| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Starlit span is too strong compared with the other studies. Just look at any "Magus is bad" thread. It would be simpler to put it back to the level of the other studies then raise the whole of Magus.
I agree that True Strike is a problem as it is a Go to, spam as much as possible spell for attack casters. But getting rid of it would require a deep rework of some parts of the system to preserve the builds that depend on it.
TBH I do not expect any of this to happen before PF3.
The biggest complaints I've seen about Magus with those threads is that Spellstrike triggers AoOs; I've seen more threads about that than them falling behind on numbers compared to other classes. If we made Spellstrike not trigger AoO, the other studies would come way up in efficiency, since the math shows the other studies can, and will/should, do more damage, and they don't take unnecessary damage for doing their schtick.
True Strike is a problem because Spell Attacks don't benefit from Item Bonuses, which make a big difference in the projected math, and Enemy Save bonuses are typically higher to compensate for lacking abilities like Evasion and Juggernaut. Having faced enemies that do have those abilities, on top of them already having much higher Save bonuses, is an extremely daunting task as a spellcaster.
If you don't follow the Full Spellcasting progression with the Save DC scaling from your highest attribute at 18 and up, your saves are very likely to be Critically Succeeded against, because even at those optimal numbers, enemies can have anywhere from a 15 to 50% chance to Critically Succeed against your spells. I've had standard enemies Critically Succeed by rolling 15's on my spells due to having a less-than-optimal Save DC at my current level.
I think if they balanced the math to function like the Martials do, being a Magus, and even a Spellcaster as a whole, would be much more satisfying to play. I just don't see why they had to have two different sets of progression for the two different "schools" of combat, in a sense.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Starlit Span vs Guisarme Fighter
I've considered one AoO every 2 rounds before level 10 and then one AoO per round. So, nothing impressive compared to the Starlit Span Magus.
I think it is clear you have made up your mind. But honestly I have no idea where you are getting your numbers on this. I just ran my Guisarme fighter with Magus Dedication.
1 spellstrike round one, one AoO. Round 2 two regular strikes, one AoO.
Note these are conservative as I only took one AoO a round and didn't give myself flanking on any attack (really you would have it on at least half).Guisarme fighter smokes your spellstriking magus with fire ray. It isn't even close.
https://imgur.com/a/fyw4Hrn
You can import this graph:
And please, no personal attacks. As a matter of fact, I was in the side of "ranged Magus is ok" before making the maths. The Raven Black can state it as I was not a fan of the houserule of only allowing ranged Spellstrike in Arcane Cascade, and now I think it's a good houserule.
Anyway, if for you this build is fine and if you don't care having a ranged character that outdamages the best melee martials, it's fine. But I really think there's an issue.
|
Is doing all of this mathematical analysis fun? It certainly isn’t for me, and honestly makes me just not want to play at all. But I guess some people find it interesting?
It sounds to me more like people just don’t like the idea of a ranged magus than any real substantive, data-driven rationale to ban it.
YMMV.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Starlit Span vs Guisarme Fighter
I've considered one AoO every 2 rounds before level 10 and then one AoO per round. So, nothing impressive compared to the Starlit Span Magus.
I think it is clear you have made up your mind. But honestly I have no idea where you are getting your numbers on this. I just ran my Guisarme fighter with Magus Dedication.
1 spellstrike round one, one AoO. Round 2 two regular strikes, one AoO.
Note these are conservative as I only took one AoO a round and didn't give myself flanking on any attack (really you would have it on at least half).Guisarme fighter smokes your spellstriking magus with fire ray. It isn't even close.
https://imgur.com/a/fyw4Hrn
You can import this graph:
** spoiler omitted **...
There's no way that graph is correct, simply because the averages don't support the sustained damage a Ranged Magus can inflict.
Let's look at 20th level. The Magus is going to Spellstrike with Telekinetic Projectile with an 18 Intelligence, with a 24 Dexterity and a +3 Major Striking Greater Corrosive Greater Flaming Greater Shocking Composite Bow, with 18 Strength.
That damage roll will be 9D6+4 (Telekinetic) plus 4D6+8 (Bow) plus 3D6 (Weapon Properties), or a total of 16D6+12, for an effective 3 Actions (because they need to recharge after this attack if they want to do this again, not unlike reloading a Crossbow).
An average roll of the D6s would be 56, meaning on average, you are doing 68 points of damage. For 3 actions. Split between them all, you are doing an average of 22.67 damage per action spent. This is all-day damage that doesn't require any special resource expenditure, and for level 20, that's pretty weak. This can get higher if the Magus expends one of their precious Spell Slots, but this isn't particularly reliable, nor can it be really effective except under certain circumstances.
