|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Umm this is what spell recall is all about. "Oh I spent this spell let me just get it back".Which is still a limited resource.
And at low level you can just do TWF with Arcane Mark, even if you run out of spells. So it's not like you ran out of magic.That's one of the tactics that makes dex to damage so good. Since you don't have a shocking grasp on it more +hit and more +damage makes more of a difference when you're running on fumes.
And we return to "you need to be a dexterity-based magus" when a strength-based magus can do that from level 2 and without spending feats.
You are using circular logic BNW.|
|
Elementals, oozes, plants, elementals, anything incorporeal, swarms, elementals...
Actually, it is: elementals (once, not 3 times), oozes, plants, swarms.
Incorporeal creatures only if you don't take the Ghost Blade arcana or don't want to spend the point to activate it. Oh, wait, you can take it only at 9th level, too high for your tastes. Well, I have used and abused it in Carrion Crown for 6 levels and several months of play.
. Sure, you're a bit behind on damage compared to some brute using power attack and high strength,Until you come across something immune to precision damage, which is half the critters authors like to throw at the party.
Maybe in Homebrew, but not in AP's. We play exclusively AP's and I can't remember ever encountering anything that's immune to precision damage. so it happens so seldom that it's forgettable.
Maybe in Homebrew, but not in AP's. We play exclusively AP's and I can't remember ever encountering anything that's immune to precision damage. so it happens so seldom that it's forgettable.
If I had cash I would be willing to bet it your memmory is off. Which AP ?
Schrödinger's Wizard becomes real at high level play I mean, you don't need to carry a weird magic item into combat when you can literally teleport to your favorite shop in absolom grab the item from the shelf drop a bag of gold on the counter as a free action and teleport back in the middle of combat. That also makes it really hard to stop the 15 minute adventuring day without EVERY session being an episode with a ticking clock.
I more or less agree with this, but at the same time I'd point out that thus far we've been talking about lower-level (or, more accurately, level 1-10 play). This is why the questions I asked are important to me: unlike at higher levels, the resources of a level 4-8 Magus (roughly the spread I think we're all discussing) are more easily pinned down and discussed. What can my level 4 Magus do with his (assuming Int 14-16) four 1st level spells, two 2nd level spells, and 4-5 Arcane Pool points? Is the best course of action really 8-9 Shocking Grasps and 2 Frigid Touches across four APL 4 encounters, regardless of the opposition and tactical setup involved?
But fourish encounter design guidelines definitely predates PFS. Or pathfinder. It's been a rough guideline for decades and the system has been based around it. If you're going off model yeah, things will change a bit.
I think "my dm" or "a well balanced home brewed adventure" varies entirely too much for the differing values of my or an opinion of well balanced to be meaningful.
If I understand you correctly here, I wholeheartedly agree. At the same time, that's precisely why I'm wary of such parameters for discussions like this. I mean, we've been talking a lot about theorycrafting versus practical play, but arguing how well something will or will not work within a single arbitrary construct sure feels like it supports the former versus the latter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I had cash I would be willing to bet it your memmory is off. Which AP ?
Maybe in Homebrew, but not in AP's. We play exclusively AP's and I can't remember ever encountering anything that's immune to precision damage. so it happens so seldom that it's forgettable.
I find it interesting that there were multiple very good arguments posed to you and you chose to respond to this one guy who was probably misremembering something that was at best tangential to the actual discussion. So are you just ceding all of the other arguments?
What even is this mythical dexterity magus build anyway? What are you having to give up? How are you getting by without at least some moderate strength for carrying capacity? How many levels would it take to actually be online with all of the things you are trying to do?
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
What even is this mythical dexterity magus build anyway? What are you having to give up? How are you getting by without at least some moderate strength for carrying capacity? How many levels would it take to actually be online with all of the things you are trying to do?
That's actually a great question. Looks like BNW has a Schroedinger Dex Magus in mind :D
That's actually a great question. Looks like BNW has a Schroedinger Dex Magus in mind :D
Nope. The one true magus build only has the quantum state of being the one true magus build. There simply is no other state for it to shift to. It's like a fixed point in time
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I now have this almost perverse desire to roll up a Human Kensai for our next campaign.
