| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe some of the focus spells from Witch. Needle of Vengeance, Elemental Betrayal, and Cackle are all really good. The first two are good 3rd actions and Cackle is a really good action economy boost.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Aura of Despair and/or Dirge of Doom on a rogue with Dread Striker. Sneak attack on everyone forever and their AC is in the dumpster.
Aside from fighter stealing just about anything from every other martial...
Swashbuckler's one for all works better on a cha caster.
Fake out can run into issues on Gunslingers if they end turns without a loaded weapon but a caster can just walk around with a crossbow they'll never use anyway.
Similar to glutton jaw, sorc's dragon claws are better on martials.
Monks use wild shape better than druids for the first 10 levels.
The entire Alchemist archetype.
You're going to see a lot of characters sniping psychic focus spells in general to get a good encounter power to go with their better martial chassis or more spell slots.
One I don't see brought up too often is getting wizard's convincing illusion feat on a cha caster through the usual multitalented 9, feat 10, feat 12 setup.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So it's something I have seen a couple of times with magus and Eldritch Archer investigators is that they hunt for the most damaging focus spell to stack on the end of their attack.
Up until the psychic that focus spell tended to be Fire Ray (scales of 2d6)
Now on a whole I wasn't blown away by psychic focus spells but and imaginary weapon fell perfectly into that it was a great Melee spell on the chassis of a 6 hp no armor caster, using it to best effect to (Melee two enemies) puts you in melee with two enemies which 6/10 doesn't end well.
But what it does seem to be great for is the ultimate focus cantrip to archetype for as Eldritch Archer or Magus looking to pick up a heavy hitting encounter spell.
I was wondering if their were any other spells or class feats or powers that end up being more effective for another class by archytpe than their own.
Be careful on one thing: Eldritch Archer doesn't have Magus wording to ignore spell range, so Imaginary Weapon for them is a melee only attack. Only Maguses get a really good use out of it (and with Spell Swipe, it's just awesome).
Be careful on one thing: Eldritch Archer doesn't have Magus wording to ignore spell range, so Imaginary Weapon for them is a melee only attack. Only Maguses get a really good use out of it (and with Spell Swipe, it's just awesome).
For Eldritch Shot the normal range of the spell doesn't apply. The spell travels as far as the ammunition goes.
Your spell flies with the ammunition, using your attack roll result to determine the effects of both the Strike and the spell.
It's actually less limiting than the Starlit Span's Ranged Spellstrike which is restricted to one range increment.
When you use Spellstrike, you can make a ranged weapon or ranged unarmed Strike, as long as the target is within the first range increment of your ranged weapon or ranged unarmed attack.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Be careful on one thing: Eldritch Archer doesn't have Magus wording to ignore spell range, so Imaginary Weapon for them is a melee only attack. Only Maguses get a really good use out of it (and with Spell Swipe, it's just awesome).For Eldritch Shot the normal range of the spell doesn't apply. The spell travels as far as the ammunition goes.
Your spell flies with the ammunition, using your attack roll result to determine the effects of both the Strike and the spell.
Nothing states that the range can be ignored.
Starlit Span states: "When you use Spellstrike, you can make a ranged weapon or ranged unarmed Strike, as long as the target is within the first range increment of your ranged weapon or ranged unarmed attack. You can deliver the spell even if its range is shorter than the range increment of your ranged attack."Eldritch Archer lacks this wording and as such is still limited by the spell range.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nothing states that the range can be ignored.
It doesn't need to.
Step 1
You Cast a Spell that takes 1 or 2 actions to cast and requires a spell attack roll.
The spell isn't required to be a ranged spell. So I cast Shocking Grasp which is legal because it takes 2 actions to cast and requires a spell attack roll.
Step 2
The effects of the spell do not occur immediately but are imbued into the bow you’re wielding.
So the range of the spell doesn't matter at this point because it hasn't activated yet. It's in 'stasis.'
Step 3
Make a Strike with that bow.
