Magus is Awesome - Please Make Spellstrike Not Trigget Attacks of Opportunity

[YuriP]

The Raven Black wrote:

Consider Bard in a campaign full of opponents immune to Mental. How would it be different ?

Yep this a good point. Is like a fighter in a haunted house full of ghosts.

OK yet this won't be so frequently like some opponents have AoO but the game sometime put's encounters or hazards that can be very hard for a specific char because it can exploit some weak point in same way that can put a opponent weak to fire against an alchemist full of bombs.

IMO many people here are overrating these limitations.

[Leon Aquilla]

Here's what I don't understand:

1. Spells that require a touch attack check do not incur an AOO, despite being more than one action and having somatic/verbal components

2. But Spellstrike incurs an AOO?

So the most effective way to play a Magus is just to write "THESE HANDS ARE REGISTERED AS DEADLY WEAPONS" on your gloves and go chasing people around with heightened Shocking Grasp?

[Golurkcanfly]

YuriP wrote:

The Raven Black wrote:

Consider Bard in a campaign full of opponents immune to Mental. How would it be different ?

Yep this a good point. Is like a fighter in a haunted house full of ghosts.

OK yet this won't be so frequently like some opponents have AoO but the game sometime put's encounters or hazards that can be very hard for a specific char because it can exploit some weak point in same way that can put a opponent weak to fire against an alchemist full of bombs.

IMO many people here are overrating these limitations.

Except those are significantly more rare and have workarounds that aren't character-defining elements you choose at character creation.

Even then, a Fighter still does *really well* with a magic weapon against a ghost and it's only a little bit of gold for a ghost touch property rune, rather than a character defining feature to choose one subclass over the other four.

Also enemy weaknesses are quite a bit more rare than AoOs to be a balance point, and most weaknesses are to things classes like the Alchemist and Magus can't exploit with their unique abilities because it's good/cold iron weakness.

The restriction is unnecessary given the existing shortcomings of the class. The class should not be punished for doing what they want to do. It's not like it's an Archer that gets punished by AoO for screwing up. It gets punished by AoO for being a melee combatant on a class based upon the entire fantasy of blending magic and martial prowess to hit someone with your sword and a spell at the same time.

[BendKing]

The people trying to justify Spellstrike provoking AoO seem to not realize that Magus isn't that strong of a class in the first place.

Making Spellstrike not provoke would barely raise the class' power level and would simply make it less clunky and punishing to use what is his main offensive mechanic.

In addition, it would push the Magus less towards Starlit Span and reach weapons, which he currently is heavily incentivized to do (indeed, the Starlit Span is already the best Hybrid Study due to essentially being able to Spellstrike each turn, no reason to make it even stronger by punishing melee Magi for daring to use their iconic move in melee).

[YuriP]

Leon Aquilla wrote:

1. Spells that require a touch attack check do not incur an AOO, despite being more than one action and having somatic/verbal components

All spells that require's touch also can incur an AoO. Any spell who have somatic components have manipulate trait so can trigger an AoO no matter the distance. And some AoO abilities also trigger concentration too taking even the verbal only spells.

The spellstrike by itself don't trigger AoO is the chosen spell that could do it.

Golurkcanfly wrote:

Except those are significantly more rare and have workarounds that aren't character-defining elements you choose at character creation.

Even then, a Fighter still does *really well* with a magic weapon against a ghost and it's only a little bit of gold for a ghost touch property rune, rather than a character defining feature to choose one subclass over the other four.

But magus could workaround too like I already said before. It can use reach and ranged attacks to workaround or use it's own spells to strike without being noticed.

Golurkcanfly wrote:

Also enemy weaknesses are quite a bit more rare than AoOs to be a balance point, and most weaknesses are to things classes like the Alchemist and Magus can't exploit with their unique abilities because it's good/cold iron weakness.

That's why I said "OK yet this won't be so frequently like some opponents have AoO" the frequency would be more compared to frequency of precision strike imunity but also this would depend a lot from adventure theme. A magus won't have great AoO problems in Slithering but for a thief this could be very frustrate and you don't have workaround options.

Golurkcanfly wrote:

The restriction is unnecessary given the existing shortcomings of the class. The class should not be punished for doing what they want to do. It's not like it's an Archer that gets punished by AoO for screwing up. It gets punished by AoO for being a melee combatant on a class based upon the entire fantasy of blending magic and martial prowess to hit someone with your sword and a spell at the same time.

I think you miss the point o AoO in 2e. This isn't 3.5/1e where's AoO is used to prevent/dificult rangers and casters to operate in melee. AoE in 2e is a reaction. An especial ability that allows some creatures to increase their attack/defense power exploiting some opponent actions. That's why we no more have Defensive Casting and why many character could do ranged attacks in melee range without afraid being countered from mostly opponents. That's also why some creatures like Lesser Death

and Grim Reaper could do 60 and 100 feets AoO like reaction that trigger basically anything a caster/long range character could do.

[dmerceless]

The Raven Black wrote:

Consider Bard in a campaign full of opponents immune to Mental. How would it be different ?

In many ways. Let's go through some of them:

1 - "Casting mental spells", while one big draw of Occult spellcasting in general, is not the core feature of the Bard class. If you're in a campaign where half the enemies are mindless, you can still focus on healing and buffing, grab other great control spells like Gravity Pull, Slow and do much else in those situations without it costing you extra actions, resources or character build tokens. A Magus that only does basic Strikes or uses a bunch of defensive measures to avoid AoOs isn't doing a different job. They're doing the same job (hitting things for damage) but in a much less efficient manner.

2 - "Casting mental spells against mindless creatures is bad" is much more obvious than "I have this magic swordsman class but I shouldn't pick it in Fist of the Ruby Phoenix because magic swordsmen are bad against trained martial artists". Knowing the ratio of AoOs in a campaign beforehand is also much harder than knowing it's focused on undead. This is a trap that's easier for a new player/group to fall for to many degrees of magnitude.

