I'd really rather not see the magus get pigeon-holed into only being able to use 3 spells with one of their core class features (like the example above). Limiting Eldritch shot to just spells with attack rolls works, because it is an archetype and not the entirety of your class build. It is just one more tool in your bag, not the focus of your whole build. Having the core mechanic of the magus only work around spell attack roll spells would be a step backwards from what we have now, in my playtesting experience and opinion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is a new monster from the most recent AP volume.
http://2e.aonprd.com/Monsters.aspx?ID=1003
Spell-Imbued Blade (Two Actions) The svartalfar killer chooses acid splash, produce flame, ray of enfeeblement, or shocking grasp and makes a melee Strike. If the svartalfar killer hits, they cast the chosen spell through the weapon at the same target. The spell's attack roll is the same result as the Strike.
Jeez, now there's two NPCs and an Archetype with better Spellstrikes than the Magus.
Joking aside, although I know NPCs work differently and the current Striking Spell can have a few (very few) merits, is kind of sad knowing that you have to be the GM to have a functional spellstrike
I'd really rather not see the magus get pigeon-holed into only being able to use 3 spells with one of their core class features (like the example above). Limiting Eldritch shot to just spells with attack rolls works, because it is an archetype and not the entirety of your class build. It is just one more tool in your bag, not the focus of your whole build. Having the core mechanic of the magus only work around spell attack roll spells would be a step backwards from what we have now, in my playtesting experience and opinion.
I know we have very different views on the matter, but maybe there could be a way to have both instances functioning alongside one another?
One thing we've already discussed is the Eldritch Knight archetype and we've agreed on that point, but reflecting upon it, I don't think the action economy of striking spell bothers me as much as the second roll.
Although the devs probably have their own versions of the ability floating around (I kind of think that this version, Rinanrv's version and the playtest version are ways for them to attempt to implement the concept in the same way that adventure paths featured the Victory Point system prior to its implementation), but how would you feel if:
- Striking spell's mechanic was kept as is (same action economy, crit rider, setup, possibility of discharging until the end of the next turn, etc)
- But it just folded the spell attack roll into the ability?
Saves would work as they currently do, and you'd still get the crit rider, except that we'd do away with the two rolls for attack spells.
I really don't think it would be that OP with cantrips, but rather, the Magus would be more incentivized to use them rather than striking twice and I also don't think it would invalidate the Eldritch Archer any more than the Martial Artist invalidates the monk.
I also don't think you'd lose the tactical aspect that you favor.
And again, Wizards and full casters still get their extra slots, their higher proficiencies and the comfort of firing their rays from afar.
I really think that Magus could benefit from an adjustment akin to what happened with the Investigator. They still have their stratagems and use their studies to strike better, but the implementation does away with the need to roll twice.
I'm good with the second roll mechanic as long as there are actual benefits to the second roll besides "it avoids MAP" in the case of a Spell Attack Roll. Rolling dice is generally fun as long as it feels like a "bonus" and not a "penalty".
Right now, roll two feels like a penalty regardless of Save/Spell Attack choice as the spell (although Spell Attacks are just super behind).
If there is a bonus to the second roll, as Unicore has pointed out FF/Circumstances already boost them a lot, so the bonus would probably need to be a Circumstance bonus so that it doesn't stack.
All the NPCs that work with it now only use Spell Attack Rolls, but that doesn't necessarily mean it can only be used with Spell Attack Rolls or that Spell Attack Rolls and Save Spells would work the same.
The most problematic thing about Striking Spell right now to me is the Crit Fishing and the action cost. Both of those foster expensive turns with huge big let downs.
Just a small nitpick, I think Rinnarv's works with save spells as well.
Just to be clear, we now have two NPC abilities that, although NPC abilities, have less rolls, better reliability and action economy than the Magus' striking spell, so I think this could justify some improvement on that ability.
I would be fine with either a fix on the action economy and the crit fishing like you have pointed out, or a fix on the number of rolls.
To be fair, they mostly had a "better spell combat/spell strike" in PF1
Three times per day as a free action after hitting with a melee weapon, a svartalfar can cast and deliver one of the following of its spell-like abilities through the weapon: chill touch, corrosive touch, force punch, frigid touch, or ray of exhaustion. If the attack is a critical hit and the spell-like ability deals damage, it deals double damage.
If there is just 1 roll, what happens if a fighter takes magus dedication?
Presumably, Striking Spell is going to be rather costly to get, at least 2-3 Feats.
In addition to that, Striking Spell with Cantrips is actually not very good on its own (3 strikes are better right now).
In the case of a Fighter, they are giving up their second attack (which if we consider their Proficiency, Agile, Double Strike, etc. is a big give up) to make a Striking Spell.
Without on level Spells to dish out with Striking Spell, it's in a tight spot, and even then if this only applied to Spell Attack Rolls (Saves still roll) its a lot less problematic.
It's too early to tell right now, but it's probably not a huge problem on its own.
If there is just 1 roll, what happens if a fighter takes magus dedication?
In addition to what Midnightoker pointed out, we still don't know what the Magus dedication will look like.
It could be that Striking Spell works differently for Multiclass Characters in a similar vein that the Investigator's Devise a Stratagem does.
i think the core issue stems from them trying to fold spell combat and spell strike into the same ability.
Granted, the 3 action economy makes the old spell combat kinda redundant, but maybe they could have gone with 2 different abilities (probably unlocked at different levels as well) that one favors action economy (2 action spellstrike) and the other favors accuracy (3 action spellcombat).
Yeah, the current one could be reworked to be spell combat and an ability more like the NPCs (2 action spellstrike) could be a 4th or 6th level feat
I already shared my ideas in another thread but just tldr:
Striking Spell becomes Spell Combat, mostly the same just open to any spell, you spend the free metamagic action and the actions to cast the spell to "store it" inside yourself. You keep this charge held for INT-Mod number of rounds. During those you can release the spell for a single action. (Maybe a feat would give you the ability to do it as a reaction to a successful strike?)
Spellstrike is a new action. It has 2 triggers: "You begin casting a spell with the attack trait, or you have a held charge of a spell through spell combat/capture spell". You replace the attack roll/somatic component of the spell by a strike, apply the strike result to the spell. If the spell requires a save instead (for those held mostly) roll the save normally, or with +2 to the DC if the Strike was a crit.
For the dedication matter, to avoid Fighters being straight up better than Magus, either one or the other would be exclusive to the Magus. (Like a MCD Ranger doesn't get the hunter's edge) Or maybe make the save spell buff increase at higher level to +4 to DC at level 15 or something. Or the Magus gets the current "if the strike crit, treat the save result as one step worse" and MCD Magi get nothing or a +2 to DC.