That's the second time I've seen laughing shadow refered to as laughing skull. I figured it was a typo the first time but now I think I'm going crazy.It's always me.
Seems I can't do it right...
Now it's not only you, I've started doing it too, because it's so g~#@#&n metal.
''Move out the way people! My Laughing Skull magus is coming in !!! (Cue ghost rider gif)''
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
With independent, if not commanded, a familiar has a generic action they can use for almost anything ( no activate items though).
Drawing the item on round 1 and passing it on round 2 is perfectly legit.
I would allow it, but would also require Manual Dexterity and still limit it to items of light or negligible bulk.
And to be honest, I am not sure why Manual Dexterity isn't a prerequisite for Valet. But that is a different bug.
I think it's working without valet. Taking an item off you the first round and handing it to you the next.- familiar passes the scroll + true strike + spellstrikeThat doesn't work (barring house rules). You can't use the action from an Independant familiar to have it hand you an item with Valet.
I noticed my mistake about 10 seconds after posting and immediately deleted my post. How did you manage to read, much less reply to it in that time?!?
But yeah, I missed the "familiar takes a scroll out" part while glancing at HumbleGamer's post. My bad.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Something like
- true strike + spellstrike
- double attack + recharge + familiar draws a scroll
- familiar passes the scroll + true strike + spellstrike
- double attack + recharge + familiar draws a scrollAnd so on.
Doesn't it take an interact action to take the scroll the familiar hands you? Interact (take scroll) + Activate Scroll (cast True Strike) + Spellstrike... would be four actions.
Would be kinda extreme that to pass an item both characters have to expend 1 action.
The rules for Wielding Items agrees with that. (which is a really strange place to put the answer for this ruling)
Especially the note that the recipient needs to have a hand free, but makes no mention of using an action of their own to receive the item.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, this whole thing at BEST hinges upon favorable rulings for two different ambiguous and debated rule interactions.
1) There is an unsettled debate if, without Striker's Scroll a Magus can EVER use a Scroll with Spellstrike given that there is a whole feat that heavily suggests that this is functionally enabled by said feat.
2) Handing equipment off, per the Action cost table in the CRB, is also debatable since it lists that both handing off an item and taking a passed item requires an action which suggests that each Character needs to spend an Action in order to functionally pass something from one to another.
If you're asking my perspective, I find the rules to pretty heavily fall on the side of the Scroll Activation being by default disallowed (since if there is a feat that says it enables you to do X then it is highly suggestive of the fact that without it then it is not allowed) as well as just by a simple reading of the table for Action costs that if it costs an action to pass and item and to take an item that it requires two Actions.
Just my 2 copper pieces that I wanted to chip in because it doesn't seem like anyone else here brought up these issues that are as-yet still very much up in the air in terms of how the developers intended to have them function.
2) Handing equipment off, per the Action cost table in the CRB, is also debatable since it lists that BOTH handing off an item and TAKING a passed item requires an action
The table doesn't list "taking a passed item", only "take an item from a willing creature". So if they aren't spending an action handing you the item, but they are willing to let you have it, then you can spend an action taking it from them.
There are also timing problems with making passing an item to an ally take one action from each of them.
If one character wants to pass an item and then move somewhere else...
does the item just float there in limbo until the other character has their turn come up and they can take it?
does the receiving character have to Ready an interact action on their previous turn in order to use their reaction to take the item?
And of course if they aren't willing to let you have the item, but you want to take it anyway, then that is a Disarm action - which is also only one action.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The utility of Striker's Scroll is being able to Spellstrike with a scroll without having to hold it. Nothing about Spellstrike prohibits you from using it in conjunction with spells cast through magic items (as long as they use the Cast a Spell activity), or otherwise the entire Twisting Tree hybrid study breaks down as it doesn't have any language allowing such a thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sparkling Targe > requires striker scroll
Not really as the shield can have an attached weapon. There is also Nimble Shield Hand if we add archetype feats.