3 - Not being able to enchant the mind of an animated broom makes perfect sense in the fantasy and I don't think anyone would disagree with that. Many people find being attacked every time you do your sword magic thing to be extremely detrimental to the fantasy of the class. What kind of sword mage are you if you can't do your melee magic thing without leaving yourself wide open?

And before someone mentions precision immunity, I also think that's a horrible mechanic. Two wrongs don't make a right.

[YuriP]

You compared the fact that a occult spellcaster in a campaign with a lot resistant/imunity oppoents can do other things can still do other things like heal/buff and others control spell but once again are ignoring/underrating the fact the magus could do reach and ranged attacks to prevent AoO too.

[WatersLethe]

YuriP wrote:

You compared the fact that a occult spellcaster in a campaign with a lot resistant/imunity oppoents can do other things can still do other things like heal/buff and others control spell but once again are ignoring/underrating the fact the magus could do reach and ranged attacks to prevent AoO too.

No, he correctly pointed out that occult casters can switch their role while a Magus would be stuck doing the same role, just poorly.

[HumbleGamer]

dmerceless wrote:

And before someone mentions precision immunity, I also think that's a horrible mechanic. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Except they do.

I mean, if you consider either A and B horrible mechanics, doesn't change the fact that 2 mechanics ( with limits and in the magus case "possibilities" ) exist.

The difference would be that a precision user ( precision ranger, swashbuckler, rogue, etc... ) wouldn't have a choice at all, while the magus ( knowing that a martial enemy might have AoO ) would be able to decide whether to use spellstrike or not.

Eventually, even try to "trigger it" with a move action before landing his blow in a safe way.

...

I partially agree on precision though, because it gives no alternatives at all ( except for some limited stuff like the swashbuckler "bleeding finisher", which is a feat, and not baseline ).

[Golurkcanfly]

YuriP wrote:

You compared the fact that a occult spellcaster in a campaign with a lot resistant/imunity oppoents can do other things can still do other things like heal/buff and others control spell but once again are ignoring/underrating the fact the magus could do reach and ranged attacks to prevent AoO too.

Except those are choices made at character creation. The Bard has a built-in level of versatility and power. The Magus can't suddenly switch to having runed-up other weapons and a different Hybrid Study.

[Golurkcanfly]

HumbleGamer wrote:

dmerceless wrote:

And before someone mentions precision immunity, I also think that's a horrible mechanic. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Except they do.

I mean, if you consider either A and B horrible mechanics, doesn't change the fact that 2 mechanics ( with limits and in the magus case "possibilities" ) exist.

The difference would be that a precision user ( precision ranger, swashbuckler, rogue, etc... ) wouldn't have a choice at all, while the magus ( knowing that a martial enemy might have AoO ) would be able to decide whether to use spellstrike or not.

Eventually, even try to "trigger it" with a move action before landing his blow in a safe way.

Except getting hit is often outright worse than just doing less damage since rather than just being less effective, you can get killed.

And you're not necessarily going to be in a position to know about AoOs beforehand.

And AoOs are significantly more common. (7% compared to 17% total, plus AoOs are increasingly more common at higher levels)

And there are other mechanisms that cause the Magus to struggle in more organic ways to encourage switching up tactics.

And that bad design choices existing is no excuse for further bad design choices.

[YuriP]

Guys, as much as you don't like the design decision but this is the normal tradeoff in all martial classes that gain some additional damage.

Barbarians gains a lot additional damage - But looses AC and cannot cast spells efficiently (and any other concentration activity).
Rogues gains a lot additional damage from sneak attacks - But need to flat-foot opponents in someway and some opponents are imune or resistant to their attacks.
Swashbuckler gains additional damage from panache - But have same precision penalties of some time face creatures imune to precision damage and have to manage their panache and finish actions.
Magus gains a lot additional damage/effects from spellstrike - But need to recharge and risks to take AoO.

[Temperans]

Imagine if the Fighter or Barbarian provoked anytime they used one of their feats. That is effectively what the Magus has to deal with.

Their very existence right now is them risking AoO from at least 1 enemy in combat. But they don't have increased accuracy, they don't have increased defenses, they don't have self heals. They only have 4 single uses of a high level spell whose very use might kill them.

If you said they had utility and so it was fine, I might have agreed. But when the Magus has no utility and is being punished for doing what they are told it's their class schtick... Yeah, something is wrong.

[HumbleGamer]

Golurkcanfly wrote:

HumbleGamer wrote:

dmerceless wrote:

And before someone mentions precision immunity, I also think that's a horrible mechanic. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Except they do.

I mean, if you consider either A and B horrible mechanics, doesn't change the fact that 2 mechanics ( with limits and in the magus case "possibilities" ) exist.

The difference would be that a precision user ( precision ranger, swashbuckler, rogue, etc... ) wouldn't have a choice at all, while the magus ( knowing that a martial enemy might have AoO ) would be able to decide whether to use spellstrike or not.

Eventually, even try to "trigger it" with a move action before landing his blow in a safe way.

Except getting hit is often outright worse than just doing less damage since rather than just being less effective, you can get killed.

And you're not necessarily going to be in a position to know about AoOs beforehand.

And AoOs are significantly more common. (7% compared to 17% total, plus AoOs are increasingly more common at higher levels)

And there are other mechanisms that cause the Magus to struggle in more organic ways to encourage switching up tactics.

And that bad design choices existing is no excuse for further bad design choices.

Leaving apart subjectives judgements about the design ( whether it's the right interpretation or just an oversight from paizo that you trigger AoO with a spellstrike ), which I understand but in the same way I don't think would add anything else to this discussion, you can guess that a martial creature may have AoO.

Like you can guess that a big one would have less reflexes than a thin and small one. Or that a beast/animal would probably have a not so high will score. These are basis.

I want to add that choosing to ignore them is a choice of yours, but keep in mind that it's nothing relates to meta but normal judgmenet about anything you may face.

Fun fact is that dealing 2x strikes would give you the same damage as a champion with the same weapon ( since the champion has no combat moves apart from blade of justice lvl 12, which relies on the divine ally, which not all champions have ). Standard damage I Say, rather than "the magus is struggling!".