I shoot the arrow at someone 100' away and roll high enough to hit them.
Step 4
Your spell flies with the ammunition, ...
It says that the spell travels with the ammunition. If the ammunition travels 100' then the spell travels 100'. This is the key. It's why I bolded it before.
Step 5
...using your attack roll result to determine the effects of both the Strike and the spell.
I rolled a hit so the arrow is now in physical contact with the target. Now, and only now, the spell takes effect. But the spell isn't with me anymore. The spell is in the arrow which is now touching the target. That's the range that matters, and it's now 0'. So even a touch spell like Shocking Grasp works. Since I rolled a hit, the spell affects the target.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nothing states that the range can be ignored.It doesn't need to.
"Spells with a range can affect targets, create areas, or make things appear only within that range."
If you are outside the spell range, you don't affect the target, period.
But the spell isn't with me anymore. The spell is in the arrow which is now touching the target. That's the range that matters, and it's now 0'. So even a touch spell like Shocking Grasp works. Since I rolled a hit, the spell affects the target.
Sorry, but that's just wrong. The range is still calculated from you. If the range has to be calculated from somewhere else, it has to be stated.
From a RAW point of view, your case doesn't stand. From a RAI point of view, you can try it as the Eldritch Archer has been released before the Magus it's possible they haven't thought about adding the language about range. But that's the only way to make it stand. And I personally find that it would be unfair for the Eldritch Archer, an archetype, to have a range advantage over the Magus, a class.
I always took it to be a modification on the magus text that discusses reach to extend that rules text into starlit span.
And I can absolutely see paizo making magus have inferior range to go with the ability to True Strike a high level spell slot. And you'd think that something as important as spell restrictions would have been mentioned in the original rules text otherwise.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
My oldest stupid build, the Kamehameha Cleric, utilizes this principle: Ki Blast is much better for a Cloistered Cleric than for a Monk.
I always took it to be a modification on the magus text that discusses reach to extend that rules text into starlit span.
And I can absolutely see paizo making magus have inferior range to go with the ability to True Strike a high level spell slot. And you'd think that something as important as spell restrictions would have been mentioned in the original rules text otherwise.
Anyway, we are entering RAI territory. Obviously, I don't know the developer's intent and you may fully be right (even if knowing how conservative PF2 designers are I'd not be surprised if they don't want such a range increase on spells). It's just that from strict RAW you can't ignore the spell range.
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's just that from strict RAW you can't ignore the spell range.
From strict RAW perspective: saying 'your spell flies with the ammunition' is pretty clearly an override of the normal range of the spell. Saying otherwise would be Too Bad To Be True and would run afoul of a different rule that we all know of.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's just that from strict RAW you can't ignore the spell range.From strict RAW perspective: saying 'your spell flies with the ammunition' is pretty clearly an override of the normal range of the spell. Saying otherwise would be Too Bad To Be True and would run afoul of a different rule that we all know of.
You consider that the override is implied, implied doesn't mean RAW, but RAI. Per RAW, there's no override as there's nothing stating that the range has to be ignored.
Also, casting touch range spells at whatever range is the too good to be true rule, not the other way around. And there's no too bad to be true rule anyway.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
And there's no too bad to be true rule anyway.
There is - though it isn't actually worded that way.
Sometimes a rule could be interpreted multiple ways. If one version is too good to be true, it probably is. If a rule seems to have wording with problematic repercussions or doesn’t work as intended, work with your group to find a good solution, rather than just playing with the rule as printed.
"Too Bad To Be True" is just a shorter way of saying that. The meaning is already there. If it is too good to be true, it probably is. If it is too bad to be true, fix it rather than playing a broken game.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
You consider that the override is implied, implied doesn't mean RAW, but RAI. Per RAW, there's no override as there's nothing stating that the range has to be ignored.Also, casting touch range spells at whatever range is the too good to be true rule, not the other way around. And there's no too bad to be true rule anyway.
