You do not gain this benefit while fighting with two weapons or using flurry of blows, or any time another hand is otherwise occupied.
So you're casting shocking grasp (or whatever) using one hand for the somatic components, then using spellstrike with the free attack granted by the touch spell. Problem: another hand is 'otherwise occupied' as slashing grace puts it. TWF and similar aren't the only thing that turns slashing grace off.
If you can somehow remove the somatic component or perform it with the hand you use to attack then slashing grace works. Not by default though.
|
Spellstrike works fine, as you aren’t doing anything resembling TWF and the FAQ on Slashing Grace does not say that it doesn’t work with Spellstrike. Your other hand is not occupied after you cast the spell. You might even have cast the spell on the previous round.
Spell Combat does not work with Slashing Grace, because the FAQ says that it doesn’t.
Slashing Grace has three situations in which it doesn't work. TWF, Flurry of Blows, and "any time another hand is otherwise occupied". Spellstrike is clearly not the first two, and unlike Spell Combat, there is no text saying the Magus needs to have a free hand, so it does not by default occupy a hand. However, any spell with somatic, material, or focus components does ("To cast a spell, you must be able to (...) gesture (if it has a somatic component), and manipulate the material components or focus (if any)." CRB pg. 206).
Spell Combat does not work with Slashing Grace, because the FAQ says that it doesn’t.
No, no, no! We had that discussion already. That FAQ is not the source of Spell Combat not working with Slashing Grace. It doesn't work because it falls under "any time another hand is otherwise occupied". The FAQ merely confirms that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Slashing Grace has three situations in which it doesn't work. TWF, Flurry of Blows, and "any time another hand is otherwise occupied". Spellstrike is clearly not the first two, and unlike Spell Combat, there is no text saying the Magus needs to have a free hand, so it does not by default occupy a hand. However, any spell with somatic, material, or focus components does ("To cast a spell, you must be able to (...) gesture (if it has a somatic component), and manipulate the material components or focus (if any)." CRB pg. 206).
While technically correct, there's a very easy way around this ...
Yes. Other than deploying the spell with a melee weapon attack instead of a melee touch attack, the magus spellstrike ability doesn’t change the normal rules for using touch spells in combat (Core Rulebook page 185). So, just like casting a touch spell, a magus could use spellstrike to cast a touch spell, take a move toward an enemy, then (as a free action) make a melee attack with his weapon to deliver the spell.
On a related topic, the magus touching his held weapon doesn’t count as “touching anything or anyone” when determining if he discharges the spell. A magus could even use the spellstrike ability, miss with his melee attack to deliver the spell, be disarmed by an opponent (or drop the weapon voluntarily, for whatever reason), and still be holding the charge in his hand, just like a normal spellcaster. Furthermore, the weaponless magus could pick up a weapon (even that same weapon) with that hand without automatically discharging the spell, and then attempt to use the weapon to deliver the spell. However, if the magus touches anything other than a weapon with that hand (such as retrieving a potion), that discharges the spell as normal.
Basically, the spellstrike gives the magus more options when it comes to delivering touch spells; it’s not supposed to make it more difficult for the magus to use touch spells.
So let's say you're holding a weapon in your right hand.
Standard Action: Cast a spell with your left hand (including Somatic/Material/Focus components).
Free Action: Swap weapon to your Left Hand.
Free Acrion: Deliver Touch Spell using Spellstrike with the weapon in your left hand - which includes Slashing Grace since your Right Hand is currently not "otherwise occupied".
So you could go through all the rules, actions and FAQs we've discussed, or you could handwave the whole thing and come to the same result.
Well, there are no rules on swapping weapons between your hands. It's commenly extrapolated from the "ungrip two-handed weapon" FAQ, but not actually part of the RAW. I also think any "swap weapon between hands" shenenigans go against RAI.
What would be perfectly legal, and I think intended, is Quick Draw'ing the weapon after casting the spell, although that has its own downsides. Of course, as usual, Dervish Dance works just fine.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, there are no rules on swapping weapons between your hands. It's commenly extrapolated from the "ungrip two-handed weapon" FAQ, but not actually part of the RAW.
That might be true, I'd have to look that up. I've never seen a GM play it as anything other than a Free Action though.