We are facing a group of melee combatants with probably AoO... It's a shame I am not a spellcaster able to cast Stoneski... oh wait, I am.

By lvl 11 you'd be able to cast 4 stoneskin ( if you are afraid of the damage ) which reduce the damage you take by 10.

You could avoid 200 damage on a standard encounter, assuming 5 enemies goes on you for 6 consecutive rounds.

I mean, possibilities are given.

- Nobody in the party wants to trigger AoO. Ok
- Nobody in the party is going to support the magus ( healings, AC, DR, etc... ). Ok
- The magus doesn't want to trigger it before using spellstrike. Ok
- The magus doesn't protect himself knowing he'll be facing martial combatants. Ok
- The magus didn't study a single Stoneskin or protective spell. Ok

I mean, is the magus playing the game alone?

[WatersLethe]

YuriP wrote:

Barbarians gains a lot additional damage - But looses AC and cannot cast spells efficiently (and any other concentration activity).

Part of the fantasy, and they also get bonus HP and temporary HP to deal with the extra damage.

YuriP wrote:

Rogues gains a lot additional damage from sneak attacks - But need to flat-foot opponents in someway and some opponents are imune or resistant to their attacks.

Part of the fantasy, those immunities are much rarer

YuriP wrote:

Swashbuckler gains additional damage from panache - But have same precision penalties of some time face creatures imune to precision damage and have to manage their panache and finish actions

Again, those precision immunities are rarer and more predictable.

YuriP wrote:

Magus gains a lot additional damage/effects from spellstrike - But need to recharge and risks to take AoO.

Risking taking an AoO while using your main ability is not part of the fantasy. In effect, it makes Magus HEAVILY and OBSCENELY encouraged to go ranged or reach, which, while cool, isn't the iconic image most people are thinking of.

Notice how only your barbarian example risks taking damage? And how they get big chungus HP, temp HP, and other ways to increase their durability?

Edit:

And Magus has to deal with spell immunities, energy resistances, anti-magic, and the like as well. Don't forget that.

[Temperans]

YuriP wrote:

Guys, as much as you don't like the design decision but this is the normal tradeoff in all martial classes that gain some additional damage.

Barbarians gains a lot additional damage - But looses AC and cannot cast spells efficiently (and any other concentration activity).
Rogues gains a lot additional damage from sneak attacks - But need to flat-foot opponents in someway and some opponents are imune or resistant to their attacks.
Swashbuckler gains additional damage from panache - But have same precision penalties of some time face creatures imune to precision damage and have to manage their panache and finish actions.
Magus gains a lot additional damage/effects from spellstrike - But need to recharge and risks to take AoO.

Let's see:

* Barbarians, gain a huge amount of damage (eventually even ignoring resistance) and abilities to mitigate damage (including resistance and healing). In exchange for no magic and a few less points of AC. None of their abilities provoke as far as I can tell.

* Rogue, gains huge damage if they attack an enemy who is flat-footed, all you need to give flat-footed is to flank an enemy. Flat-footed also helps the Rogue and ally land their abilities. They don't provoke and have a lot of skill feats.

* Swashbuckler, gains panache if they tumble (provokes) or they do their style action (most are debuffs that don't provoke), they get huge damage and feats to help them do their thing better. In exchange, they have to choose between passive bonus or huge damage, and the fact the bonus damage is precision.

* Magus, gains cantrip damage and maybe some other benefit from feats. In exchange they have less skills, provoke, deals no better damage, and gets the literal worst action economy of any "martial".

... One of this classes is clearly different from the others I wonder which one it is... :stare:

[CaffeinatedNinja]

If Magus is doing the same DPS as a champion, which has heavy armor, +2AC, d10 hp, more room for con, and the best defensive reaction in the game, magus is pretty much useless in that fight.

Magus does less damage than a fighter. Even using cantrip spellstrikes. Why is it penalized for it’s basic damage enhancer. Tell you what, if Barbarians extra damage, ranger precision edge, and fighter +2 all triggered AoO they would be in the same boat.

But let them make regular martial strikes, it is fine? No, people would be up in arms.

Magus can’t do it’s signature move effectively against 1/4 of enemies. That is an issue, and kills the class fantasy.

To those that say there are workarounds, sure! But nothing is free of cost. While you are using your workarounds your caster isn’t debuffing, or blasting, or whatever. While the classes that don’t have to work around it just keep hitting.

If you want to up magus spellstrike cantrip DPS higher so they are a super high damage class with this limitation sure. But they aren’t.

Look, I think Magus are awesome. Arguably a bit under tuned, but eh. However this penalty on top is awful, and super campaign specific. If you are playing in a martial campaign with lots of AoA, and there are a lot of them, don’t bring a magus is not fun.

[The Raven Black]

Golurkcanfly wrote:

YuriP wrote:

You compared the fact that a occult spellcaster in a campaign with a lot resistant/imunity oppoents can do other things can still do other things like heal/buff and others control spell but once again are ignoring/underrating the fact the magus could do reach and ranged attacks to prevent AoO too.

Except those are choices made at character creation. The Bard has a built-in level of versatility and power. The Magus can't suddenly switch to having runed-up other weapons and a different Hybrid Study.

Retraining.

[YuriP]

WatersLethe wrote:

Risking taking an AoO while using your main ability is not part of the fantasy. In effect, it makes Magus HEAVILY and OBSCENELY encouraged to go ranged or reach, which, while cool, isn't the iconic image most people are thinking of

I'm not sure. Remember that 1e magus also trigger AoO as any other spellcaster. The main diference is in that edition AoO works like a penalty to prevent ranged chars to fight at close range and to try prevent melee opponents to freely trespass the party frontline to reach the backline characters. But game also gives Defensive Casting and step as workaround partially the problem of AoO in melee range. Ironically the mage is even more limited than a common spellcaster in 1e because it only have the option to try a Defensive Casting roll while common spellcasters usually can take a step before casting to avoid AoO.

So in the end I never felt that ignore AoO is inside of magus fantasy.