Let's compare it to our biggest damage dealer, the Giant Instinct Barbarian. For more consistent damage, we'll use a Guisarme and take the Attack of Opportunity feat, because that's some good stuff to combo with. The Barbarian is going to spend an action to move into place, and then simply Strike an enemy Twice while Raging. The Barbarian's wielding a +3 Major Striking Keen Greater Flaming Greater Corrosive Guisarme.
That damage roll will be 4D10 (Weapon) plus 18 Rage plus 6 Weapon Specialization plus 7 Strength for a total of +31, with 2D6 from Weapon Properties, or a total of 4D10+2D6+31. From a single action. From approximately 20 feet away. An average roll would be 29, with a bonus of 31 for a total of 60 damage. Does the Magus do more damage on a single hit on average? Yes. But can they do that much damage multiple times a round? No. It takes all 3 of their actions to do. And a Melee Magus does even more damage, since they get Arcane Cascade, Full Strength, and other benefits depending on their Study. Plus they can expend Spell Slots for even higher damage, if they so wanted.
Even if we want to argue that a Melee Magus needs to "move" into position, that can be solved with a Quickened Action via Haste spell that they themselves can cast on a regular basis, via Focus Points or their Hybrid Studies or even an actual Spell Slot, if they so chose. Again, the only real drawback of Melee Magus compared to Ranged Magus is the fact that AoOs can disrupt their entire attack routine, which become more commonplace in the higher levels.
Comparing the damage between a Giant Instinct Barbarian and a Ranged Magus, the Barbarian's bonus to damage alone per action spent Attacking far outpaces the damage per action spent Spellstriking as the Magus, and it will really only even out if the Magus expends actual Slots to attack with. But of course a Giant Instinct Barbarian should be doing more damage, right? They're melee, that's the big benefit/tradeoff for putting yourself at risk of the bad guys!
So let's instead compare to other ranged attackers, like the Crossbow Ranger, who are also those "one hit wonders". Our Ranger will be running Gravity Weapon and the Precision Hunter's Edge with the likes of Crossbow Ace and Running Reload. Their Weapon of Choice will be a +3 Major Striking Greater Flaming Greater Corrosive Greater Shocking Crossbow.
Spending one Action to Hunt, then Activate Gravity Weapon, and Shoot, they are rolling 4D10 (Weapon) plus 3D8 (Precision) plus 3D6 (Weapon Properties) plus 14 (Specialization and Gravity Weapon) for damage, or 4D10+3D8+3D6+14. This does an average of 61 damage. Okay, so this is lower than a Magus with Cantrips on average. But this does takes 2 actions to set-up on the first round, and if they need to change targets, it takes another action to do so, but if not, they can make multiple strikes within certain rounds (or every round while Hasted), and they are much more mobile via Running Reload as needed, meaning if an enemy runs away or moves out of position, you can adjust without having to waste turns without doing your main plan of attack (for the Magus, that includes Spellstrike). Their damage potential after the first round is approximately equal to a Ranged Magus expending spell slots for damage, and they can do this kind of damage all day. And I'm not even including the Gunslinger with their Deadly/Fatal traits and added proficiency value.
So really, the Ranged Magus isn't that OP. There are other ranged builds that can compare or even outpace it on a regular basis that have far more versatility in their actions or turns. All it really takes for the Ranged Magus to not be "the bee's knees" is to remove AoOs triggering on Spellstrike.
|
|
I trust Superbidi's numbers. If the Starlit Span Magus is stronger than a Fighter or Ranger or Barbarian, that's a problem. Because those are the expected ceiling of the game for Martials.
Hence why I would pull Starlit Span back to the level of other studies, and then improve the whole of Magus so that all studies are roughly equivalent to each other and a little behind the core Martials.
Removing the AoO on Spellstrike will not increase the damage dealt by the melee Magus though.
In a round about way it does: You can't do damage if you're laying down on the ground from taking damage from an AoO. :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Removing the AoO on Spellstrike will not increase the damage dealt by the melee Magus though.
The Melee Magus does more damage regardless due to adding more modifiers to damage and having higher damage dice, so it doesn't need that help. What it needs help with is not putting their main schtick at risk by having it disrupted from AoOs by bad guys; being a D8 Medium Armor class, they are even more vulnerable than a Rogue or Investigator, simply because they are triggering AoOs for doing the same things a Rogue or Investigator do, which is attacking bad guys.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I trust Superbidi's numbers. If the Starlit Span Magus is stronger than a Fighter or Ranger or Barbarian, that's a problem. Because those are the expected ceiling of the game for Martials.