Ha Taidana has devoted himself to mastery of the sword, arcane arts that further his mastery of the sword, and nothing else. He does not merely abstain from any other such activities; he actively despises them as a distraction from the attainment of exactitude and perfection.
Strength 7, Dexterity 20, Constitution 12, Intelligence 16, Wisdom 12, Charisma 8
Traits: Magical Lineage, Master of the Sudden Strike, Wary of Danger; Meticulous (drawback)
Feats: Weapon Finesse (Human Bonus feat), Slashing Grace (1st level), Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Katana (Magus), Weapon Focus: Katana (Magus)
Notes: Taidana spends 10 sp a day on an untrained hireling to carry his equipment (that is, everything but his sword, clothing, and spell components) for him, a trained hireling to cook for him, a trained hireling to wash and groom him, and a trained hireling to sharpen his blade.
If I had a way to squeeze in Improved Initiative at 1st level, I would.
Not a magus but I did have 2 dervish dancing kitsune ( Reynard de'Bonaire and Reinhart de'Bonaire) A dervish dancing swashbuckler with a level of bard and a dervish dancing bard with a level of swashbuckler. (they were twins out of the liter of six) with strength scores of five.
Because yes, I was cheesing, I made VERY sure to track their encumbrance very carefully so i didn't descend into cheating.
Tricks included masterwork backpacks, darkleaf armor, and using diplomacy/bluff to insist that going around in their fur was their natural right and objecting to it was speciest.(because clothing has weight) and the occasional wand/potion of ant haul in case a party member dropped or a damsel needed rescuing via chandelier swing, and a rank in handle animal for a pack dog. Eventually the sword got replaced with mithral so they could have a hat/headband. I think one had the trait muscle of the society for more cargo space.
|
I now have this almost perverse desire to roll up a Human Kensai for our next campaign.
Ha Taidana has devoted himself to mastery of the sword, arcane arts that further his mastery of the sword, and nothing else. He does not merely abstain from any other such activities; he actively despises them as a distraction from the attainment of exactitude and perfection.
Strength 7, Dexterity 20, Constitution 12, Intelligence 16, Wisdom 12, Charisma 8
Traits: Magical Lineage, Master of the Sudden Strike, Wary of Danger; Meticulous (drawback)
Feats: Weapon Finesse (Human Bonus feat), Slashing Grace (1st level), Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Katana (Magus), Weapon Focus: Katana (Magus)
Notes: Taidana spends 10 sp a day on an untrained hireling to carry his equipment (that is, everything but his sword, clothing, and spell components) for him, a trained hireling to cook for him, a trained hireling to wash and groom him, and a trained hireling to sharpen his blade.
If I had a way to squeeze in Improved Initiative at 1st level, I would.
katana isnt a finesse weapon unless im missing something, good luck hitting with the 7 str...
also, i'd swap master of the sudden strike with ancestral weapon
Not just that, but slashing grace doesn’t even work with Spell Combat. I’m embarrassed all around! :D
Not just that, but slashing grace doesn’t even work with Spell Combat. I’m embarrassed all around! :D
Starting to see how and why people plinko into the cookie cutter?
No, that was just me being whimsical. I’m no closer to being convinced Dexterity to damage is worth spending two feats.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
2. A DEX-based Magus must have DEX-to-damage.Your response was:
Further, the assumption that you Need DEX-to-damage - even when playing a DEX-build - is another leap. DEX-to-damage is likely ~+4 damage by level 5, meanwhile you can use your Arcane Pool to make your weapon Flaming/Frost for +7 to damage, and you can add another ~5d6 damage with your favourite damage spell,...The theoretical set up I'm seeing is multiple rounds of prep, minute per level spells lasting the entire dungeon, action economy and rounds spent on buffs, and then still having spells left over to cover up for non damage.So to start with I showed how a Magus can deal damage without DEX-to-damage. Your response wasn't to show that I was wrong, it was simply to tell me that my setup took to long to get going, so here's a run-down of the action economy I was proposing:
Level 5 Magus, round 1:
- Swift Action: Spend 1 Arcane Pool to enchant my Rapier. Since I'm level 5 this gives me a +2 modifier, but I can "spend" those enhancements on enchantments if I choose to. I choose to spend them on the Flaming and Frost enchants.