The Raven Black wrote:

Golurkcanfly wrote:

YuriP wrote:

You compared the fact that a occult spellcaster in a campaign with a lot resistant/imunity oppoents can do other things can still do other things like heal/buff and others control spell but once again are ignoring/underrating the fact the magus could do reach and ranged attacks to prevent AoO too.

Except those are choices made at character creation. The Bard has a built-in level of versatility and power. The Magus can't suddenly switch to having runed-up other weapons and a different Hybrid Study.

Retraining.

Remember too that magus still are a spellcaster. You could do better than any other martial you literally can avoid the AoO problem with magic. This is completely inside of magus fantasy too.

Just try to become invisible or even completely disappear to avoid even being a target to AoO.

[The Raven Black]

dmerceless wrote:

The Raven Black wrote:

Consider Bard in a campaign full of opponents immune to Mental. How would it be different ?

In many ways. Let's go through some of them:

1 - "Casting mental spells", while one big draw of Occult spellcasting in general, is not the core feature of the Bard class. If you're in a campaign where half the enemies are mindless, you can still focus on healing and buffing, grab other great control spells like Gravity Pull, Slow and do much else in those situations without it costing you extra actions, resources or character build tokens. A Magus that only does basic Strikes or uses a bunch of defensive measures to avoid AoOs isn't doing a different job. They're doing the same job (hitting things for damage) but in a much less efficient manner.

2 - "Casting mental spells against mindless creatures is bad" is much more obvious than "I have this magic swordsman class but I shouldn't pick it in Fist of the Ruby Phoenix because magic swordsmen are bad against trained martial artists". Knowing the ratio of AoOs in a campaign beforehand is also much harder than knowing it's focused on undead. This is a trap that's easier for a new player/group to fall for to many degrees of magnitude.

3 - Not being able to enchant the mind of an animated broom makes perfect sense in the fantasy and I don't think anyone would disagree with that. Many people find being attacked every time you do your sword magic thing to be extremely detrimental to the fantasy of the class. What kind of sword mage are you if you can't do your melee magic thing without leaving yourself wide open?

And before someone mentions precision immunity, I also think that's a horrible mechanic. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Well, no more Dirge of Doom, no more Synesthesia, not even Daze anymore.

And note that casting Mental against Undead can work, depending on the creature. We're not in PF1 anymore. So you are not warned in advance about the immunity anymore than the Magus knows about the AoOs.

After that, if a campaign is heavy with creatures that make life more complicated for a given class, it falls to the GM to warn their players beforehand.

[Golurkcanfly]

The Raven Black wrote:

Golurkcanfly wrote:

YuriP wrote:

You compared the fact that a occult spellcaster in a campaign with a lot resistant/imunity oppoents can do other things can still do other things like heal/buff and others control spell but once again are ignoring/underrating the fact the magus could do reach and ranged attacks to prevent AoO too.

Except those are choices made at character creation. The Bard has a built-in level of versatility and power. The Magus can't suddenly switch to having runed-up other weapons and a different Hybrid Study.

Retraining.

Oh yeah, let me just change my character concept and what they're built around during downtime, pigeon-holing all Magi into the same subclass.

[WatersLethe]

YuriP wrote:

WatersLethe wrote:

Risking taking an AoO while using your main ability is not part of the fantasy. In effect, it makes Magus HEAVILY and OBSCENELY encouraged to go ranged or reach, which, while cool, isn't the iconic image most people are thinking of

I'm not sure. Remember that 1e magus also trigger AoO as any other spellcaster. The main diference is in that edition AoO works like a penalty to prevent ranged chars to fight at close range and to try prevent melee opponents to freely trespass the party frontline to reach the backline characters. But game also gives Defensive Casting and step as workaround partially the problem of AoO in melee range. Ironically the mage is even more limited than a common spellcaster in 1e because it only have the option to try a Defensive Casting roll while common spellcasters usually can take a step before casting to avoid AoO.

So in the end I never felt that ignore AoO is inside of magus fantasy.

A key difference is that in PF1 you could cast, five-foot-step, and deliver, as well as cast defensively. In PF2 you can't break up the spellstrike and you can't cast defensively.

[Golurkcanfly]

YuriP wrote:

WatersLethe wrote:

Risking taking an AoO while using your main ability is not part of the fantasy. In effect, it makes Magus HEAVILY and OBSCENELY encouraged to go ranged or reach, which, while cool, isn't the iconic image most people are thinking of

I'm not sure. Remember that 1e magus also trigger AoO as any other spellcaster. The main diference is in that edition AoO works like a penalty to prevent ranged chars to fight at close range and to try prevent melee opponents to freely trespass the party frontline to reach the backline characters. But game also gives Defensive Casting and step as workaround partially the problem of AoO in melee range. Ironically the mage is even more limited than a common spellcaster in 1e because it only have the option to try a Defensive Casting roll while common spellcasters usually can take a step before casting to avoid AoO.

So in the end I never felt that ignore AoO is inside of magus fantasy.

The Magus had built in ways to better cast defensively and already worked really well with concentration in general. AoOs were not a problem in actual play because of how easy it was to pump your concentration checks for Cast Defensively. Even at level 1 with 16 INT, you could have +8 to your DC12 concentration check before, and because your concentration check bonuses scaled faster than the DCs, past level 5 or so you'd never trigger AoOs.

Furthermore, the Magus could also cast a spell, hold the charge, and then run in to Spellstrike.

It had multiple ways to explicitly ignore AoO to the point that it was hardly an issue. This combined with how single hit damage in PF1e was a much smaller portion of melee output made it a non-issue for them.

[WatersLethe]

In the end, I just don't think Spellstrike AoOs are worth keeping around. Like, everyone suggesting workarounds and counterplay and spells seem to be arguing that it adds something to the game or serves some balance purpose, when all of those things can simply be ignored by picking up a ranged weapon or a reach weapon (in many cases).

It'd be like arguing tooth and nail that melee rogues must only get sneak attack against flat footed targets, while rogues who pickup a shortbow or spear can just always get sneak attack damage for free.

