release a charge could be a great option to have. I don't know if I made it clear in my "rework" but I made SpellStrike a special type of strike so you have to announce it first (so you can choose to attempt to discharge the spell or not). Maybe both options could cohabit (one of those being a feat maybe ?)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The ability to hold the charge for a full minute, right out of the gate at level 1 is basically giving a class the equivalent of a quickened spell at level 1 that is useable in every combat. It completely wrecks havoc on the action economy of spell casting (snip)This would be one of my main concerns to. One of the options we're looking at is somewhat similar, in that you have the option to not trigger a spell till later (and get a buff while the spell is held). Solving this action economy issue is one challenge of that. Having it so you can effectively only do it in combat is the most direct path, but a bit narratively weird in the same way stances can be.I wasn't expecting you to pop on this thread, that's great ! o/
And yeah i wish I could edit that part out and limit it to the INT-mod >.> but well, cannot edit it now.
What narrative weirdness are you thinking about exactly ? That's one thing I try to avoid too and if there was one in my suggestion I'd like to be made aware of it.
Narrative weirdness would be from being able to hold a charge in combat but not out of combat, making combat into some magical narrative space can be pretty jarring for a lot of players. PF2 has been good about trying to create limits like "when an enemy is visible to you" (for rage) or just having very specific short durations. For holding a spell charge, it gets a little weird with cantrips that should be able to be cast at any time.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Narrative weirdness would be from being able to hold a charge in combat but not out of combat, making combat into some magical narrative space can be pretty jarring for a lot of players. PF2 has been good about trying to create limits like "when an enemy is visible to you" (for rage) or just having very specific short durations. For holding a spell charge, it gets a little weird with cantrips that should be able to be cast at any time.The ability to hold the charge for a full minute, right out of the gate at level 1 is basically giving a class the equivalent of a quickened spell at level 1 that is useable in every combat. It completely wrecks havoc on the action economy of spell casting (snip)This would be one of my main concerns to. One of the options we're looking at is somewhat similar, in that you have the option to not trigger a spell till later (and get a buff while the spell is held). Solving this action economy issue is one challenge of that. Having it so you can effectively only do it in combat is the most direct path, but a bit narratively weird in the same way stances can be.I wasn't expecting you to pop on this thread, that's great ! o/
And yeah i wish I could edit that part out and limit it to the INT-mod >.> but well, cannot edit it now.
What narrative weirdness are you thinking about exactly ? That's one thing I try to avoid too and if there was one in my suggestion I'd like to be made aware of it.
Yeah. I was thinking that by shortening it (or making that trying to hold it for a full minute made you Tired like sustained stuff, even cantrip) it would fix that.
But then about narration, a character doing that constantly IS kinda weird. It would be like a Wizard casting Shield every 6 seconds because they are afraid of being ambushed. Or a Rogue rolling Hide constantly.
The ability to hold the charge for a full minute, right out of the gate at level 1 is basically giving a class the equivalent of a quickened spell at level 1 that is useable in every combat. It completely wrecks havoc on the action economy of spell casting (snip)This would be one of my main concerns to. One of the options we're looking at is somewhat similar, in that you have the option to not trigger a spell till later (and get a buff while the spell is held). Solving this action economy issue is one challenge of that. Having it so you can effectively only do it in combat is the most direct path, but a bit narratively weird in the same way stances can be.
Wait... that sounds like my idea! That sounds like the idea I posted in this thread right here!
I know it's likely that Paizo's designers came up with this idea on their own without even seeing the thread I posted- or someone posted similar here, on Reddit, on Discord, or somewhere else- but if nothing else I'm happy to hear that they like this line of thought.
Alright, managed to have a session with other people today, as the magus player.
Sadly it didn't really go as planned, you'll see (but it's fun).So, group was made of 3 people:
Me, Sliding Magus (+1 silver cold bastard sword etc, playing with my modifications)
A Shooting Star Magus with Eldritch Archer dedication (playing "vanilla" playtest magus)
An Archer Monk (with a super fun concept of one-inch punching his arrows)All level 15, characters made like 1h before starting, not knowing what we'll fight and barely any equipment.
Combat starts right away, some sort of dragon, everyone does Fortitude and Reflex saves. We take some damage, and the area is now void, no air, so no vocal component.
Archers start shooting, I use Magus Potency to get my sword to +3 Greater Striking and slide into melee while spellcasting a Level 2 shocking Grasp (ring of wizardry II) since i'm not sure about its weaknesses and I don't want to waste a big spell. Nat 20, so a crit for about 70 or so damage total. Bespell and persistence, both with terrible 1 damage but eh. Ennemy uses a reaction to make me take 6d6 persistent bleed.
Then I get swallowed and just roll saves not to faint immediately. Thanks Master Fortitude save.Next turn the second Magus shoots a Striking Spell Eldritch Shot, it will likely be something addressed in the final book but as of now, you can mix the two for a mega nova nuke. Using polar ray and another spell I forgot, sadly the thing is immune to cold damage despite his crit (19 on the roll, added keen effect with runic impression, which technically says adding the effect of a rune and not inscribing a rune).
Monk does his one inch arrows dealing pretty good damage too.
Dragon's goes to Shooting star, casts a darkness spell and attacks, Shooting star is swallowed too.
After a crit fail at the previous turn I manage to escape the belly of the beast, i'm at 22HP on 207, in complete darkness.
The Monk keeps dealing damage so the dragon moves to him, he manages to hold him of one...
Sorry to necro your post, Kalaam, but did you ever get to play those other encounter you mentioned? Curious on how your experiences felt compared to the Shooting Star Magus'
Sorry to necro your post, Kalaam, but did you ever get to play those other encounter you mentioned? Curious on how your experiences felt compared to the Shooting Star Magus'
Haven't got the opportunity to do that yet, I'll be sure to share the results here once I do.