Hence why I would pull Starlit Span back to the level of other studies, and then improve the whole of Magus so that all studies are roughly equivalent to each other and a little behind the core Martials.
That's a big "if," because they're really not. A Ranged Magus can hit harder in a single attack, which is fine, but they can't reasonably outpace their damage over a period of time. If any of those classes hit more than once in a round, the Magus gets outpaced quite easily. Even in a single action, a Barbarian is only several points of damage on average behind the Magus. And that's just using a basic Strike. If the Barbarian uses a Whirlwind Attack? Sorry, no way a max damage critical from a Magus will outdamage it. Even a Power Attack from a Barbarian would be more damage in a single attack on average, since that's adding more than the difference in damage. And if Hasted, they can swing again for an attack that's nearly just as powerful in damage.
The Crossbow Ranger can do more damage by being able to attack multiple times in a round after the first, and they could even take Beastmaster Dedications for commanding their Pet to strike as well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not a big deal, considering you won't find a full group of enemies with AoO.
It's all about tactics and target choice ( and, fortunately, a magus has easy access to stoneskin, fortification runes, shield block, and a huge amount of defensive stuff with almost no cost ).
The higher levels you get, the more likely enemies will have AoOs and other reactions to screw you over, meaning a Melee Magus becomes ineffective in more and more situations as you level. That's just bad design for a class to be weaker and weaker as they level, especially when the enemies don't similarly scale. In fact, one of our groups TPK'd because of tons of larger creatures with AoO's able to reliably beat us down on a regular basis. To suggest that it's impossible or unlikely is absurd, especially if you're playing at a table that wants difficult fights for the challenge.
To a point. But really, if your tactic/target choices boils down to "Just make Strikes" and "Risk wasting turns doing Spellstrikes," it's a lose/lose choice to make that leaves a bad taste in your mouth when you want to be able to Spellstrike regularly.
|
|
I trust Superbidi's numbers. If the Starlit Span Magus is stronger than a Fighter or Ranger or Barbarian, that's a problem. Because those are the expected ceiling of the game for Martials.
Hence why I would pull Starlit Span back to the level of other studies, and then improve the whole of Magus so that all studies are roughly equivalent to each other and a little behind the core Martials.
The numbers aren't good. As multiple of us have pointed out, melee martials are way out damaging magus.
Plus, this whole discussion baffles me a little. The argument is that "Magus using this specific archetype and specific focus spell from one of 50 deities is too good" so nerf magus? Or maybe nerf the focus spell that is causing the supposed problem?
When I say "improve the whole of Magus", I am definitely not arguing for nerfing magus, quite the opposite, so I don't see how you get to this conclusion.
|
Is doing all of this mathematical analysis fun? It certainly isn’t for me, and honestly makes me just not want to play at all. But I guess some people find it interesting?It sounds to me more like people just don’t like the idea of a ranged magus than any real substantive, data-driven rationale to ban it.
YMMV.
Not sure what your quoting my posts means.
People use a bunch of math of theoretical or projected numbers. nothing indicated those numbers were actually generated from real play, hence my point about their being a lack of “any real substantive, data-driven rationale.”
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The numbers aren't good.
I gave you the graph, I'm pretty sure you master copy paste. The numbers are perfectly fine, I'm totally overt about them.
Anyway, I made my case. If you don't want to trust me, there's nothing I can do about it. And I hardly care anyway.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
People use a bunch of math of theoretical or projected numbers. nothing indicated those numbers were actually generated from real play, hence my point about their being a lack of “any real substantive, data-driven rationale.”There's not a lot of sense here. Are you saying that modelling battle efficiency on paper is impossible? And all everyone can do is (extremely slowly) collecting statistics from games? That's definitely nonsense.
How good is any given model and are numbers correct is entirely different question.
I would say you cannot model battle efficiency in games like these without a far more complex model than most used on these forums. I believe tracking damage in game is far more important than white room math. I only make adjustments if I see a problem during actual play.
So far the Magus is a high performing class in play. I'm running two of them right now. A laughing shadow and an inexorable iron magus. Both are higher performing characters in the game. I'm also running them with a fighter in one group and a champion in the other. The magus is performing on par with both the fighter and champion and is one of the highest damage dealing classes in the game with powerful alphastrike ability and versatility with spellcasting.
This is only up to level 8. I will not make any modifications until I see how they perform up to the highest possible level.
You have to walk a fine line with a class like a magus. Give them too much and they overshadow everyone. Give them too little and they are not enjoyable to play. So far I think they hit about right though I am going to keep a close eye on the AoO provocation as I believe that is the biggest factor that might have a substantial effect on their performance.