Striker's Scroll has three effects:
Why would you be able to use any scroll with spellstrike at any time?
It is a bit ambiguous.
1) only says that you can attach the scroll to your weapon. It doesn't give you any permissions to cast from the scroll as part of the Spellstrike action.
2) only tells you how to attach the scroll.
3) prevents you from casting the scroll normally while it is attached. It does say that you can cast the spell as part of Spellstrike. What isn't clear is if this is an override of the restriction on being able to cast the scroll normally, or if this is an addition to Spellstrike that lets you cast from items at all during Spellstrike.
Spending a feat to just not need hold a scroll once sounds like a waste.
It lets you use a 2-handed weapon and Spellstrike from a scroll. Or a 1-hand weapon and shield item.
As well as letting you have another powerful spell to spellstrike with without any additional actions needed to fetch a scroll with.And as Losonti pointed out, ruling that you can't Spellstrike while casting from items seriously reduces the effectiveness of Twisting Tree. The entire point of that study is to use a staff. Being unable to spellstrike with the spells in that staff seems like a bait-and-switch.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The other major benefit of the feat is that you're offloading the action cost from encounter mode to exploration mode. Everyone else needs to spend an action drawing the scroll before they can use it, but all you needed to do was draw the weapon (if you didn't already have it out).
Anyway, it's not a feat that's useful for every or even necessarily most magus builds, but it provides a clear benefit to your average Inexorable Iron magus at the very least.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
IIRC you cannot Activate an item during Spellstrike.
Where are you seeing this restriction?
You channel a spell into a punch or sword thrust to deliver a combined attack. You Cast a Spell that takes 1 or 2 actions to cast and requires a spell attack roll. The effects of the spell don't occur immediately but are imbued into your attack instead.
It doesn't specify how you cast a spell or what source is powering the spell. It could be cast from your spell slots. It could be cast from a cantrip. Or a focus spell. Or an innate spell.
Why not an item? That can also be described as "You Cast a Spell" since scrolls, wands, and staves all use an activation method called "Cast a Spell". Cast a Spell item activation even uses the same Cast a Spell activity that casting from spell slots, cantrips, focus spells, and innate spells use.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
IIRC you cannot Activate an item during Spellstrike.Where are you seeing this restriction?
You channel a spell into a punch or sword thrust to deliver a combined attack. You Cast a Spell that takes 1 or 2 actions to cast and requires a spell attack roll. The effects of the spell don't occur immediately but are imbued into your attack instead.It doesn't specify how you cast a spell or what source is powering the spell. It could be cast from your spell slots. It could be cast from a cantrip. Or a focus spell. Or an innate spell.
Why not an item? That can also be described as "You Cast a Spell" since scrolls, wands, and staves all use an activation method called "Cast a Spell". Cast a Spell item activation even uses the same Cast a Spell activity that casting from spell slots, cantrips, focus spells, and innate spells use.
When you use a Scroll you are using the Activate an Item Action in order to Cast a Spell and since Spellstrike is an Activity with designated specific Actions associated with it you cannot simply replace the Cast a Spell Action with Activate and Item in the same way that you can't use a Feat enabled special Attack that includes a Strike Action in place of a called-for Strike that is part of a different Action, this is all covered by the subordinate actions rules which uses Haste for an example which is pretty much perfect as it references that Activities that contain called-for Actions do NOT count or qualify for use of said Activity.
Cast a Spell /=/ Activate an Item (Scroll) to produce the Cast a Spell effect
Regarding it being "destructive" toward the Twisting Tree Magus...that hybrid study has a ton of other benefits for the Magus that essentially makes the Staff as good for them as nearly any other weapon they might choose and if people were playing at the table by consuming charges from their Staff via Activate an Item as part of Spellstrike they were always doing it wrong, this needs to be done using your own Slots.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not all activities with subordinate actions specify specific actions. Many do - especially ones that have Strike as a subordinate action. Some have Stride specifically as well.