I also think any "swap weapon between hands" shenenigans go against RAI.
In what way? The FAQ says the Magus can drop weapons and pick them up , and the FAQ ends with the sentence:
Basically, the spellstrike gives the magus more options when it comes to delivering touch spells; it’s not supposed to make it more difficult for the magus to use touch spells.
It seems pretty all-encompassing that the Magus doesn't discharge the spell by touching weapons.
|
|
Slashing Grace has three situations in which it doesn't work. TWF, Flurry of Blows, and "any time another hand is otherwise occupied". Spellstrike is clearly not the first two, and unlike Spell Combat, there is no text saying the Magus needs to have a free hand, so it does not by default occupy a hand. However, any spell with somatic, material, or focus components does ("To cast a spell, you must be able to (...) gesture (if it has a somatic component), and manipulate the material components or focus (if any)." CRB pg. 206).
Spell Combat does not work with Slashing Grace, because the FAQ says that it doesn’t.No, no, no! We had that discussion already. That FAQ is not the source of Spell Combat not working with Slashing Grace. It doesn't work because it falls under "any time another hand is otherwise occupied". The FAQ merely confirms that.
That FAQ is the source of Spell Combat not working, because before that FAQ there was a great deal of table variation about whether or not Spell Combat worked. They could absolutely have included Spellstrike in the list of things in the FAQ, and they chose not to.
When just Spellstrike is considered (you are not using Spell Combat), every PFS GM that I have run into allows casting the spell, gripping your weapon in two hands, and attacking with a two-handed weapon. Because once you have cast the spell, your other hand is no longer occupied. If a GM allows that to work, then they should allow Slashing Grace when only Spellstrike is involved. If you want to rule that Slashing Grace doesn't work, then just be consistent for other situations.
I see no argument that makes sense for Slashing Grace not working on rounds when you did not cast the spell. If you've got a held charge of a shocking grasp, and you're attacking with your weapon, your off-hand isn't involved at all that round and isn't occupied.
That FAQ is the source of Spell Combat not working, because before that FAQ there was a great deal of table variation about whether or not Spell Combat worked. They could absolutely have included Spellstrike in the list of things in the FAQ, and they chose not to.
Chose not to, because as written it would have made for a very confusing mess. Spellstrike simply does not care about hands at all. All spellstrike cares about is
1) Did you just cast a touch spell OR are you currently holding a charge?2) Are you making an attack with a manufactured weapon?
If you answer yes to both, then you can use spellstrike.
For the comments further up about casting a spell, moving, then using spellstrike with slashing grace:
You could use slashing grace in that scenario as well. Slashing grace doesn't require your hand be free for the duration of your turn, only for the duration of your action(s) in which you are attacking. In this case the free action (that was granted for casting a touch attack spell) you make an attack with after moving.
Another example: You could make a standard action attack with slashing grace, then use a move action to draw a potion or another weapon. Doing so would not nullify your slashing grace attack you just made.
Of course if you are doing a full-attack action, then your hand must remain free for all of your iteratives/hasted attacks, etc. Which is why spell combat does not work with slashing grace.
It isn’t entirely black and white as to if spellstrike works or not with slashing grace on its own... but I know of one surefire way to make it work... getting your weapon as a bonded object, because the rules for bonded objects as weapons treat wielding the weapon as fulfilling the somatic components for the spell and as such absolutely nothing stops you from casting the touch spell for spellstrike with the same hand that is wielding the weapon thus granting you a completely free offhand while using spellstrike.
That FAQ is the source of Spell Combat not working, because before that FAQ there was a great deal of table variation about whether or not Spell Combat worked. They could absolutely have included Spellstrike in the list of things in the FAQ, and they chose not to.
