| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am very unlikely ever to take it on an magus. Spell strike is too good on attacking spells and magi get too few spell slots to let the theoretical potential of expansive spell strike to be practically useful. Adding an extra lower accuracy roll to essentially cast a save spell normally…but with an extra weapon attack that could disrupt your own spell on a crit fail, is going to backfire about as often as it does something spectacular.
And I am saying this as someone looking forward to building a two handed weapon - damage dealing-focused Magus.
Most Magi will not pick that feat, requires to continue to invest on intelligence and prepare a different set of spells than you would normally prepare.
I like the feat, but I usually only use it with Strikers Scroll and/or Fusion Staff as it gives me more options without using the limited 4 slots.
Well, Scroll Trickster might be a good archetype for that. Gaining a few daily scrolls, then spending a bit of money on some bigger ones.
Expansive is good, but not a must have. It's useful for action economy but that's it.
It could have been a class feature but it's alright that it isn't.
As you level up, the price of lower lvl scrolls becomes almost negligible, at lvl 9 the cost of a 30gp lvl 3 spell scroll is not really a big deal per example.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So a regular cone of cold targets all enemies in the area and they have to roll their reflex save vs your spell DC.
Using spell strike means you have to make an attack roll first, and not crit fail, in order for all enemies to get to make a save vs your spell DC.
If you critically miss, your spell is wasted.
If you miss with the attack, you are basically just casting a spell regularly, only a little less effectively than a full caster, and with fewer spell slot resources.
If you kill the target of the spell strike with your weapon attack then there is a good chance the casting part is going to feel redundant.
You are dealing with two separate defenses, almost certainly one that will be average at its lowest, and often at least one that will be better than average, with no chance of having the first roll increase your odds with the second.
Whereas attacking with an attack roll spell let’s you target only 1 defense and get item bonuses to your spell attack. Expansive spell strike takes away the boost that magi spell casting gets in exchange for an action economy boost. I think some people will like it, but it is a long shot from being mandatory, many people will feel like it is a down-grade in play.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think I'm missing something because I see little to almost no value in expansive spell strike.
If I want to hit somebody and throw a cone of cold I can just hit them and throw the cone of cold. With no Crit miss chance and with a LOT more flexibility where the cone of cold goes.
Sure, that is 3 actions instead of 2. But spell strike/recharge is ALSO 3 actions and most of the time that is what I'm going to be doing. Oh, once a fight I get to expansive strike and use my focus spell which is nice.
It just seems rather niche to me and I just have better things to do with that level 2 feat.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The main value is action economy compression (2 actions for strike+save spell instead of 3) and a light synergy with Fuse Staff, allowing to use save spells from it without having to turn the weapon back into a staff.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know why we a marking the spell loss on a critical failure as some nasty downside. It's actually nicer than regular spell strike where you lose the spell on a regular failure.
Because you get something for that. An attack spell would miss anyway, but spellstrike is giving you the ability to avoid iterative penalties, faster accuracy progression than Wizard by two levels, and you get to benefit from potency runes.
Meanwhile, none of that benefits an AoE spell. The only thing you're doing is restricting your AoE placement to save an action, which you'll have to pay back later. The AoE didn't have any sort of critical miss condition before, and now it does.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's not much use in melee, but starting a line or cone from a distant target can be very good indeed for Starlit Span.
I don't see the point, I guess you could do some gimmicky stuff with Starlit Span or Lunging spellstrike an line or cone effects, but that's it.
You're giving your spell an extra failure condition, then allowing all the usual defences, and given you're a magus you probably don't have impressive save DCs, all in return for a single extra strike.
I'd rather cast and strike sepereately, if I don't have three actions I'll skip the strike.
Normal spellstrike is good because it's either free damage on your attack from a cantrip or making that spell attack roll spell of yours much more accurate than it would be for any other caster by using your weapon proficiency and weapon runes with it.
It'd be nice if you could do the Spell before the Strike when using Expansive Spellstrike. Being able to do a Blazing Dive followed by a Strike would be very, very cool.
I like it for starlit span; it effectely becomes a suped up reach spell. Otherwise I'll grab it if I have nothing better to get, but wouldn't prioritize it
I like it with Spell Swipe
Yeah, Expansive is likely the best way to make common use of Spell Swipe (hello Electric Arc )
Yeah, Expansive is likely the best way to make common use of Spell Swipe (hello Electric Arc )
I agree that this is probably the best way to use spell swipe regularly...but it requires you to have your spell strike charge and be in position at the start of your turn to attack 2 enemies in Melee, and have any prepped actions (like cascade) already going before you start.
Getting 2 full attack bonus attacks in a round is a nice boost to the cast a spell and strike, but at very best it is an every other round activity and in all likelihood is more like a once an encounter activity that has a fairly decent chance of functionally being about the same thing as casting a spell and attacking 1 time, all for a 2 feat investment.
I do think most magi will want to have electric arc memorized as one of their cantrips anyway, so that will probably not be an additional cost to it, but I think 2 extra cantrips has a greater probability of setting a magi up to take advantage of enemy weaknesses and the tactical situation of the battlefield.