Some activities are more flexible on what actions they allow as subordinate actions. There are several that allow either Stride or Step. And Ready is the most flexible - allowing any action or activity that costs one action to use.
So when Spellstrike says 'Cast a Spell' as a subordinate action, is it meaning casting a spell from spell slots alone? Is casting a spell from spell slots a different activity than casting from cantrip slots? Or innate spells? Or a focus spell?
Or is Spellstrike listing 'Cast a Spell' as a category of activities that could include all of those above, as well as casting a spell from an item? Much like a hypothetical activity that has as a subordinate action "any action with the 'Move' trait".
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Regarding it being "destructive" toward the Twisting Tree Magus...that hybrid study has a ton of other benefits for the Magus that essentially makes the Staff as good for them as nearly any other weapon they might choose and if people were playing at the table...Fused Staff
When you prepare a staff, you can hold it up to a weapon to merge the two items. You can switch the fused item's form from the weapon to the staff or vice versa as a single action, which has the concentrate trait. When the item is in staff form, you can Cast the Spells from the staff and benefit from any other abilities the staff grants. The staff and the weapon share their fundamental runes, using whichever weapon potency and whichever striking rune is higher level. They don't share any other runes or specific abilities.
You can Cast Spells from the staff as part of a Spellstrike even when the staff is in weapon form. Otherwise, you can't cast the staff's spells while it's in weapon form.
The fusion lasts until your next daily preparations, though you can spend 10 minutes to separate the two items and meld the staff into a different weapon. The melding works for you alone. A different wielder can use the staff in its current form but can't transform it, get the benefit of the shared runes, or use its spells for a Spellstrike if it's in weapon form.
(Emphasis added.)
The two bolded portions matter.
If you cannot normally cast spells from a staff as part of a Spellstrike, that entire, bolded two-sentence paragraph is unnecessary. If that paragraph is intended to create an exception that allows what is otherwise prohibited, then it is worded all wrong.
Additionally, the proscription of another wielder from using the staff's spells for a Spellstrike while is in weapon form distinctly implies that they can use its spells for Spellstrike when it is a staff.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I cannot emphasize enough how destructive that viewpoint is to the Twisting Tree hybrid study, since it renders the staff specialist magus unable to use its signature weapon with the core feature that the entire class is built around.
Ah... They get to cast a dozen true strikes whenever they want from a staff of divination. There is also Fused Staff: "You can Cast Spells from the staff as part of a Spellstrike even when the staff is in weapon form." I think they'll manage alright.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I cannot emphasize enough how destructive that viewpoint is to the Twisting Tree hybrid study, since it renders the staff specialist magus unable to use its signature weapon with the core feature that the entire class is built around.Ah... They get to cast a dozen true strikes whenever they want from a staff of divination. There is also Fused Staff: "You can Cast Spells from the staff as part of a Spellstrike even when the staff is in weapon form." I think they'll manage alright.
Re: Fused Staff - You missed the "even when" caveat. Your conviction is supported only if you drop the word "even." The "even when" clearly implies that a Magus could, otherwise, normally cast a spell from a staff as part of a Spellstrike.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fused StaffYou can Cast Spells from the staff as part of a Spellstrike even when the staff is in weapon form. Otherwise, you can't cast the staff's spells while it's in weapon form.
Indeed. This states that when the staff is transformed into a weapon they can only use the staff's charges to power Spellstrike. They can't cast the spells from the staff normally.
And it doesn't give any new ability to cast from the item as part of a Spellstrike. It certainly appears that it implies that the ability to cast from items as part of a Spellstrike is assumed to be available.
|
|
Fair enough, I forgot that Activate an Item is its own activity. However, it's pretty clear that staves work with spellstrike:
The spell gains the appropriate trait for your magical tradition (arcane, divine, occult, or primal) and can be affected by any modifications you can normally make when casting spells, such as metamagic feats.
Ah... They get to cast a dozen true strikes whenever they want from a staff of divination. There is also Fused Staff: "You can Cast Spells from the staff as part of a Spellstrike even when the staff is in weapon form." I think they'll manage alright.