- Full-Round Action: I use Spell Combat to cast Frostbite and full attack. This nets me 2 attacks this round, and each one deals 1d6+1 damage from the Scimitar, plus 1d6+1 damage from the Frostbite spell, plus 2d6 damage from the enchantments I added as a swift action. This gives me a total of 4d6+6 damage on a regular hit and 6d6+12 damage on a crit. Perfectly respectable damage for a 5th level Magus.
This was all done in a single round with no pre-buffing and the only thing I had to prepare in advance was the spell being cast, so I really don't know how it comes across as as "Schrodinger's wizard". It comes online at level 5, which is hardly "higher levels".
Then:
This was all done in a single round with no pre-buffing and the only thing I had to prepare in advance was the spell being cast, so I really don't know how it comes across as...Because what are you doing for the other 15ish rounds you're doing in combat that day, assuming 4 4 round combats a day? Not every day will be like that. Some will be better, some will be worse, but I'm calling your setup shcrodingers wizard because you're burning limited resources and assuming that they'll still be there after you burned them.
________________________________________________________________________
OK ... So correct me if I'm misunderstanding something here, but this is a summary of our conversation on this topic so far:
- You asserted that a Magus needs DEX-to-damage.
- I asserted that they don't.
- You said any damage buffs that they could put on would take too many actions .
- I showed you how a Magus could deal comparable damage with only a swift-action setup that only uses 1 Arcane Pool point and a single first level spell.
- You stated that 1 Arcane Pool point and 1 first level spell is apparently too much use of "limited resources" for your liking.
...
WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!?!
Every Magus in the history of Magi - Including the Dervish Dance/Shocking Grasp Magus - will use an Arcane Pool point to buff their weapon at the beginning of basically every combat. This buff lasts for 1 minute. Its not something that you have to do every turn, its not something that's a rare resource to be used, its the primary use for this resource, the base assumption of the class. So what I'm doing for the four 4-round combats per day is I'm using 1 Arcane Pool point on each combat, which is exactly what you'll be doing with your Dervish Dance Magus. I really don't get this at all.
I also used a first level spell, just as you would. If anything I'll be using Less resources than your Dervish/Shocking Magus since Frostbite can potentially last multiple rounds.
Up until this point I thought you were just someone who's stuck on a certain build, but now I'm really not sure you understand how the class works ...
DO you understand how it works? Really I'm not being funny or trying to trap you, I'm genuinely not sure you understand how the mechanics of this class work if you're worried about the action cost and the resource cost . A 5th level Magus with 14 INT has enough Arcane Pool points and spells to handle that . That's literally the lowest INT score I can imagine on a 5th level Magus, and its totally fine.
So what are you doing differently? How is your Dervish Magus somehow out-competing my Magus without apparently using any resources? How is it out-competing the STR-based Magus despite having 2 less feats ? What is it that I'm missing in this conversation, because right now I'm not following you at all?
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Two minutes with a trait:
Bladed Magic
Source Ultimate Campaign pg. 56
Category Basic (Magic)
You have an innate talent for using magical weaponry and those weapons capable of becoming magical. You gain a +1 trait bonus on Craft checks made to craft magic or masterwork weapons. In addition, when you use your arcane pool class ability to grant a weapon an enhancement bonus, that bonus lasts for 2 minutes instead of 1.
Short answers:
1) When the magus is burning spells the amount of damage the spells are doing makes the extra damage from dex to damage a rounding error. The extra + hit is always incredibly important though, and you can't channel more feats into it after weapon focus (g. weapon focus technically eventually)
When the magus is low on spells, or conserving spells for a later fight, getting to Zorro your way through fights with arcane mark getting that dex to damage makes a MUCH bigger difference. You don't have 16 frostbites, so you can't assume it every round unless you're assuming a really short working day or higher levels.