It isn't implied. It is stated. "Your spell flies with the ammunition, using your attack roll result to determine the effects of both the Strike and the spell." When a specific rule contradicts a general rule, the specific rule takes precedence. It does not have to declare it is overriding the general rule.
It isn't implied. It is stated. "Your spell flies with the ammunition, using your attack roll result to determine the effects of both the Strike and the spell." When a specific rule contradicts a general rule, the specific rule takes precedence. It does not have to declare it is overriding the general rule.
Your spell flies with the ammunition. Then it hits a creature out of the spell range.
The rule "Spells with a range can affect targets, create areas, or make things appear only within that range." kicks in and the spell doesn't affect the target.If there's nothing clearly indicating that the rule about range is overridden then the rule is still there. Flying with the ammunition doesn't change the spell range.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Then why would the Arcane Archer rules even need to say 'your spell flies with the ammunition'? What does that even mean? Why not simply say that you cast the spell, make the ranged attack, and use the results of the attack roll from the attack in place of making a spell attack for the spell. Removing that line of text would be less word count and less confusing.
And if you want to say that it is just flavor text, I would point out that the devs have mentioned that even their flavor text is not 'fluff' - it shouldn't be ignored. If it is flavor text and not meant to override the general rules on spell range, then it is incredibly misleading flavor text.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think there are valid arguments to be made in both directions, here. I think we're in "it pretty much requires a GM ruling" territory.
That said, it's growing off-topic.
I will say that Monk/Barbarian Grappler makes much better use of the base-level Living Hair than Witch ever did. It runs off my existing handwraps, gives me a viable attack that I can use when both my hands are full and it comes with trip? Yes, please.
Oh, and buying it gives your archetype familiar its second feature, too.
Witch's reaction tot he same feat: "How am I suppsoed to make use of this?"
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Then why would the Arcane Archer rules even need to say 'your spell flies with the ammunition'? What does that even mean?
I let you answer your own question. I'm not the one trying to find a hidden meaning to this sentence. For me, it just states what it states: The spell flies with the ammunition. Keeping all its values intact as nothing in the sentence suggest that the spell must be modified.
Why not simply say that you cast the spell, make the ranged attack, and use the results of the attack roll from the attack in place of making a spell attack for the spell. Removing that line of text would be less word count and less confusing.
For the same reason they say your spell is imbued into your bow. It doesn't necessarily imply anything mechanically.
If it is flavor text and not meant to override the general rules on spell range, then it is incredibly misleading flavor text.
Well, I don't see why you want to override the range rules. You cast a spell and shoot your ammunition and the spell flies with it, it's actually pretty much describing what happens. The range rules are applied once the spell hit and you determine the spell effects. If the target is outside the spell range, it isn't affected, that's all.
Stating that the range of the spell is ignored is just not RAW. But I'm fine with a RAI case stating that it is implied. Just, it's implied, not directly written.
Anyway, I'm repeating myself, so we can agree to disagree.
I just encourage people to check with their GM first before using a touch range spell with Eldritch Shot, especially if they took 2 feats to get it.
Not sure if it's "bad" for the base class, but a Fighter or Champion with Quick Shield Block and MC Psychic can use Tangible Dream's Layered Shield to block multiple attacks in the same round. Might even be better than having a more typical shield, since they don't need to repair it between fights and the Hardness scales decently.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Your spell flies with the ammunition. Then it hits a creature out of the spell range.
The rule "Spells with a range can affect targets, create areas, or make things appear only within that range." kicks in and the spell doesn't affect the target.If there's nothing clearly indicating that the rule about range is overridden then the rule is still there. Flying with the ammunition doesn't change the spell range.
I disagree. While I understand what you are saying, reading through a half dozen discussions of Eldritch Shot and various touch spells, I didn't find anyone else interpreting "flies with the ammunition" the way you are. At most, RAW is ambiguous.