Maybe I will be proven wrong. But I think produce flame and spell strike with flanking (spending one action to set that up) is often going to out perform this three action activity. Not to mention the fun that can be had by a laughing shadow magi with a whip and tanglefoot, spell striking and moving away, especially by the time you are casting 2nd level spells and they will have to live with the speed penalty for more than a round, or waste an action to get rid of it.
Overall, I think it is great that there are so many cool ways to get a lot of spell striking with cantrips. I just know that my elven fighter with a Maul has swipe, and it is ridiculously awesome when I crit and knock 2 enemies prone with it, but that I only get to even use the feat about 1 time per 4 hour session, when I am lucky, and that is only a 2 action activity.
True. I think that attack spells and buff spells are probably too valuable to waste a Magus' slots on AoE's that might critically fail, especially at early levels.
To adress the OP's question, I think that Expansive Spellstrike isn't the mandatory choice at its level. It has situational uses, but I feel that Force Fang at the same level is as enticing for a neophyte Magus.
For my builds, I plan on getting Expansive Spellstrike later on or as a result of retraining one of my early level feats when my Magus gains access to a ring of wizardry or the Wizard MC archetype.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I’m for sure taking it with my Magus for Strength of Thousands.
Thanks to the free wizard mc archetype, I have plenty of spell slots to work with, and debuffs have a lot longer longevity in low-level slots than attack spells.
Plus, I’m using a scythe, so I’ve gotta grab cone of cold so I can do the Sister Freide move :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While I hate to say this... ignoring Expansive Spellstrike lets you basically ignore INT. I wish the class valued INT more, but as long as you're preparing attack spells to use with Spellstrike (ignoring your spell attack in favor of weapon attack) and spells that buff/support (don't need save DC) then the class gains no value from INT and can instead focus on other ability scores (Like STR/DEX/CON for being a martial and WIS for saves).
To adress the OP's question, I think that Expansive Spellstrike isn't the mandatory choice at its level. It has situational uses, but I feel that Force Fang at the same level is as enticing for a neophyte Magus.
One of my players swears that expansivr if practically a must have and complains about the action economy, but force fang is a really good way to recharge spellstrike without increasing MAP
While I hate to say this... ignoring Expansive Spellstrike lets you basically ignore INT. I wish the class valued INT more, but as long as you're preparing attack spells to use with Spellstrike (ignoring your spell attack in favor of weapon attack) and spells that buff/support (don't need save DC) then the class gains no value from INT and can instead focus on other ability scores (Like STR/DEX/CON for being a martial and WIS for saves).
You still want int for cantrips that add it to damage. What you're likely going to see are lots of melee magi picking up sentinel or the champion line to drop dex. Ranged magi also get more damage from int than str.
Since the Spell Swipe was Mentioned - just to be sure
Is Spell Swipe one Strike vs the target and apply spell to all or is it one strige against every target and apply spell to them?
Let me rephrase (since that answer was (sorry, might be my fault) not helpful at all (for me)
you use spell swipe
you roll 2 strikes, hit one creature with each and if the spell can target more then one enemy it can hit both
thats how I read it, correct?
How many attack spells have multiple targets ?
How many attack spells have multiple targets ?One? I think? For now anyway.
Hm...then yeah, as it is Spell Swipe is pretty useless without Expanded. Scorcing Ray is *great* but dunno if it's worth a whole feat xD
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The biggest issue with the swipe is that it is 3 actions. Maybe if you start off combat with a haste you can get one off later in the combat, assuming there are multiple enemies standing close together, but the whole feat chain feels more like wishful thinking than a tactic you can reliably plan around.
It'll become better as more spells gets added.
For now the simple regular use will be a melee electric arc, and for burst I'd say chain lightning or scorching ray. probably a few more for damage.
But stuff like Slow heightened would also work. Fear too etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I get that, but the lower the damage due you have on your weapon, the less you are getting out of tagging on an extra weapon attack to a normal spell. Like heightened slow to only get 2 targets doesn’t sound very exciting to me.
The biggest issue with the swipe is that it is 3 actions. Maybe if you start off combat with a haste you can get one off later in the combat, assuming there are multiple enemies standing close together, but the whole feat chain feels more like wishful thinking than a tactic you can reliably plan around.
Yeah I think that's only doable if you've got a mount animal companion with the free action every round.
The idea of Spellstriking with a lance does appeal to me though...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even bigger bursts can work with expansive spellstrike. The burst starts at a corner of your choice in the center of the target.
With a reach weapon against a gargantuan target, even a fireball doesn't hit the magus.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think that the theoretical potential of the expansive spellstrike feat is going to capture the attention of a lot of players.
Personally, I just think that it is rarely going to do in play what a lot of players think it will and will be discouraging players from taking it as a GM unless they are really excited about some idea that requires it.
I would hate for the general consensus around the magus to be that bounded casting is terrible and their spell casting proficiency is abysmal, and thus the class is a total failure...because all the Magi are running around think this feat helps them play the best magus possible, when in fact it amplifies the limits of the class with minimal interaction with its strengths.
I think this style of Magi might have been better off being a class archetype that just modified the spell strike mechanic to work more like the striking spell mechanic of the playtest, but allowed for multi targeting spells.