2) Those two feats amount to weapon focus, improved initiative, dodge, and fleet x 2. (which are going to stack with weapon focus and probably improved initiative later at some point). Dexterity controls so much more than strength in this system that if you can't take advantage of a two handers str and a half damage, go with dex.
If you're telling me that +damage doesn't matter at all because you have spells running all day I would say spend one feat and pick up a rapier over a muscle magi. It still pays off.
3) It isn't that the muscle magi drops below some threshold of unusable (it does not) it's that the dex magi has a few slightly better abilities in a lot of area without the muscle magi playing all that differently.
For society i have 3 druids. A faux rogue with a pounceraptor of death, A tanky meatwall with an ankylosaurus meat wall, and a wild empathy druid who runs at the monsters and belly rubs them so the party doesn't hurt the poor things. Neither of those is worse than the others because they're in completely different niches.(pun not intended but good anyway)
A muscle magi vs. a dex magi is doing the exact same thing but the numbers are just a little bit lower. There just isn't enough difference to justify having worse numbers to a lot of people.
That slight but real game advantage, spellstrike only working optimally with 18-20x2 weapons, the limited number of really good touch spells, reward people for going with the cookie cutter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Assuming the earlier conceit that we only care about a character up to level 7, the strength build has the massive advantage of open feats to take combat casting at level 1. If you’d played an actual magus, you’d realize how hard spell combat often is to pull off at early levels, with defensive casting. Sure, you can get by with doing 5 foot step dances, but that doesn’t work out as often as you’d hope.
And even if we do start caring about higher levels, then you could just retrain the feat around level 12 when it stops being so important.
When the magus is low on spells, or conserving spells for a later fight, getting to Zorro your way through fights with arcane mark getting that dex to damage makes a MUCH bigger difference. You don't have 16 frostbites, so you can't assume it every round unless you're assuming a really short working day or higher levels.
At levels 1-2 you effectively have the same number of Frostbites as you do Shocking Grasps, and you’re not obligated to pick one over the other (unless you’re going Eldritch Scion, which limits your spells known) so this is a wash. With Frostbite you have to make two attack rolls to get equivalent damage, but a Strength Magus with Magical Lineage can pick up Rime Spell at level 1 and cause enemies to also be Entangled.
At level 3. shocking Grasp averages 10.5 points of damage each on average. Each Frostbite averages 6.5 points of damage per attack, so 13 per round, and overlaps with the next round. Both builds are presumably casting one instance of their respective spells during each one of the four hypothetical 4-round encounters they’ll have that day. The Frostbite build, however, deals damage in a second round, and can deal two debuffs to as many as three enemies—three debuffs if the Strength Magus adds Enforcer to Rime Spell.
At level 4, the same number of Shocking Grasps each net you an average 14 points of damage. Frostbite nets you 7.5 per attack.
It’s not until level 5 that Shocking Grasp starts pulling away in terms of damage, but nothing prevents the Frostbite build from switch-hitting as needed. The Dexterity Magus can as well, but his earlier feat investment means at least one of Rime Spell or Enforcer had to be retrained to get Dervish Dance and/or to get Intensified Spell, to keep Shocking Grasp going.
In either case, running out of Frostbites for the day is not a consideration—not anymore than running out of Shocking Grasps. The Dexterity Shocking Grasp Magus falls back on Arcane Mark plus Spellstrike, which gains him a bonus attack. The Strength Frostbite Magus falls back on the -5 attack penalty, possible AC penalty, and mobility limitations he inflicts on as many as five enemies.
2) Those two feats amount to weapon focus, improved initiative, dodge, and fleet x 2. (which are going to stack with weapon focus and probably improved initiative later at some point). Dexterity controls so much more than strength in this system that if you can't take advantage of a two handers str and a half damage, go with dex.
