
KraevenX |
The question is simple. Does the +1 circumstance bonus to hit a target wearing metal from Shocking Grasp apply to the attack roll for Spellstrike?
There have been a couple of threads about this topic in the past and while the debate has been heated the result of the discussion have been inconclusive.
Thread 1
Thread 2
And a search of the Paizo forums reveals a similar questions have been asked a ton of times for first edition, funnily enough.
My RAW interpretation is that the bonus doesn't apply. That being the case, I think that there is a possibility that RAI this functions the way it did in First Edition. I personally think its much cooler if the strike is altered by the spell you cast and that bonuses that would apply to the spell attack roll are also applied to the weapon attack roll and I don't believe it would necessarily upset game balance.
The same basic question can be asked for the interaction between Spellstrike and Phase Bolt. Does the strike experience reduced AC bonuses from shields/cover?
I am praying to the Pathfinder Gods that we can receive a developer response to put this burning question to rest.

Eoran |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

while the debate has been heated the result of the discussion have been inconclusive.
I expect that this discussion on it will be equally inconclusive considering that the relevant rules text has not changed.
I am praying to the Pathfinder Gods that we can receive a developer response to put this burning question to rest.
Spring errata should be coming out at some point in the next three months. That is where such developer response should be given - not necessarily in this thread.

KraevenX |
KraevenX wrote:while the debate has been heated the result of the discussion have been inconclusive.I expect that this discussion on it will be equally inconclusive considering that the relevant rules text has not changed.
KraevenX wrote:I am praying to the Pathfinder Gods that we can receive a developer response to put this burning question to rest.Spring errata should be coming out at some point in the next three months. That is where such developer response should be given - not necessarily in this thread.
Thanks for the response Eoran. The reason I made this thread was because I was reading the Paizo FAQ and they recommended that rules questions be posted in this forum and I'm not certain if there are any other ways to look for dev responses. Is there anyway to suggest something be included in Errata or otherwise signal boost it? Again, I want to use the best most official channels for this kind of thing. I don't want to mess up the forums I just love this game and I want to understand how best to run it/interpret it.
That being said - how do you run it? RAW or RAI aside what do you think is best? I'm just curious.

KraevenX |
Thanks for the response Eoran. The reason I made this thread was because I was reading the Paizo FAQ and they recommended that rules questions be posted in this forum and I'm not certain if there are any other ways to look for dev responses. Is there anyway to suggest something be included in Errata or otherwise signal boost it? Again, I want to use the best most official channels for this kind of thing. I don't want to mess up the forums I just love this game and I want to understand how best to run it/interpret it.That being said - how do you run it? RAW or RAI aside what do you think is best? I'm just curious.
I just checked your profile and didn't even realize you were a contributor to those threads! Haha, guess that answers my question.

Drunemeton |

The best write up I’ve read so far:
—-
Strike and Spell as One Attack
You channel a spell into a punch or sword thrust to deliver a combined attack.
Spellstrike involves Casting the Spell and making single attack roll for the results of both the Strike and the spell. Normally this spell's effect is coupled with the Strike that is made, though there are some specific interactions with certain effects that work differently.
Splitting up the steps of making a Spellstrike for clarity, you get:
- • You Cast a Spell that requires a spell attack roll. The effects of this spell don't occur immediately but are imbued into your attack instead.
- • Make a melee Strike. Your spell is coupled with your attack, using your attack roll to determine the effects of both.
Casting a Spell normally requires immediate resolution by rolling a spell attack, but this ability delays the spells effects until you make an attack roll as a melee Strike. The spell is imbued into that Strike, and both are delivered as "a combined attack".
Phase Bolt
Make a ranged spell attack roll against your target's AC; if the target has any circumstance bonuses to AC (such as from a shield or cover), reduce that bonus by 2 for this attack.
With only one attack being made, Phase bolt's effect reducing AC would apply to determine the effects of both Strike and spell.
There are other spells with similar effects that would also apply for a Spellstrike with the same reasoning, such as shocking grasp that gives a +1 circumstance bonus on the attack roll if the target is made of metal or wearing metal armor.
Spellstrike Specifics
There are those specific interactions described for certain types of effects used as part of a Spellstrike that could change how this works, but none of these apply here.
The closest in Ancillary Effects only covers "non-targeted effects that might affect creatures other than the target, as well as any ongoing effects starting from the moment you hit with the Strike", but phase bolt's effect to reduce the bonus to a target's AC applies only for that single attack and only to the target.
—-
Game mechanics are Delivery leads to Payload. If Magus is truly blending martial & magic then any spell mechanic(s) that affect the Delivery of the spell affect the Delivery of the Strike, and once the Strike lands the Payload is delivered. Then any mechanics that affect the effects of the Payload are resolved. Resistance, weakness, reactions, saving throws, etc.

painted_green |

I would rule to allow it, though I could also see using the bonus just for adjudicating the results of the spell part and disregarding it for the weapon part (so you roll once but the actual result will differ for the two parts, or be compared to different AC values). Disallowing it completely is unwarranted, though, in my opinion, for reasons mentioned in the post above mine.

KraevenX |
The best write up I’ve read so far:
—-
...
That's a good writeup and the best way to represent the argument for allowing the bonuses to apply to the attack roll. I understand how both stances make their arguments for RAW. What I'm really curious about is what RAI was when writing Spellstrike. Considering this question from a legacy of play standpoint would imply that it was RAI for Spellstrike to experience those same bonuses.