I personally don't think it adds enough to the game to keep around, and even if it's technically some balance feature, it's not doing a good enough job at that anyway and should be rethought or simply abandoned.

[Temperans]

YuriP wrote:

WatersLethe wrote:

Risking taking an AoO while using your main ability is not part of the fantasy. In effect, it makes Magus HEAVILY and OBSCENELY encouraged to go ranged or reach, which, while cool, isn't the iconic image most people are thinking of

I'm not sure. Remember that 1e magus also trigger AoO as any other spellcaster. The main diference is in that edition AoO works like a penalty to prevent ranged chars to fight at close range and to try prevent melee opponents to freely trespass the party frontline to reach the backline characters. But game also gives Defensive Casting and step as workaround partially the problem of AoO in melee range. Ironically the mage is even more limited than a common spellcaster in 1e because it only have the option to try a Defensive Casting roll while common spellcasters usually can take a step before casting to avoid AoO.

So in the end I never felt that ignore AoO is inside of magus fantasy.

Are you kidding? Seriously are you just going to ignore how casting defensively used to work? Let me remind you or anyone that doesn't quite remember or know.

PF1 casters could do one of three things to avoid losing spells:
* Take AoO damage and roll concentration with DC equal to damage taken.
* Move out of threatened area, 5-ft step in that edition was a non action.
* Cast Defensively.

To cast defensively you had to roll a concentration check with DC equal to 15+twice spell level. Magus spells capped out at 6th lv so the max DC for them was 27. The Magus 1st lv spell combat allowed them to take a penalty to attacks, to gain a bonus on casting defensively. By lv 8 they got +2 to it, lv 14 it doubled the benefit from taking a penalty. Finally the capstone allowed them to cast spells without provoking. None of this counting arcana, feats, magic items, buff spells, or traits.

The very idea that PF1 Magus was not meant to ignore AoO is patently and absurdly false.

[Golurkcanfly]

WatersLethe wrote:

In the end, I just don't think Spellstrike AoOs are worth keeping around. Like, everyone suggesting workarounds and counterplay and spells seem to be arguing that it adds something to the game or serves some balance purpose, when all of those things can simply be ignored by picking up a ranged weapon or a reach weapon (in many cases).

It'd be like arguing tooth and nail that melee rogues must only get sneak attack against flat footed targets, while rogues who pickup a shortbow or spear can just always get sneak attack damage for free.

I personally don't think it adds enough to the game to keep around, and even if it's technically some balance feature, it's not doing a good enough job at that anyway and should be rethought or simply abandoned.

Also note that the Rogue Flat-Footed restriction is encouraging them to be sneaky and tricky, enhancing the flavor. Meanwhile, the Magus restriction is encouraging them to pick the subclass that changes the entire concept from melee magic user to a magic Archer.

[Golurkcanfly]

Temperans wrote:

YuriP wrote:

WatersLethe wrote:

Risking taking an AoO while using your main ability is not part of the fantasy. In effect, it makes Magus HEAVILY and OBSCENELY encouraged to go ranged or reach, which, while cool, isn't the iconic image most people are thinking of

I'm not sure. Remember that 1e magus also trigger AoO as any other spellcaster. The main diference is in that edition AoO works like a penalty to prevent ranged chars to fight at close range and to try prevent melee opponents to freely trespass the party frontline to reach the backline characters. But game also gives Defensive Casting and step as workaround partially the problem of AoO in melee range. Ironically the mage is even more limited than a common spellcaster in 1e because it only have the option to try a Defensive Casting roll while common spellcasters usually can take a step before casting to avoid AoO.

So in the end I never felt that ignore AoO is inside of magus fantasy.

Are you kidding? Seriously are you just going to ignore how casting defensively used to work? Let me remind you or anyone that doesn't quite remember or know.

PF1 casters could do one of three things to avoid losing spells:
* Take AoO damage and roll concentration with DC equal to damage taken.
* Move out of threatened area, 5-ft step in that edition was a non action.
* Cast Defensively.

To cast defensively you had to roll a concentration check with DC equal to 15+twice spell level. Magus spells capped out at 6th lv so the max DC for them was 27. The Magus 1st spell combat allowed them to take a penalty to attacks, to gain a bonus on casting defensively. By lv 8 they got +2 to it, lv 14 doubled the benefit from taking a penalty. Finally the capstone allowed them to cast spells without provoking.

The very idea that PF1 Magus was not meant to ignore AoO is patently and absurdly false.

Plus it didn't even need those features to ignore AoO after like, 5th level thanks to Combat Casting.

[Temperans]

Exactly Golurk, anyone that says PF1 Magus didn't ignore AoO didn't how casting defensively and Magus work.

Which is what makes PF2 Magus getting so punished by it even more infuriating from the side of people who already know the lore of Magus. Fine they switch from 2/3 caster to wave casters. Fine they lost spell combat, arcane pool, and spell recall. Fine they lost access to heavy armor being default.

But they lost the ability to not provoke, because? They aren't even that encouraged to go high Int as the spells largely don't care.

[YuriP]

Temperans wrote:

Are you kidding? Seriously are you just going to ignore how casting defensively used to work? Let me remind you or anyone that doesn't quite remember or know.

PF1 casters could do one of three things to avoid losing spells:
* Take AoO damage and roll concentration with DC equal to damage taken.
* Move out of threatened area, 5-ft step in that edition was a non action.
* Cast Defensively.

To cast defensively you had to roll a concentration check with DC equal to 15+twice spell level. Magus spells capped out at 6th lv so the max DC for them was 27. The Magus 1st lv spell combat allowed them to take a penalty to attacks, to gain a bonus on casting defensively. By lv 8 they got +2 to it, lv 14 it doubled the benefit from taking a penalty. Finally the capstone allowed them to cast spells without provoking. None of this counting arcana, feats, magic items, buff spells, or traits.

The very idea that PF1 Magus was not meant to ignore AoO is patently and absurdly false.

This same idea could be used to any offensive spell that have touch distance too. If a magus have the right to ignore AoO because he's using an ability that allows it to cast while strike the same could be said about a caster who is trying to do Shocking Grasp because the main idea of spell is to be used in melee.