I’m sorry but... what? You just contradicted yourself... if the FAQ is the source of spellcombat not working with slashing grace then there wouldn’t have been dispute prior to the FAQ... if table variance was commonplace prior to the FAQ then there was already enough evidence to suggest that it doesn’t work, and the FAQ merely acted to close the arguments with a clear cut confirmation that it in-fact does not work. So... no, the FAQ was NOT the source of it not working, the FAQ was simply confirmation.
|
|
That FAQ is the source of Spell Combat not working, because before that FAQ there was a great deal of table variation about whether or not Spell Combat worked. They could absolutely have included Spellstrike in the list of things in the FAQ, and they chose not to.I’m sorry but... what? You just contradicted yourself... if the FAQ is the source of spellcombat not working with slashing grace then there wouldn’t have been dispute prior to the FAQ... if table variance was commonplace prior to the FAQ then there was already enough evidence to suggest that it doesn’t work, and the FAQ merely acted to close the arguments with a clear cut confirmation that it in-fact does not work. So... no, the FAQ was NOT the source of it not working, the FAQ was simply confirmation.
Source/confirmation. Whatever you want to call it. Without the FAQ, there would be people ruling that it works, and the existing rules weren't enough to say they were wrong.
Gonna agree with Chell on that one Thune. The FAQ was a clarification of how the rules worked, not a new rule. Yes there would be people ruling differently, but misunderstanding the rule doesn't change the rule.
I see what you're saying, but I don't think it matters for a rules discussion.
Also ... that rule isn't really under discussion in this thread.
SPELLSTRIKE!
|
|
It matters because there’s a tendency to dismiss the FAQ and claim that we shouldn’t look at it. The FAQ makes a definitive statement about Slashing Grace not working with Spell Combat. It does not make such a statement about Spellstrike, which is also a core ability of the Magus (so it’s not like it’s from some other class that they weren’t thinking about). That shouldn’t be ignored in the discussion.
When someone says the FAQ isn’t the source, and then treat it like it isn’t a rules source at all, I think that needs to be pointed out.
It matters because there’s a tendency to dismiss the FAQ and claim that we shouldn’t look at it. The FAQ makes a definitive statement about Slashing Grace not working with Spell Combat. It does not make such a statement about Spellstrike, which is also a core ability of the Magus (so it’s not like it’s from some other class that they weren’t thinking about). That shouldn’t be ignored in the discussion.
When someone says the FAQ isn’t the source, and then treat it like it isn’t a rules source at all, I think that needs to be pointed out.
In this case it sorta is irrelevant though... the rules for slashing grace and spell combat as written were quite clear that they don’t work together... most of the people who argued that they do prior to the FAQ were looking to twist words around to suit their desires rather than accepting the rules as written. They saw a small possibility of “if I read it this way... then it works...” aka willful misreading...
As for the topic at hand with spellstrike... it really is a bit of a grey area... the rules surrounding the interaction are fairly strongly supported for both viewpoints without any stretching or bending of the rules...
On one side you have the rules for spellcasting requiring a free hand to cast any spells with somatic components. Bonded weapons and some class features override this rule.
On the otherhand you have the actual attack being performed as a free action after the casting of the spell is completed.
The point of contention comes when determining exactly where you make the distinction of if slashing grace can apply or not... if you call it for the full action of Spellstrike, then it doesn’t apply unless your weapon is a bonded object because your offhand is occupied with casting the spell. But if you call it for only the action of the attack itself the it does apply since your offhand is no longer occupied when you perform the free action attack. However that stance can be seen as undermining the rule regarding spell combat since one could argue that your offhand is free throughout the entirety of your full attack for spellcombat since the spell is cast either before or after all of the attacks... and since it is known that you can’t use spellcombat with it, it would be reasonable to assume you can’t spellstrike either since your offhand would have to be occupied with a spell at some point in your spell strike unless you have another class feature to circumvent that...
Personally I think it is intended to work... but there is enough evidence to suggest it might not though not really enough to be definitive for either side...
Nope, it totally works.
I've changed my mind about my above statements regarding free-action changing hands, you don't even have to do all that.
Casting a spell is a standard action.
Delivering a touch spell is a seeparate free action.
During the free action your "offhand" is no longer "otherwise occupied", so Slashing Grace works.
The reason Spell-Combat doesn't work is that TWF is a full-round action, so for the entire enterprise you consider your "offhand" to be "otherwise occupied". This isn't the case with Spellstrike.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I think it is intended to work... but there is enough evidence to suggest it might not though not really enough to be definitive for either side..
(edit: fixed the quote. Not sure how that other section got in there.)