I did find a thread where you analyzed a Fighter with Eldritch Shot using Gouging Claw, where you found it to be suboptimal. https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gdq&page=2?Arcane-Cascade-for-Starlit-Sp an#66
Which raises a question. If "flies with the ammunition" does not affect general range rules, how does Eldritch Shot work with touch-ranged spells? Touch spells require that you, not ammunition, touch the target. Are you casting the spell, imbuing it into the bow, sending it with the ammunition, then reaching out to touch the target? And your ranged attack roll determines if your ranged attack succeeds AND if your spell attack succeeds? What happens if you are using a crossbow, where both your hands are occupied?
I think there are valid arguments to be made in both directions, here. I think we're in "it pretty much requires a GM ruling" territory.
That said, it's growing off-topic.
Pretty much, yeah.
I will say that Monk/Barbarian Grappler makes much better use of the base-level Living Hair than Witch ever did. It runs off my existing handwraps, gives me a viable attack that I can use when both my hands are full and it comes with trip? Yes, please.
Oh, and buying it gives your archetype familiar its second feature, too.
Witch's reaction tot he same feat: "How am I suppsoed to make use of this?"
Hah. Indeed. The feat is so bad for Witch that I forgot it even had it.
At most, RAW is ambiguous.
I fully agree that the rules should have stated exactly what happens with the range of spells the way Starlit Span does. Also, the wording of Starlit Span made me reconsider Eldritch Shot. It hints at its necessity for the range to be modified.
Which raises a question. If "flies with the ammunition" does not affect general range rules, how does Eldritch Shot work with touch-ranged spells?
First, Eldritch Shot doesn't have to work with touch-ranged spells.
Also, touch range is "in your reach" in terms of game. So I think one can easily apply it at 5 ft. (or more if you are enlarged). But anyway, touch range spells are not interesting with Eldritch shot as you can find long range ones with very close damage that you can at least use more than 5ft. away.To get back to the discussion: there's another discussion about nice Psychic builds. And... I haven't found a nice Psychic build yet. I dislike the Psychic's feats so I was looking at a Dedication to work with it, but I haven't found any. The Psychic class is extremely well built, there are Focus Spells, Reactions and such. There's no real need to grab something outside and I don't find some combo to work with it.
Not sure if it's "bad" for the base class, but a Fighter or Champion with Quick Shield Block and MC Psychic can use Tangible Dream's Layered Shield to block multiple attacks in the same round. Might even be better than having a more typical shield, since they don't need to repair it between fights and the Hardness scales decently.
It's... not great. For those classes, you want to be able to block more than three times in a fight, and you want to be able to block more than once without losing your AC from raising shield. Also, shield spell gives you 1 AC instead of 2. Oh, and you'd probably prefer to not have to use a focus point for it, and you might prefer to be able to skip a turn when you need to without having to spend another.
Oddly, it looks like the best way to use the amped version might be to shatter two layers on the first hit, and then switch back to using standard shield... which still has its +1 ac, and also can be dropped and restarted at will until you use it to block again. Alternately, you just blow the entire thing at once and use the later actions for something else.
For what a tank would use it for, this isn't great. For the psychic who's sitting int he back, being able to toss an extra shield in front of the squishiest melee is potentially a lot more useful, especially as a "What do I do with my third action after casting?" pick.
Hah. Indeed. The feat is so bad for Witch that I forgot it even had it.
As someone who's into grappling, it's one of the few witch feats I know.
First, Eldritch Shot doesn't have to work with touch-ranged spells.
Also, touch range is "in your reach" in terms of game. So I think one can easily apply it at 5 ft. (or more if you are enlarged). But anyway, touch range spells are not interesting with Eldritch shot as you can find long range ones with very close damage that you can at least use more than 5ft. away.
Touch range specifically says you have to have to touch your target. Since you believe "flies with the ammunition" doesn't affect range requirements, and you've written an analysis of Eldritch Shot and a touch range cantrip, I was just wondering how you saw that working. But OK. Back on topic.