If you're telling me that +damage doesn't matter at all because you have spells running all day I would say spend one feat and pick up a rapier over a muscle magi. It still pays off.
I genuinely don’t see how. We’re still just talking about, what, a difference of +1?
A muscle magi vs. a dex magi is doing the exact same thing but the numbers are just a little bit lower. There just isn't enough difference to justify having worse numbers to a lot of people.
This is what I’m talking about when I speak of specifics versus generalizations. Clearly, Strength + Frostbite + Rime + Enforcer does NOT do “the exact same thing.” The Magus has a marginally worse attack penalty against enemies without metal armor, but has higher damage potential and significantly debuffs opponents.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A muscle magi vs. a dex magi is doing the exact same thing but the numbers are just a little bit lower. There just isn't enough difference to justify having worse numbers to a lot of people.
So the Str magus has 18 strength, and spends his first two feats on Weapon Focus and Arcane Strike. The Dex magus has 18 dex, and spends his first two feats on Finesse and Dervish Dance.
By third level, Str Magus has +7 to hit and deals 1d6+5 damage (1d6+7 on standard-action and opportunity attacks), whereas Dex Magus has +6 to hit and deals 1d6+4 damage. Arcane pool and spells are the same for both. Incidentally, the Str Magus is also substantially better at climbing and swimming, and saves money since he doesn't need a bag of holding to carry his gear.
So the Str Magus has slightly better numbers than the Dex Magus, and by your own reasoning this means there is no reason at all for anybody to play a Dex Magus, ever. Math, people. It shows that the more-offensively-oriented build deals slightly more damage, there's a shocker.
Ahh ok. I got snowball and frostbite mixed up. Still..
I don't see why you'd equate a strength magus with frostbite. Or are you saying you free up the feat for enforcer?
Frostbite doesn't work on anything immune to non lethal damage. Undead and constructs are a VERY popular enemy types (there's a reason adventurers smash every statue....) Anything with fast healing or regeneration is going to effectively heal twice as fast. Yes devils* exist, but so do yetis.
In either case, running out of Frostbites for the day is not a consideration—not anymore than running out of Shocking Grasps.
It really is. Because if you assume you won't, then the question "what do I do when I'm out of spells" doesn't matter at all. If you assume you will (or that you're going to be fighting undead) you have to ask yourself how good am I without the spell?
I genuinely don’t see how. We’re still just talking about, what, a difference of +1?
(Sticking with human, even though dex/int races are easier)
Str 17 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 14 wis 12 cha 7
Str 7 Dex 19 Con 14 Int 16 Wis 10 Cha 7
+1 to hit (weapon focus) +2 initiative, +2 reflex saves (and those two are going to increase as you level) 1 higher on concentration checks, +2 higher AC to start or +10 extra feet of movement if the magus tin cans it up later, An extra skill point per level .. taking one stat out of your mad spread really adds up.
So the Str magus has 18 strength, and spends his first two feats on Weapon Focus and Arcane Strike. The Dex magus has 18 dex, and spends his first two feats on Finesse and Dervish Dance.
your strength magus conversely has an AC of 14 for not spending any points on dex while the dex magus just has a pony for not spending any points on strength.
I don't see why you'd equate a strength magus with frostbite. Or are you saying you free up the feat for enforcer?
Because those were the spells being discussed, and I wanted to make a point as to what options you have when you’re not burning two feats to mitigate MAD.
Frostbite doesn't work on anything immune to non lethal damage. Undead and constructs are a VERY popular enemy types (there's a reason adventurers smash every statue....) Anything with fast healing or regeneration is going to effectively heal twice as fast. Yes devils* exist, but so do yetis.
Leaving aside the relative rarity of undead and constructs at low levels, Magi aren’t locked into a single spell. As they go up in level, their spell options increase.
It really is. Because if you assume you won't, then the question "what do I do when I'm out of spells" doesn't matter at all. If you assume you will (or that you're going to be fighting undead) you have to ask yourself how good am I without the spell?