I don't mind Arcane Stance taking an action and it is easy to modify to avoid the Youtube ruling of actions occurring within a round. The flow of recharging with conflux spells and actions works in actual play.
The magus is not on my list of classes requiring a fix right now.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I gave you the graph, I'm pretty sure you master copy paste. The numbers are perfectly fine, I'm totally overt about them.
I think it's less about the numbers you got that the model you used to get them as you seem biased on the parameters by cherry picking ones that highlight your conclusion instead of trying to model what happens for real fights. For instance, picking multiclass feats for the best focus spells or only having fights only take 2 rounds.
If you'd instead show a more balanced approach like 4 round fights using magus spells. IMO, you've shown that True Strike and Fire Ray have the ability to skew a Magus in extremely short fights: What they rest of us haven't seem is them skew things when you look at them outside that narrow view.
I gave you the graph, I'm pretty sure you master copy paste. The numbers are perfectly fine, I'm totally overt about them.
I think it's less about the numbers you got that the model you used to get them as you seem biased on the parameters by cherry picking ones that highlight your conclusion instead of trying to model what happens for real fights. For instance, picking multiclass feats for the best focus spells or only having fights only take 2 rounds.
If you'd instead show a more balanced approach like 4 round fights using magus spells. IMO, you've shown that True Strike and Fire Ray have the ability to skew a Magus in extremely short fights: What they rest of us haven't seem is them skew things when you look at them outside that narrow view.
I was pissed because Caffeinated Ninja said my numbers were wrong.
I'm fine with our disagreement, I'm not sure we can convince each other. My PFS Rogue is an archer with spellcasting abilities, so I think I'll test Eldritch Archer on her, it's very thematic and I'll be able to bring experience on top of theorycrafting.
Yeah, true strike with a focus spell as your initial hit, then spam spellstrike with cantrips to clean up seems like an entirely viable strategy for an archer magus, and is probably better (in terms of absolute damage) than what another magus can do.
My understanding is that the Starlit Span magus goes extreme nova in the first rounds like the best of all Magi and can still deliver good damage in the following rounds.
3 things: #1 by making the fight incredibly short, it doesn't give time for the round to normalize after the spike: The DPS over 4 or 5 rounds is going to see a drop and look more reasonable than 2. #2 "like the best of all Magi" isn't true: a magus with a d12 weapon is going to so more nova damage than starlit. #3 it's also not "like the best of all Magi" BUT 'like the best of all magi that take the fire domain by multiclassing' which is a significant proviso.
Second, we have charts he made floating around with ranged vs ranged and as I pointed out a 2 round snapshot doesn't really show fight lengths and, if anything the magus will have to move more [MUST fire in 1st range increment] vs others [rangers hunt prey ignoring second range increment]. 1 nova in 2 rounds is a lot different than a nova in 5 rounds.
Yeah, true strike with a focus spell as your initial hit, then spam spellstrike with cantrips to clean up seems like an entirely viable strategy for an archer magus, and is probably better (in terms of absolute damage) than what another magus can do.
Better than what another magus can do' is going to be a matter of how much movement is required. For instance, if we're baking an archetype into things what about a Inexorable Iron Magus with a Maul and a Mature Beastmaster Companion so the mount can use it's 1 action without a command to move? Is it doing worse than Starlit?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Precisely, nothing wrong with SuperBidi's analysis. But his conclusion is overstated.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I didn't mean to imply you were lying about your math or anything like that. If it came across that way I apologize.
Ok, so you disagree with my simulation, which is different. Anyway, my main thesis is that this Magus makes a fool out of ordinary archers. I'm pointing all the ridiculous stuff it generates only for fun.
As a matter of fact, I've found something even more funny with this Magus.
Let's take the level 20 as an example (but it's similar all the way up to 20). With a True Strike Withering Grasp, the Magus deals on average 127.5 points of damage (considering one round of persistent damage). With the same attack and a +4 to hit, the Magus deals on average 185.55 points of damage, for an average difference of 58.05. Against the same enemy, a Guisarme Fighter does on average 42.75 points of damage with his primary attack. So if the Guisarme Fighter has just one action left when reaching the enemy and if they don't expect to use all their reactions, it's better (in terms of party efficiency) for the Fighter not to Strike but to Aid the Magus...
Better than what another magus can do' is going to be a matter of how much movement is required. For instance, if we're baking an archetype into things what about a Inexorable Iron Magus with a Maul and a Mature Beastmaster Companion so the mount can use it's 1 action without a command to move? Is it doing worse than Starlit?