Not sure if it's "bad" for the base class, but a Fighter or Champion with Quick Shield Block and MC Psychic can use Tangible Dream's Layered Shield to block multiple attacks in the same round. Might even be better than having a more typical shield, since they don't need to repair it between fights and the Hardness scales decently.It's... not great. For those classes, you want to be able to block more than three times in a fight, and you want to be able to block more than once without losing your AC from raising shield. Also, shield spell gives you 1 AC instead of 2. Oh, and you'd probably prefer to not have to use a focus point for it, and you might prefer to be able to skip a turn when you need to without having to spend another.
Oddly, it looks like the best way to use the amped version might be to shatter two layers on the first hit, and then switch back to using standard shield... which still has its +1 ac, and also can be dropped and restarted at will until you use it to block again. Alternately, you just blow the entire thing at once and use the later actions for something else.
For what a tank would use it for, this isn't great. For the psychic who's sitting int he back, being able to toss an extra shield in front of the squishiest melee is potentially a lot more useful, especially as a "What do I do with my third action after casting?" pick.
There's the outside idea of taking it on a 2h weapon martial. Open with sudden charge to close distance, self amp shield and burst all 3 layers at once to mitigate damage in the earliest (most dangerous) round of combat.
Or the more outside idea of taking it on an archer and casting it on the frontline if you don't have a real reaction to use otherwise.
Neither are things I've really thought too deeply about or seen discussed so I don't have any solid opinion on it.
There's the outside idea of taking it on a 2h weapon martial though it requires wasting a feat on reactive shield as a fighter. Open with sudden charge to close distance, self amp shield and use the extra reaction to burst all 3 layers at once to mitigate damage in the earliest (most dangerous) round of combat while retaining your attacks of opportunity.
Or the more outside idea of taking it on an archer and casting it on the frontline if you don't have a real reaction to use otherwise.
Neither are things I've really thought too deeply about or seen discussed so I don't have any...
At that point, you're putting in the feat investment to get Quick Shield Block with the intention of using it... once per fight? That's really not worth it.
Now, I make no statement as to whether or not "grab psychic archetype for supershield utility" is a worthwhile expenditure of feats or not, but at that point I think ti's straying pretty far from the topic of this thread.
|
It isn't implied. It is stated. "Your spell flies with the ammunition, using your attack roll result to determine the effects of both the Strike and the spell." When a specific rule contradicts a general rule, the specific rule takes precedence. It does not have to declare it is overriding the general rule.
You consider that the override is implied, implied doesn't mean RAW, but RAI. Per RAW, there's no override as there's nothing stating that the range has to be ignored.Also, casting touch range spells at whatever range is the too good to be true rule, not the other way around. And there's no too bad to be true rule anyway.
Where is the word Range in the quoted text ?
Nowhere. So, no specific rule about Range. So, no change from the RAW of the spell's Range.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nothing states that the range can be ignored.It doesn't need to."Spells with a range can affect targets, create areas, or make things appear only within that range."
If you are outside the spell range, you don't affect the target, period.
But the spell isn't with me anymore. The spell is in the arrow which is now touching the target. That's the range that matters, and it's now 0'. So even a touch spell like Shocking Grasp works. Since I rolled a hit, the spell affects the target.Sorry, but that's just wrong. The range is still calculated from you. If the range has to be calculated from somewhere else, it has to be stated.
It is stated.
The effects of the spell do not occur immediately but are imbued into the bow you’re wielding.
...
Your spell flies with the ammunition, ...
You've been very clear about what you believe that it doesn't mean. I'm curious to know what you think those phrases do mean.
From a RAW point of view, your case doesn't stand. From a RAI point of view, you can try it as the Eldritch Archer has been released before the Magus it's possible they haven't thought about adding the language about range. But that's the only way to make it stand.
Spellstrike Ammunition works the same way as Eldritch Shot for attack spells: you cast a spell into the weapon, it travels to the target, and then affects that target using your attack roll to determine your results. It also lacks the language you claim is necessary regarding the range.