It’s really not. I quite literally broke down how many instances of the spell you’d get, and how many rounds it would cover for each of the hypothetical four daily encounters.
Str 17 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 14 wis 12 cha 7Str 7 Dex 19 Con 14 Int 16 Wis 10 Cha 7
+1 to hit (weapon focus) +2 initiative, +2 reflex saves (and those are going to increase as you level) 1 higher on concentration checks, +2 higher AC to start or +10 extra feet of movement if the magus tin cans it up later, An extra skill point per level .. taking one stat out of your mad spread really adds up.
Right, and if your Magus is carrying more than 23 lbs, it all goes out the window. And unless your Magus dedicates spell slots to compensate—which you’ve said we shouldn’t—he effectively can’t climb or swim (much less contribute in other life-or-death activities involving Strength). This is what drove my “1 point difference” argument: I don’t see how a build that is so min-maxed can be viable, much less the best.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
(Sticking with human, even though dex/int races are easier)
Str 17 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 14 wis 12 cha 7
Str 7 Dex 19 Con 14 Int 16 Wis 10 Cha 7
Your dex Magus can be shut down by 1 Ray of enfeeblement even if he saves and plenty of poisons, the str Magus is a bit more resistant and he can still survive some dex damage. He even has a better Will save, so, again, more resistance against spells that affect that save.
I see some trading of strengths and weaknesses, but not that overwhelming advantage.
You argue that there is little support for higher-level adventures in Pathfinder Society, and that proves that there is no interest in them.
I think there is another explanation for why people don't play high-level scenarios in the Society.
How many parties in the Pathfinder Society games are made by pick-up groups? How well PUGs work when you use high-level characters? How willing people are to play with another high-level character of people with which they have never played?
How fun and playable are high-level scenarios that need to end in one session?
My experience is that players like to play high-level games at home, where the GM can adapt them to the characters.
Because those were the spells being discussed, and I wanted to make a point as to what options you have when you’re not burning two feats to mitigate MAD.
that option is still around.
Leaving aside the relative rarity of undead and constructs at low levels
Wow. no. Constructs, start popping up around 4. But undead are everywhere. You can't swing a chainsaw arm without beheading a few skeletons zombies wights ghasts and ghouls at low level.
Magi aren’t locked into a single spell. As they go up in level, their spell options increase.
Then you can take frostbite as a dex magi. What's with the spell tangent?
It’s really not. I quite literally broke down how many instances of the spell you’d get, and how many rounds it would cover for each of the hypothetical four daily encounters.
At the damage your spell is doing the stat to damage is still going to be very relevant.
Right, and if your Magus is carrying more than 23 lbs, it all goes out the window.
Then don't. Its easy enough.
And unless your Magus dedicates spell slots to compensate—which you’ve said we shouldn’t—
Keep in mind that a spell that lasts 2 hours per level is a lot different than one that lasts 1 minute per level, either as a self buff, asking a party member, or getting an item.
he effectively can’t climb or swim (much less contribute in other life-or-death activities involving Strength)
Other life or death activities involving strength is pretty much an oxymoron. Or every wizard would be dead.
He can get up a knotted rope just fine.
The problems go away with a scroll collection after levels 1 or 2. (The magus doesn't need to be the one to cast them even, he can just hand them off)
Note: this is even HARDER to do with a bag of mixed nuts that you get at a PFS table and I've done the low strength character there a lot. Mind you I did normally skip level 1.
This is what drove my “1 point difference” argument: I don’t see how a build that is so min-maxed can be...
Its one point in hit its 2+ points in a LOT of other things. Including initiative once the game of rocket tag kicks in.
If you're going to die on the difference between a +0 and -2 on a d20 roll for a strength check you're dead anyway. I don't see why its such a big difference on the rarest of checks but not important on the most common checks (initiative)
(Sticking with human, even though dex/int races are easier)Str 17 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 14 wis 12 cha 7
Str 7 Dex 19 Con 14 Int 16 Wis 10 Cha 7
+1 to hit (weapon focus) +2 initiative, +2 reflex saves (and those two are going to increase as you level) 1 higher on concentration checks, +2 higher AC to start or +10 extra feet of movement if the magus tin cans it up later, An extra skill point per level .. taking one stat out of your mad spread really adds up.