I'm personally focusing on the Starlit Span Magus because it's easy to make a simulation of a ranged attacker. But in my opinion, the problem is neither True Strike nor spell attack spells (that's the first time spell attack spells are considered broken) but with the ability to make a single attack roll so loaded with damage that you can break the ceiling with bonuses that are in normal conditions working as intended.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, part of the issue is that a Magus (who takes the druid archetype) and shoots an arrow from their bow that turns into a Stone Lance that pins the target to the ground is super cool (even if you need to wait until level 12 to be able to do this). People are going to want to do things that seem super cool, and when you commit to the concept you're going to also think about ways to do your schtick as well as you possibly can, and true strike is super obvious here (maximize your chance of impaling with your stalactite you shot from a bow).
So I'm not sure there's a solution here other than "managing things at the level of individual groups".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, part of the issue is that a Magus (who takes the druid archetype) and shoots an arrow from their bow that turns into a Stone Lance that pins the target to the ground is super cool (even if you need to wait until level 12 to be able to do this). People are going to want to do things that seem super cool, and when you commit to the concept you're going to also think about ways to do your schtick as well as you possibly can, and true strike is super obvious here (maximize your chance of impaling with your stalactite you shot from a bow).
So I'm not sure there's a solution here other than "managing things at the level of individual groups".
Even if we keep all of that in place, you can't do this every round, as you are limited by uses of True Strike (wands or otherwise), as well as Focus Points, which is a minimum of 2, and a maximum of 3, not to mention you don't have the actions to Recharge every round after each shot. Heaven forbid that you need to move because an enemy hides behind a wall or something; this is why white room math isn't the greatest way to gauge how "OP" a class is. Why not just let Martials be able to sit there and Strike enemies without moving whatsoever?
So wait, we have two people now professing similar stances from two different styles of build? Sounds like a lot of the "Magus are OP" claims stem from being able to utilize multiclass Focus Spells as part of their schtick, between the Stone Lance and Fire Ray shenanigans (why not up the ante with Expansive Spellstrike and Tempest Surge, too?), both of which do require 14 Wisdom for their respective Dedication feats; not an easy task, and doesn't come without sacrifice. I never really thought that a Focus Spell would work with the likes of Spellstrike, even if by RAW it works, even if largely because the class doesn't come with its own offensive Focus Spell to abuse like this.
So really, if we just limit Spellstrike to only work with Spellslots and Cantrips, and not some backwoods archetype Focus Spells that aren't typical of Starlit Span builds, can we safely assume that Starlit Span isn't really that OP?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, I guess my cat folk starlit span magus, who uses a star knife as his primary weapon, is going to totally wreck the game.
At a range of 20 feet.
So, how does that math work? How much does my magus break the game? I am pretty sure the answer is, “it doesn’t” but I’m not going to spend my time doing all the number crunching. The one game I played him, he greatly underperformed the other characters at the table.
I suppose if someone builds a character, maxing out all of the tricks and such, maybe there could be an issue? But that’s not a problem with starlit span.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, I guess my cat folk starlit span magus, who uses a star knife as his primary weapon, is going to totally wreck the game.
At a range of 20 feet.
So, how does that math work? How much does my magus break the game? I am pretty sure the answer is, “it doesn’t” but I’m not going to spend my time doing all the number crunching. The one game I played him, he greatly underperformed the other characters at the table.
I suppose if someone builds a character, maxing out all of the tricks and such, maybe there could be an issue? But that’s not a problem with starlit span.
You just broke the game. I can't believe it.
I guess one thing I'm wondering is how does a starlit magus get as many True Strikes as they want? Sure, you can prepare it like 10 times and have no other spells, but that doesn't seem like a good idea. Are you just holding a scroll and your bow, casting the spell with the scroll, then spellstriking?
I guess one thing I'm wondering is how does a starlit magus get as many True Strikes as they want? Sure, you can prepare it like 10 times and have no other spells, but that doesn't seem like a good idea. Are you just holding a scroll and your bow, casting the spell with the scroll, then spellstriking?
Yes, that's the basic way to get tons of True Strikes. A Wand is even better as you will certainly use it enough to justify its higher cost.
So really, if we just limit Spellstrike to only work with Spellslots and Cantrips, and not some backwoods archetype Focus Spells that aren't typical of Starlit Span builds, can we safely assume that Starlit Span isn't really that OP?
Shocking Grasp deals Fire Ray's damage. So you don't block entirely the combo, but you make it cost resources. In my opinion, it should be enough to avoid issues.