So if a Wizard in a town casts a spell with a range of 30' into my Spellstrike Ammunition and he's 10 miles away when it use it against an enemy standing 5' from me the spell doesn't reach them because the target isn't within 30' of the Wizard?
And I personally find that it would be unfair for the Eldritch Archer, an archetype, to have a range advantage over the Magus, a class.
Archetypes having abilities better than classes is pretty much why they exist. Sentinel grants better armor proficiency than Wizard, Medic grants better healing options than Fighter, etc. Why would anyone take an archetype that only grants abilities that you already exceed?
But Starlit Span's Ranged Spellstrike has other advantages over Eldritch Shot: it only takes two actions, can be used with a wider array of spells through Expansive Spellstrike, etc. So it isn't as if one ability is strictly better than the other.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Great for an archetype is the Wizard's feats for casting with no perceptible manifestation.
That sound kind of niche for both.
Like, there are campaigns where that sounds great, and there are campaigns where it wouldn't be all that useful, and I'm really unclear on who it is that would get *better* use of it than the wizard who gets it natively.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It isn't implied. It is stated. "Your spell flies with the ammunition, using your attack roll result to determine the effects of both the Strike and the spell." When a specific rule contradicts a general rule, the specific rule takes precedence. It does not have to declare it is overriding the general rule.
You consider that the override is implied, implied doesn't mean RAW, but RAI. Per RAW, there's no override as there's nothing stating that the range has to be ignored.Also, casting touch range spells at whatever range is the too good to be true rule, not the other way around. And there's no too bad to be true rule anyway.
Where is the word Range in the quoted text ?
Nowhere. So, no specific rule about Range. So, no change from the RAW of the spell's Range.
The Spell Storing Rune doesn't include the word 'range' anywhere in its text, either.
So a Fighter can't use one to deliver a Shocking Grasp spell unless the Wizard she hired to cast it is standing next to her target?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Great for an archetype is the Wizard's feats for casting with no perceptible manifestation.
I've seen a lot of people here who place a high value on hiding those manifestations. Is it just so you can enchant people's minds without others knowing?
Great for an archetype is the Wizard's feats for casting with no perceptible manifestation.I've seen a lot of people here who place a high value on hiding those manifestations. Is it just so you can enchant people's minds without others knowing?
Pretty much.
Fairly useless in a standard dungeon crawl. Somewhat useful if you intend to magically charm the city official that you need a favor from and the GM is being fastidious about spellcasting emanations.
There's the outside idea of taking it on a 2h weapon martial though it requires wasting a feat on reactive shield as a fighter. Open with sudden charge to close distance, self amp shield and use the extra reaction to burst all 3 layers at once to mitigate damage in the earliest (most dangerous) round of combat while retaining your attacks of opportunity.
Or the more outside idea of taking it on an archer and casting it on the frontline if you don't have a real reaction to use otherwise.
Neither are things I've really thought too deeply about or seen discussed so I don't have any...
At that point, you're putting in the feat investment to get Quick Shield Block with the intention of using it... once per fight? That's really not worth it.
Now, I make no statement as to whether or not "grab psychic archetype for supershield utility" is a worthwhile expenditure of feats or not, but at that point I think ti's straying pretty far from the topic of this thread.
Alas, my edit to remove that part was too slow; I realized how dumb it sounded after posting it.
In general, I've found shields to be too taxing on action econ to be worth using over a whole encounter until paragon guard so being able to compress 2 rounds worth of shielding into 1 action+reaction has some attraction to it, particularly when you can throw it on any 2h martial and take advantage of it before you start setting up AoOs.
Back on topic, a thaumaturge can get more mileage out of bard's loremaster's etude than a bard ever will and doesn't exactly mind other bard archetype feats.