As I said before I don't think that's in designer plans to ignore the AoO. This was mentioned and comented during playtests if they ignored and didn't add this ability to magus is probably because they didn't want.

Golurkcanfly wrote:

Also note that the Rogue Flat-Footed restriction is encouraging them to be sneaky and tricky, enhancing the flavor. Meanwhile, the Magus restriction is encouraging them to pick the subclass that changes the entire concept from melee magic user to a magic Archer.

Or just to use spells to compensate.

[Golurkcanfly]

YuriP wrote:

This same idea could be used to any offensive spell that have touch distance too. If a magus have the right to ignore AoO because he's using an ability that allows it to cast while strike the same could be said about a caster who is trying to do Shocking Grasp because the main idea of spell is to be used in melee.

As I said before I don't think that's in designer plans to ignore the AoO. This was mentioned and comented during playtests if they ignored and don't added this ability to magus is probably because they didn't want.

Touch spells *shouldn't* provoke AoO. Again, bad design choices in the past shouldn't enforce new bad design choices.

And it's significantly worse for the Magus because it's the core concept of the class, not just an option it can grab. The class is about casting a spell in melee and hitting an enemy with said spell via your weapon.

Yet the mechanics actively discourage that.

Designer choices in the past also shouldn't be the reason why something shouldn't change in the future. The Alchemist still suffers from previous choices, and that's not a good thing. Even after the errata there's some serious issues, like how Quick Bomber shouldn't be a feat since it's near-mandatory, and that the class still has a dreadful action economy since Quick Bomber only applies to bombs and doesn't let it pull out other alchemical items to use them quickly.

[Temperans]

YuriP wrote:

This same idea could be used to any offensive spell that have touch distance too. If a magus have the right to ignore AoO because he's using an ability that allows it to cast while strike the same could be said about a caster who is trying to do Shocking Grasp because the main idea of spell is to be used in melee.

As I said before I don't think that's in designer plans to ignore the AoO. This was mentioned and comented during playtests if they ignored and didn't add this ability to magus is probably because they didn't want.

Golurkcanfly wrote:

Also note that the Rogue Flat-Footed restriction is encouraging them to be sneaky and tricky, enhancing the flavor. Meanwhile, the Magus restriction is encouraging them to pick the subclass that changes the entire concept from melee magic user to a magic Archer.

Or just to use spells to compensate.

Did you miss when half the Alchemist was unplayable because the way it and tools were written made it literally impossible to do anything or get any benefit? Paizo is not infallible they can make mistakes.

While, it is possible that they did want Magus provoking. That does not mean its: good, right, or appropriate for the class.

Imagine a Fighter provoking every time they used any of their feats. With their favored weapon. While doing so always costed at least 2 actions and required a 3rd action to reload their melee weapon.

[YuriP]

Golurkcanfly wrote:

Touch spells *shouldn't* provoke AoO. Again, bad design choices in the past shouldn't enforce new bad design choices.

But imposes to avoid unbalances. If the Paizo rethinks about this mechanic the will need first to change in a errata to be valid to any melee spell this would favor all spellcasters instead of just one class.

But Paizo won't do this because they have too much afraid of the spellcasters could dominate de game again. Too much afraid IMO.

[Golurkcanfly]

YuriP wrote:

Golurkcanfly wrote:

Also note that the Rogue Flat-Footed restriction is encouraging them to be sneaky and tricky, enhancing the flavor. Meanwhile, the Magus restriction is encouraging them to pick the subclass that changes the entire concept from melee magic user to a magic Archer.

Or just to use spells to compensate.

It encourages them to be a significantly worse caster in 30% of fights (or more) at high levels instead of engaging in the fantasy the class is built around. What it encourages in moment to moment gameplay, isn't interesting and what it discourages in moment-to-moment gameplay is the fantasy the class is built around.

And this is on top of more organic choices in combat on a chassis that already has issues in melee due to being squishy.

[Golurkcanfly]

YuriP wrote:

Golurkcanfly wrote:

Touch spells *shouldn't* provoke AoO. Again, bad design choices in the past shouldn't enforce new bad design choices.

But imposes to avoid unbalances. If the Paizo rethinks about this mechanic the will need first to change in a errata to be valid to any melee spell this would favor all spellcasters instead of just one class.

But Paizo won't do this because they have too much afraid of the spellcasters could dominate de game again. Too much afraid IMO.

Or they could just errata Spellstrike to say something akin to "Spells cast as part of this action do not have the manipulate trait"

[Temperans]

YuriP we are talking about the Magus Spellstrike. They reworked half of Alchemist via Errata. They can errata Spellstrike to not provoke.

Also they literally nerfed almost everything about Magus to the ground. Making it so they don't provoke literally does nothing except making it so Magus wont lose their turn because they dared to use their class ability. Specially when a Magus using cantrip Spellstrike does less damage than a Fighter using Power Attack.

[The Raven Black]

WatersLethe wrote:

In the end, I just don't think Spellstrike AoOs are worth keeping around. Like, everyone suggesting workarounds and counterplay and spells seem to be arguing that it adds something to the game or serves some balance purpose, when all of those things can simply be ignored by picking up a ranged weapon or a reach weapon (in many cases).

It'd be like arguing tooth and nail that melee rogues must only get sneak attack against flat footed targets, while rogues who pickup a shortbow or spear can just always get sneak attack damage for free.

I personally don't think it adds enough to the game to keep around, and even if it's technically some balance feature, it's not doing a good enough job at that anyway and should be rethought or simply abandoned.

We are only suggesting to play with the Rules as written, so nothing even remotely comparable to arguing for definitely not-RAW changes like your melee rogue vs distance rogue example.

And we are trying to find ways within the RAW to help the Magus player find solutions.

What we are not doing is thinking we know better than the devs about the whole system's balance.