So, your character is mostly useless at level 1 and 2. You have 3 less CMD. Get ready to get grappled and tripped a lot. The encumbrance will be a problem for many levels, and will recur as a problem as you take the inevitable point or 2 of strength damage.
Keep in mind the strength magus could just use mithral medium armor if you are that worried about movement speed. Though really monstrous physique more than makes up for the speed difference.
But that’s not even the optimal strength array.
STR 17(19)/ DEX 14 / CON 13 / INT 14 / WIS 8 / CHA 7
Then level 4 ability increase in strength and level 8 in constitution.
Personally, I prefer something more well rounded like this:
STR 16(18) / DEX 14 / CON 12 / INT 14 / WIS 10 / CHA 8
With ability increases going to strength.
Strength also has the advantage of being more adaptable to weapon types. Say an artifact longsword or warhammer drops in your AP that is meaningfully above your current weapon expectations, you can take the lower crit chance for the other perks of the weapon. Or say you are fighting enemies with damage-type or material damage reduction. The strength magus can more easily swap from weapon to weapon as the need presents itself. Consider underwater combat, the scimitar is going to struggle with not being a piercing weapon, while the strength magus will just swap to a rapier
that option is still around.
Only in part at level 1, because one of your feats (assuming you're even playing Human) is going to Weapon Finesse. And then only temporarily, because at level 2 you have to retrain it to Dervish Dance. You can re-start it at level 3, at which point Strength Magus is adding Enforcer. You can catch up by level 5, but at that point Strength Magus is already either making his signature spell even better or working on a different trick. If the GM allows Wayang Spellhunter in addition to Magical Lineage, but to be applied on a different spell, then Strength Magus is leaving Dexterity Magus in the dust.
Wow. no. Constructs, start popping up around 4. But undead are everywhere. You can't swing a chainsaw arm without beheading a few skeletons zombies wights ghasts and ghouls at low level.
Of the more than 3,000 monsters Paizo has published, 51 are Constructs of CR4 or less. Nine of those are robots. One hundred are Undead of CR4 or less. There are about as many Humanoid entries of CR4 or lower as Constructs and Undead combined. Same with Magical Beasts. Same with Outsiders. There are almost 50% more creatures of the Animal type CR4 or less than Constructs and Undead combined. Start adding Abberations, Fey, Plants (all as frequent as Constructs), Monstrous Humanoids (as frequent as Undead), and the rest, and you can start appreciating just how viable Frostbite is in the overwhelming majority of circumstances.
Then you can take frostbite as a dex magi. What's with the spell tangent?
Again, I'm simply refuting the points you made above, when a Frostbite build was posed to you as a viable alternative. More to the point, as indicated above and earlier, burning two feats to focus on Dexterity means a Dexterity Magus's Frostbite and a Strength Magus's Frostbite are not equal.
At the damage your spell is doing the stat to damage is still going to be very relevant.
No, not really. Again, unless you drop your Strength to such an extent as to be a hair's breadth from disaster, we're talking about a point of difference. The actual point of contention, as you recall, was how many Frostbites a Strength Magus would have available--as part of your larger point on resources.
Then don't. Its easy enough.
What it actually is, is easier said than done.
Keep in mind that a spell that lasts 2 hours per level is a lot different than one that lasts 1 minute per level, either as a self buff, asking a party member, or getting an item.
The hypothetical spell in question could last a whole day. You're still burning a spell slot to cast it, to compensate for something you can't do. It's that, or asking someone to carry your weight (literally where this example is concerned). In either case, this is something you argued against until now.
Other life or death activities involving strength is pretty much an oxymoron. Or every wizard would be dead.
No, because every Wizard isn't focused on a constant state of attack.
He can get up a knotted rope just fine.