My personal picks:
Witch; lets almost any class poach focus spells to round out their renewable resources and nab an enhnaced Familiar for 3 of their earliest level feats, while the main class is a wizard without their best feature
Champion; lay on hands and champions reaction are great on most characters, and casters love the heavy armor too; depending on your diety choice, you might also get some utility from domain spells. The base class is pretty nice
Inventor; lots of early level access utility and some build a bear mods for a weapon is really nice for clever players who use athletics skills
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Spellstrike Ammunition works the same way as Eldritch Shot for attack spells: you cast a spell into the weapon, it travels to the target, and then affects that target using your attack roll to determine your results. It also lacks the language you claim is necessary regarding the range.
So if a Wizard in a town casts a spell with a range of 30' into my Spellstrike Ammunition and he's 10 miles away when it use it against an enemy standing 5' from me the spell doesn't reach them because the target isn't within 30' of the Wizard?
Yes, because the spell is lost long time ago.
"If magic ammunition doesn’t have an Activate entry, it’s activated automatically when it’s launched. Types of magic ammunition that have an Activate entry must be activated with additional actions before being used. Once you activate the ammunition, you must shoot it before the end of your turn. Otherwise, it deactivates (but it isn’t consumed) and you must activate it again before you can use it. If you shoot the ammunition without activating it first, it functions as non-magical ammunition and is still consumed."The Spell Storing Rune doesn't include the word 'range' anywhere in its text, either.
"Usage etched onto a melee weapon"
If you find a spell with a range shorter than touch, the question may be raised.You've been very clear about what you believe that it doesn't mean. I'm curious to know what you think those phrases do mean.
If a Monk deflects the arrow or even redirect it, the spell is also deflected/redirected. So it's actually quite different than not having the wording which then would mean that the Monk redirects the arrow but still takes the spell in the face.
So, now, allow me to return the favor: Why is there a wording about range on Ranged Spellstrike as according to you that wording is unnecessary?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Spell Storing Rune doesn't include the word 'range' anywhere in its text, either."Usage etched onto a melee weapon"
If you find a spell with a range shorter than touch, the question may be raised.
This doesn't follow. The weapon is not the "target" of the spell. The caster casts the spell into the weapon. The weapon later strikes a creature, an action is spent, and the spell is unleashed with the target of the strike being the target of the spell. There is no text that uses the word "range". The only "target" of the spell is the creature the spell is being released on.
If the ammunition of Eldritch Shot is not the origin point of its released spell, why is a Spell Storing weapon the origin point of its release spell?
For those classes, you want to be able to block more than three times in a fight
I dunno, most combats aren't going to go on much longer than that, and against dangerous enemies that's about when you'd start pushing your shield toward the broken threshold anyways.
If the ammunition of Eldritch Shot is not the origin point of its released spell, why is a Spell Storing weapon the origin point of its release spell?
I've never said that. The origin of its released spell is the character using the command action to release the spell.
When you cast Vampiric Touch with a Spell Storing weapon, I hope you don't give the temporary hps to the original caster. It's as if the weapon wielder was casting the spell as they are the one making the command action that unleashes it. That's why for example there's a fix DC instead of the caster DC, because the caster has nothing to do with the spell anymore.By the way, I answer to all your questions but none of you has answered to my single question: Why is there a wording about range on Ranged Spellstrike as according to you that wording is unnecessary?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the ammunition of Eldritch Shot is not the origin point of its released spell, why is a Spell Storing weapon the origin point of its release spell?I've never said that. The origin of its released spell is the character using the command action to release the spell.
When you cast Vampiric Touch with a Spell Storing weapon, I hope you don't give the temporary hps to the original caster. It's as if the weapon wielder was casting the spell as they are the one making the command action that unleashes it. That's why for example there's a fix DC instead of the caster DC, because the caster has nothing to do with the spell anymore.By the way, I answer to all your questions but none of you has answered to my single question: Why is there a wording about range on Ranged Spellstrike as according to you that wording is unnecessary?