[Stephan Taylor]

Wouldn’t the attack portion of the spellstrike take the place of the somatic component so as to keep it within two actions, and since attacking doesn’t provoke AoO, spellstrike wouldn’t? That’s how I would rule it if I were a Gm

[Temperans]

Stephan Taylor wrote:

Wouldn’t the attack portion of the spellstrike take the place of the somatic component so as to keep it within two actions, and since attacking doesn’t provoke AoO, spellstrike wouldn’t? That’s how I would rule it if I were a Gm

If an activity asks you to do an action that provokes the activity provokes. That is the way the rules are currently worded and nothing that can be done about it.

What Spellstrike currently says is basically "you can cast even when your hands are full". Without changing any underlying mechanic.

* P.S. It specifically says,

Quote:

Because you're a magus, you can draw replacement sigils with the tip of your weapon or your free hand for spells requiring material components, replacing them with somatic components instead of needing a material component pouch.

. So by RAW striking does not replace Somatic Components. In fact you are told to add them, to replace materials.

[Golurkcanfly]

The Raven Black wrote:

WatersLethe wrote:

In the end, I just don't think Spellstrike AoOs are worth keeping around. Like, everyone suggesting workarounds and counterplay and spells seem to be arguing that it adds something to the game or serves some balance purpose, when all of those things can simply be ignored by picking up a ranged weapon or a reach weapon (in many cases).

It'd be like arguing tooth and nail that melee rogues must only get sneak attack against flat footed targets, while rogues who pickup a shortbow or spear can just always get sneak attack damage for free.

I personally don't think it adds enough to the game to keep around, and even if it's technically some balance feature, it's not doing a good enough job at that anyway and should be rethought or simply abandoned.

We are only suggesting to play with the Rules as written, so nothing even remotely comparable to arguing for definitely not-RAW changes like your melee rogue vs distance rogue example.

And we are trying to find ways within the RAW to help the Magus player find solutions.

What we are not doing is thinking we know better than the devs about the whole system's balance.

This isn't helpful. The topic isn't about "how do I avoid AoO" it's about how that isn't a question that should be asked for this core feature.

Just because you *can* ignore AoO by choosing the subclass that fundamentally changes the core fantasy of the class doesn't mean it's not an issue. Hell, it can even make the issue worse by pigeonholing all Magi into that one subclass which is already stronger due to the innate advantages of ranged attacks, especially with a squishy chassis and boosters that don't care about weapon dice.

[YuriP]

The Raven Black wrote:

WatersLethe wrote:

In the end, I just don't think Spellstrike AoOs are worth keeping around. Like, everyone suggesting workarounds and counterplay and spells seem to be arguing that it adds something to the game or serves some balance purpose, when all of those things can simply be ignored by picking up a ranged weapon or a reach weapon (in many cases).

It'd be like arguing tooth and nail that melee rogues must only get sneak attack against flat footed targets, while rogues who pickup a shortbow or spear can just always get sneak attack damage for free.

I personally don't think it adds enough to the game to keep around, and even if it's technically some balance feature, it's not doing a good enough job at that anyway and should be rethought or simply abandoned.

We are only suggesting to play with the Rules as written, so nothing even remotely comparable to arguing for definitely not-RAW changes like your melee rogue vs distance rogue example.

And we are trying to find ways within the RAW to help the Magus player find solutions.

What we are not doing is thinking we know better than the devs about the whole system's balance.

Exactly!

Also I don't expect any changes in magus spellstrike in a future errata. Because everything make me believe they want the magus works like that. With same limitation of any spellcaster basically just having less spells, better martial proficiencies and a spellstrike ability that allows it to strike and cast at same time.

Golurkcanfly wrote:

This isn't helpful. The topic isn't about "how do I avoid AoO" it's about how that isn't a question that should be asked for this core feature.

What I understand about this topic wasn't only about "please Paizo remove AoO from spellstrike" but more likely some people saying "I think that the designer made a mistake here and forget to remove AoO" but in fact I disagree and I believe this isn't a mistake but a real design decision that they know how works and really want that work like this.

[Malfinn Eurilios]

CaffeinatedNinja wrote:

First, I would like to say I greatly enjoy Magus. It is a fun and well put together class. I think Paizo really nailed a proper gish, which is super hard to do.

However, in Attack of Opportunity("AoO") heavy campaigns (like the official APs at higher levels) they suffer badly.

Magus is a good class, but it is not an overpowered one. A fighter with a 2hander does more damage than a spellstriking magus! It can do other stuff of course, but a Magus that isn't spellstriking is doing damage on par with a non-paladin champion, with far more fragile defenses.

The entire class fantasy of melee magus is getting into melee range and hitting things. Spellstrike getting you hit in the face by an AoO doesn't mesh with that. The general consensus is that ranged magus is by far the best solely because of spellstrike triggering AoO.

Spellstrike doesn’t provoke AoO, it’s a strike, there’s no cast a spell activity involved your instead spellstriking. The recovery action for spellstrike does provoke AoO because it has the concentrate trait.

What you saying would make all the close in reach magus weaker while making the staff and ranged magus the best as they would be largely uneffected.

[graystone]

The Raven Black wrote:

And we are trying to find ways within the RAW to help the Magus player find solutions.

I think the issue is that the only RAW "solution" is to ONLY ever take Starlit Span [or Inexorable Iron with a reach weapon] Hybrid Studies... So it's not a very satisfying answer for those that want to play other Hybrid Studies [or non-reach weapon types]. It's kind of like is barbarians rage only worked with Greatswords or the Giant Instinct. Sure the RAW solution to the problem would be to only ever play with a Greatswords or the Giant Instinct but that makes every other option pretty sucky and people wouldn't be too happy about it either.

[Temperans]

Quote:

You have to spend all the actions of an activity at once to gain its effects. In an encounter, this means you must complete it during your turn. If an activity gets interrupted or disrupted in an encounter (page 462), you lose all the actions you committed to it.

To do an activity you must do all actions without interruption.

Spellcasting provokes.

Spellstrike sentence 2, wrote:

You Cast a Spell that takes 1 or 2 actions to cast and requires a spell attack roll.