There isn’t, though. The only evidence is people taking a concept that only exists with Spell Combat (that your spell is your off-hand weapon and occupies your hand for the entire full-round attack) and applying it to Spellstrike.Casting a spell only occupies your hand while you are casting the spell. You are no longer casting the spell when you make your attack with Spellstrike. If casting the spell occupied your hand for your entire turn, then you wouldn’t be able to do anything else with that hand. But you can grip a two-handed weapon, or use a move action to draw another weapon, or take out a potion, or even use a swift action to cast another spell with somatic components if you’ve got that option, because your hand is not occupied. And if your hand is not occupied, then Slashing Grace works.
Delivering a touch spell is a seeparate free action.
During the free action your "offhand" is no longer "otherwise occupied", so Slashing Grace works.
You do make an intriguing argument. I was going to argue that a buckler's shield bonus is lost when you attack with that arm, even though the attack is long resolved by the time you are attacked, but the un-/regrip two-handed weapon FAQ says "a wizard wielding a quarterstaff can let go of the weapon with one hand as a free action, cast a spell as a standard action, and grasp the weapon again with that hand as a free action", and the spell rules say "You can’t cast a spell of this type while bound, grappling, or with both your hands full or occupied." If the spell rules care only about the time of casting to check hand-occupancy, I don't see why Slashing Grace shouldn't behave the same.
Therefore, I bow to your argument, and rectify my earlier statement. Slashing Grace does work when using Spellstrike, no matter the components.
Yeah I honestly didn't think of it till today either =P
I was pretty sure the swap-hands-shenanigans would work, but once you get your head around the action economy you don't even need it.
I'm impressed though, we all came into this thread with different ideas, but we got there without a raging argument.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah I honestly didn't think of it till today either =P
I was pretty sure the swap-hands-shenanigans would work, but once you get your head around the action economy you don't even need it.
I'm impressed though, we all came into this thread with different ideas, but we got there without a raging argument.
"Hey guys, I got the pitchforks and torches ready, sorry I'm late...oh"
Nope, it totally works.
I've changed my mind about my above statements regarding free-action changing hands, you don't even have to do all that.
Casting a spell is a standard action.
Delivering a touch spell is a seeparate free action.
During the free action your "offhand" is no longer "otherwise occupied", so Slashing Grace works.
The reason Spell-Combat doesn't work is that TWF is a full-round action, so for the entire enterprise you consider your "offhand" to be "otherwise occupied". This isn't the case with Spellstrike.
Yeah, I agree with this on second thought.
thanks for the good discussion there team. glad there was an overall consensus. i guess my only remaining query is has this ever been confirmed with a DEV/Paizo staff to clear this up? or has this always remained to GM discretion?
if this hasn't been answered by one of the team is there anyway we can get some attention to clarify it (fairly new to the paizo threads)? it's always nice to have a close out on some heavy forum queries :)
No and No.
It's never been clarified because most don't bring it up. Also while there are a number of rules to look at, once you get it all in your head the answer is there. It's not exactly "up to GM discretion" though . It took us a while to get there but Slashing Grace DOES work with Spellstrike, just not with Spell-Combat (thus it won't work with Spellstrike during a Spell-Combat action).
And no you won't get a clarification because they've moved on to PF2, so ... we're on our own now.
Since this discussion/during this discussion I spoke with my GM with what was agreed here and one of the remaining pieces of the conversation that was made in I guess a friendly disagreement was "Your hand is still occupied by the somatic component usage, because as the magic section says the free action gained to make the attack is part of the action. So its still happening with that action where your hand is occupied"
Any solid response or a good description to clear this query up?
The bolded part is incorrect.
Touch Spells in Combat: Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action. You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll.
So the Free Action touch is in the same Round but not as part of the same action. The following sentences even clarify that you can take actions between casting the spell and delivering the free touch attack.
As a Magus you could:
Cast a Touch Spell (Standard Action)
Quick-Draw a Weapon (Free Action)
Enchant your weapon with your Arcane pool (Swift Action)
Move 30 feet toward your enemy (Move Action)
Deliver the touch spell using Spellstrike (Free Action)
This sequence has you taking 3 actions between casting the spell and delivering it.