The staff of divination is already enough of an "always best choice" item (which is directly antithetical to PF2e's design philosophy) without it being the only one that actually functions with a Twisting Tree magus's class features.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Re: Fused Staff - You missed the "even when" caveat. Your conviction is supported only if you drop the word "even." The "even when" clearly implies that a Magus could, otherwise, normally cast a spell from a staff as part of a Spellstrike.I cannot emphasize enough how destructive that viewpoint is to the Twisting Tree hybrid study, since it renders the staff specialist magus unable to use its signature weapon with the core feature that the entire class is built around.Ah... They get to cast a dozen true strikes whenever they want from a staff of divination. There is also Fused Staff: "You can Cast Spells from the staff as part of a Spellstrike even when the staff is in weapon form." I think they'll manage alright.
I wasn't making a pro or con post, just even if you read it the one way that it's "destructive" to Twisting Tree. My point is that no matter what read you have, there are abilities that are called out to allow staves to be used in a Spellstrike.
That said I think it can be read that since you can ONLY be used with a Spellstrike "even though" it's a fused: "Otherwise, you can't cast the staff's spells while it's in weapon form". IE, normally you can't cast spells from the staff but Spellstrike is an exception. It depends on whether you think the standard is if you can use an item to spellstrike or not how it reads IMO.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The staff of divination is already enough of an "always best choice" item (which is directly antithetical to PF2e's design philosophy) without it being the only one that actually does anything useful for a Twisting Tree magus.
IMO, the whole True Strike spell should be gotten rid of as whenever there is an issue like this it always seems to the the answer why it's like that: for instance why don't we have spells that give bonuses to spell attacks? As much as I don't like it, the Twisting Tree magus is the only magus likely to be able to use a staff of divination and that in itself is a significant bonus in higher level True Strike spamming.
Talking about fused staff, I Just looked at the staves we currently have, and seems there's not a single spell attack you can use for your spellstrike.
Cantrips: Staves of Fire, Verdant, Conjuration, Evocation, Final Rest, Nature's Cunning, Nature's Vengeance, Lini's Leafstick, Sieges and Magi have usable cantrips.
Also for higher level spells a Staff of Illumination has searing light, Staff of Nature's Vengeance has shocking grasp, Staff of Power has ray of enfeeblement, Staff of Magi has Telekinetic Maneuver and disintegrate.
So, you are required to also get expansive spellstrike or to craft your own staff, putting some spell attack spells.
Crafting your own is the way to go if you want to lean into staves for Spellstrike and not go expansive.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, I wasn't wrong at all.
Talking about fused staff, I Just looked at the staves we currently have, and seems there's not a single spell attack you can use for your spellstrike.
Those to things don't match up if more than 0 spells can be had with staves. If you'd have made a qualifier, then you wouldn't be wrong: saying "there's not a single spell attack you can use for your spellstrike" is provably wrong and I showed my proof.
fuse staff is a lvl 8 feat, so the spells need to be at least good as one lvl 7 offensive cantrip, and they are drastically worse
Base searing light is 5d6 fire and 5d6 good to fiend or undead: vs fiend or undead it can match a 10th level cantrip. If you're lucky you might even trigger 2 weaknesses, like on a Tar Zombie Mammoth for 2x weakness 10.
Ray of Enfeeblement can be useful vs something with a weak Fort save [spell has no heightened state]. This is especially true if you fish for a crit hit with a True Strike to lower the save one degree.
Telekinetic Maneuver and disintegrate are fine as is.
Cantrips mean nothing, talking about a magus who will lock all offensive ones because how their class work.
Will it? There are 6 arcane spell roll arcane cantrips. There is 1 divine not covered by those 6. Then there is 1 more arcane from the new dark archive. So is the magus going to have all 8 spell attack cantrips ready to go? You COULD but it'd be less work to snag one off a staff as you need to get 3 more than you get from your base class.