[pixierose]

Sooo I don't have a lot of stakes in this, but as a DM if I planned to build a game with a whole lot of attacks of opportunities and its because of a central theme(military, martial arts, etc) I would ignore magus AoO.

I do think creative play, changing up tactics, is way more interesting.but clearly others disagree, or at the very least disagree that Magus is a good example of that. That's okay if they did decide to change it I would accept it.

That being said one thing I would point out is that in the game where everyone had an AoO, the Magus had an ability to reduce the chance of it but not eliminate the chance.

In a game where AoO is not a universal truth you want to completely get rid of it?

I also run for a public server. One of my encounters I a recent dungeon was a Glass Golem. A Archer Magus chose to ignore the fight because her "magic did nothing" after she produced flame, and her arrows couldn't harm the creature. She turned the corner and did nothing. No recall knowledge checks no experimentation to discover that the ray of frost she used earlier in another fight could have slowed the enemy, reducing the damage. No use of the various alchemical weapons they found in the very same dungeon.

In 2e there is always something you can try and do. It is a game built around teamwork, and versatility, sure you might not always be optimal but you could usually find something to do. Unless you choose not to.

If they do give Magus an option I don't think it should be to eliminate AoO from spellstrikr all together nor without some kind of cost. I would make it an additional action the Magus can apply to before spellstrike. Or maybe an alternative stance to arcane cascade.

[Benchak the Nightstalker]

Golurkcanfly wrote:

Also note that the Rogue Flat-Footed restriction is encouraging them to be sneaky and tricky, enhancing the flavor. Meanwhile, the Magus restriction is encouraging them to pick the subclass that changes the entire concept from melee magic user to a magic Archer.

I'd argue it encourages them to be tricky with their spells.

Off the top of my head (not including invisibility, which has already been mentioned):

Mirror image
Enlarge for extra reach
Use illusions to provoke
Use darkness/darkvision
Hideous laughter/confusion/uncontrollable dance to shut down reactions
Buff an ally with stoneskin so they can eat the AoO

Even debuffs that aren't foolproof, like fear, dazzled, or concealment, can swing things in the magus's favor.

All those are available to any hybrid study--a lot of them are even available as studious spells.

[HumbleGamer]

Malfinn Eurilios wrote:

CaffeinatedNinja wrote:

First, I would like to say I greatly enjoy Magus. It is a fun and well put together class. I think Paizo really nailed a proper gish, which is super hard to do.

However, in Attack of Opportunity("AoO") heavy campaigns (like the official APs at higher levels) they suffer badly.

Magus is a good class, but it is not an overpowered one. A fighter with a 2hander does more damage than a spellstriking magus! It can do other stuff of course, but a Magus that isn't spellstriking is doing damage on par with a non-paladin champion, with far more fragile defenses.

The entire class fantasy of melee magus is getting into melee range and hitting things. Spellstrike getting you hit in the face by an AoO doesn't mesh with that. The general consensus is that ranged magus is by far the best solely because of spellstrike triggering AoO.

AoOs are rare you say? Actually no they aren't. I went through the last three books of AoA (I am GMing it right now) and here is the frequency of AoO.

Book 4 - 29% of enemies of AoO
Book 5 - 23 % of enemies
Book 6 - 38%!

This is in addition to golems, which ALSO shut down magus pretty hard.

You can play around AoO? Sure. But when your basic melee damage rotation, spellstrike with a cantrip triggers it, they are hard to play around. And other classes that don't have to play around are just far more effective.

Magus is a good, fun class. But it's power shouldn't vary so massively depending on if AoO's are common.

Please consider making spellstrike (not all spells) not trigger AoO. It won't effect Magus in games with no AoO, and they are not at all overpowered in those games. But it would let them be viable late game with heavy amounts of AoO enemies, which clearly happens in the published APs.

Thank You

Spellstrike doesn’t provoke AoO, it’s a strike, there’s no cast a spell activity involved your instead spellstriking. The recovery action for spellstrike does provoke AoO because it has the concentrate trait.

Casting a spell is a spellstrike subordinate action, which triggers AoO.

The concentrate trait doesn't trigger AoO, unless you are against a fighter on "Disruptive Stance"

Quote:

The slightest distraction can provoke your wrath, and you’re prepared to foil enemies’ actions. As long as you are in this stance, you can use Attack of Opportunity when a creature within your reach uses a concentrate action, in addition to manipulate and move actions. Furthermore, you disrupt a triggering concentrate or manipulate action if your Strike hits (not only if it’s a critical hit).

Anyway, Spellstrike Triggering AoO, touch spells which shouldn't trigger aoe, defining mechanics as Bad or even unbalanced... I think that, once again, it's the old 1e approach who doesn't allow to accept a new system.

[The Raven Black]

graystone wrote:

The Raven Black wrote:

And we are trying to find ways within the RAW to help the Magus player find solutions.

I think the issue is that the only RAW "solution" is to ONLY ever take Starlit Span [or Inexorable Iron with a reach weapon] Hybrid Studies... So it's not a very satisfying answer for those that want to play other Hybrid Studies [or non-reach weapon types]. It's kind of like is barbarians rage only worked with Greatswords or the Giant Instinct. Sure the RAW solution to the problem would be to only ever play with a Greatswords or the Giant Instinct but that makes every other option pretty sucky and people wouldn't be too happy about it either.

I play an Animal Barbarian and I know very well ranged combat is a big weakness of that Totem. Still, it is what I chose for my PC.

[Temperans]

@Pixierose the difference is that PF1 magus could cast any spells with their Spell Combat. While they also had a lot more spells, so a lot more utility and potential damage.

But in PF2, they only get 4 actual spells. The rest is just cantrips. Getting hit because you casted a cantrip feels bad. Getting hit and losing 1 of your 4 spells feels bad. Not being able to recover those spells feels bad.

[Temperans]

@Benchak if Magus had more spell slots I would agree. But they only have 4. So those 4 spells better be worth the effort otherwise there is no point in bothering.

[pixierose]

One thing to keep in mind you only lose your spells in 2e if if you are crit, if you just get hit your spells still go off.