Also note that the Free Action to deliver the touch spell is ONLY available in the round that you cast the spell. If you save it for jext round then you'd have to use a standard action to deliver it . If you don't use that Free Action then it's lost.
So what we end up with here is that the Magus is no longer doing anything with their "offhand" when the Free Action happens, so Slashing Grace should work fine. They only oose slashing Grace during the Action that is used to cast the spell, not during the Round when they cast the spell.
The exception to this is if they're also using Spell-Combat, because Spell-Combat is a Full-Round Action, and their "offhand" is considered to be "in use" for the entire duration of that Full-Round Action.
If a Magus were to (for example) cast a Quickened Shocking Grasp (Swift Action) and deliver it using Spellstrike (Free Action) and THEN use their Full-Round Action to use Spell-Combat then they would still get Slashing Grace for the Shocking Grasp as it occurred before the Full-Round Action Spell-Combat began.
If the same Magus cast a Quickened Shocking Grasp (Swift Action) and deliver it using Spellstrike (Free Action) but missed, and THEN use their Full-Round Action to use Spell-Combat then any attacks during the Spell-Combat (even the one that delivers the Shocking Grasp) would NOT get Slashing Grace as their "Offhand" IS considered occupied during the entire Full-Round Action.
I probably should have started with this: GRICK'S GUIDE TO TOUCH SPELLS
Problems like that is why I was playing the devils advocate in my earlier post and pointing out how some of the existing rules can (and will) be used to say it doesn’t work...
But as Mr Charisma pointed out, your DM has simply misread the rule, that they tried to quote you, in this case... so long as the free attack remains a separate action from the spellcasting, your offhand is unoccupied at the time of the attack.
Yeah this IS a complicated set of rules, so it's very understandable to get it wrong . Pretty much the only people who know these rules are people who have played a Magus before.
I would get the GM to read Grick's guide and go from there. Be patient, it takes time to learn, and most of the time getting it wrong won't seriously effect the game. Allow the GM to make the call during the session and look it up together afterwards.
Or ... just retrain Slashing Grace to Dervish Dance and it works 100% of the time and you don't need to memorize any of this junk =P
As a Magus you could:Cast a Touch Spell (Standard Action)
Quick-Draw a Weapon (Free Action)
Enchant your weapon with your Arcane pool (Swift Action)
Move 30 feet toward your enemy (Move Action)
Deliver the touch spell using Spellstrike (Free Action)This sequence has you taking 3 actions
I would actually narrow this down to
Cast a touch spellMove action to move
Deliver touch spell.
The quick draw and swift action arcane pool, being free/swift actions means that could be done during any other actions. The move action, however, cannot be done without ending your previous action first.
eg, you cannot start a move or standard action before your previous standard or move action is completed (with a few exceptions like spring attack, shot on the run, ride-by-attack, etc).
Otherwise MrCharisma's comments are spot on. If the free action to deliver the touch spell was part of the standard action to cast the spell, then you would not be able to cast, move, touch. Your only option would be cast, touch (standard action now completed), move.
My point was that you can do other actions between casting the spell and delivering the free touch attack.
In the unlikely event that you have a Bard in your party, and said bard had a readied action to cast HEROIC FINALE after your move action you could even take another standard action before delivering the spell.
Or if you cast a Swift action touch-spell (eg. Quickened Shocking Grasp) you could take a Move Action and a Standard Action before delivering the free touch attack. You could even take a Full-Round Action between the Swift Action casting and thr Free Action touch attack.
The number of actions taken is irrelevant, the point is that the free touch attack is its own separate action.
My point was that you can do other actions between casting the spell and delivering the free touch attack.
In the unlikely event that you have a Bard in your party, and said bard had a readied action to cast HEROIC FINALE after your move action you could even take another standard action before delivering the spell.
Or if you cast a Swift action touch-spell (eg. Quickened Shocking Grasp) you could take a Move Action and a Standard Action before delivering the free touch attack. You could even take a Full-Round Action between the Swift Action casting and thr Free Action touch attack.
The number of actions taken is irrelevant, the point is that the free touch attack is its own separate action.
Some actions cause held charges on touch spells to go away, if following the above plan make sure you don't cast another spell or something.