In the last hour you've been flatly wrong but never unsure about the basics of how an investigar and alchemist ability work. Perhaps take a step back and rethink this line of thinking.
If the ammunition of Eldritch Shot is not the origin point of its released spell, why is a Spell Storing weapon the origin point of its release spell?I've never said that. The origin of its released spell is the character using the command action to release the spell.
When you cast Vampiric Touch with a Spell Storing weapon, I hope you don't give the temporary hps to the original caster. It's as if the weapon wielder was casting the spell as they are the one making the command action that unleashes it. That's why for example there's a fix DC instead of the caster DC, because the caster has nothing to do with the spell anymore.By the way, I answer to all your questions but none of you has answered to my single question: Why is there a wording about range on Ranged Spellstrike as according to you that wording is unnecessary?
Honestly, it is getting difficult to follow your ideas here. In the post I was responding to, you were suggesting that "range" was from caster to weapon rune. Now it is from character using the command action to the target?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, now, allow me to return the favor: Why is there a wording about range on Ranged Spellstrike as according to you that wording is unnecessary?
That's an odd question since I have never argued that the wording about range on Ranged Spellstrike is unnecessary.
In my first post on my topic pointed out that the wording of Ranged Spellstrike specifically limits the the spell effects to one range increment of the weapon. That makes it different from Eldritch Shot which is only limited by the maximum range of the weapon.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...
It's as if the weapon wielder was casting the spell as they are the one making the command action that unleashes it.
...
I'm confused here. Are you saying that the wielder has to use the "cast a spell action" when they activate the rune? If you aren't then saying "[i]t's as if the weapon wielder was casting the spell" is misleading.
I would argue that it's the weapon that is the origin point of the released spell since that is the object that creates the effect.
Actions and other abilities that generate an effect typically work within a specified range or a reach. Most spells and abilities list a range—the maximum distance from the creature or object creating the effect in which the effect can occur.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Conceal spell and silent spell are two fantastic feats of GMs play where people are general skeptical of having casters cast who knows what spell around them. Need to detect magic in a market place? Need to cast message during a dinner party? Need to cast an illusion ever?
Many GMs hand wave the weirdness of casting spells and not having everyone react like the wizard might be mind controlling you.
Silent spell is additionally useful if you ever want to be able to scout and cast spells. You really can’t stand in front of a door and start casting spells in PF2 and not expect people on the other side to hear you.
But these feats are as valuable for the wizard as for every other casting class.
Swashbuckler's one for all works better on a cha caster.
This is specially true for Swashbucklers with Bard dedication.
The entire Alchemist archetype.
Also fantastic for the Alchemical Sciences Investigator.
My oldest stupid build, the Kamehameha Cleric, utilizes this principle: Ki Blast is much better for a Cloistered Cleric than for a Monk.
This works even better for Oracles due their chassis progression for Focus Spells. Oracles are also fantastic with you want to MC with Druids due it's very good elemental order spells and with many Sorcerers' Bloodline Spells.
Back to topic:
I find the witch to be excellent archetype but weak main as well.
Minor lesson as immediate follow-up plus the familiar alongside primary feat seems very good for a lot of int heavy classes.
Many times Wizards and Magus build can be more productive with hexes. Also receives a free familiar.
Champion; lay on hands and champions reaction are great on most characters, and casters love the heavy armor too; depending on your diety choice, you might also get some utility from domain spells. The base class is pretty nice
Champions dedication and Divine Ally works fantastically well with Sparkling Targe Magus. The Champions have a good AC and high shield HP due heavy armor and shield ally but usually low defense against spells at same time the Sparkling Targe Magus have a good spell defense but less AC. The dedication allows the usage of heavy armors in early game, shield ally increases shield HP to help sturdy shields to endure against spell damages. Also if the player want can "buy" the champion reactions to help te protection of it allies.
Inventor; lots of early level access utility and some build a bear mods for a weapon is really nice for clever players who use athletics skills
Inventor falls in a situation similar to the alchemist.