Sure. If he is allowed to take 10. And if a knotted rope has been already set by someone for him. And if you never have to deal with a slippery surface.
The problems go away with a scroll collection after levels 1 or 2. (The magus doesn't need to be the one to cast them even, he can just hand them off)
Again, that's assuming availability.
If you're going to die on the difference between a +0 and -2 on a d20 roll for a strength check you're dead anyway. I don't see why its such a big difference on the rarest of checks but not important on the most common checks (initiative)
But my Strength Magus doesn't have to worry about dying in ostensibly easy circumstances. What he has to ponder is which Metamagic feat(s), or how much extra Arcane Pool, and/or what handy Wizard spell(s) he has to give up to get an extra +1 to attack, damage, and initiative.
The answer is "none," because all three of those are worth having more--and at least two of those three will mean more as the Magus gains level than that modifier.
Of the more than 3,000 monsters Paizo has published, 51 are Constructs of CR4 or less. Nine of those are robots. One hundred are Undead of CR4 or less.
In no published module set, adventure path, or home game I have been in over 30 years of gaming are you going to run into an equal number of horses and zombies that need killing (or. Well. Rehorziontalizing) Adventure writers and most home dms do not generally use a random number generator to pick the critters.
Again, I'm simply refuting the points you made above, when a Frostbite build was posed to you as a viable alternative.
Its not a build. Its one feat and one spell.
And if you never have to deal with a slippery surface.
If someone has greased your rope buy another one. Otherwise it doesn't matter if the wall next to you is ice or a rock gym.
No, not really. Again, unless you drop your Strength to such an extent as to be a hair's breadth from disaster,
And no. This is just not the case.
In either case, this is something you argued against until now.
I have pointed out the difference between my position and the one you're attacking twice. Once is missing an argument. After that, you're just making an objection. There is a HUGE difference between you can't count on a minute per level spell getting through the dungeon and you can't count on a TWO HOUR per level spell getting through the dungeon. One is spending resources that will not last you through the dungeon and one is spending resources that WILL last you through the dungeon. Or the weekend.
The vast majority of magi found the pearl (of power) clutching over a low strength score nothing to worry about and managed to deal with it for a level or two before handy haversacks and mithral armor kick in. Without that baseless objection Cookie cutter magi are going to pull ahead
In no published module set, adventure path, or home game I have been in over 30 years of gaming are you going to run into an equal number of horses and zombies that need killing (or. Well. Rehorziontalizing) Adventure writers and most home dms do not generally use a random number generator to pick the critters.
Of course you won't fight horses as often as zombies, but that's a borderline ad absurdum argument. Wile adventure writers--and GMs in general--may not randomly roll, for encounters, they're not disproportionately picking Constructs and Undead, either.
Also, just for the fun out of it, I filtered the animal list to show just CR1-4 animals that are either predators or at least likely to fight adventurers. That adjusted number was still greater than that of CR1-4 undead.
Its not a build. Its one feat and one spell.
It's two feats--and I stopped there specifically, since one of the main points of contention in this debate comes down to the two feats you sacrifice for Dexterity to Damage.
If someone has greased your rope buy another one. Otherwise it doesn't matter if the wall next to you is ice or a rock gym.
That's not a solution when it really matters. A Magus with a Strength of 7 can't carry a single length of regular rope, much less a second one. You need a 17 or higher for anything that doesn't entail an assisted climb, can't carry the equipment needed to make it easier, and can't take 10 when threatened or rushed.
And again, that's just one example of practical play versus theorycrafting.
I have pointed out the difference between my position and the one you're attacking twice. Once is missing an argument. After that, you're just making an objection. There is a HUGE difference between you can't count on a minute per level spell getting through the dungeon and you can't count on a TWO HOUR per level spell getting through the dungeon. One is spending resources that will not last you through the dungeon and one is spending resources that WILL last you through the dungeon. Or the weekend.
The problem is that, on more than one occasion, you posed an argument, posters presented counterarguments, but when you replied again you did so arguing points they didn't make.
For example, no one said a minute/level spell will get you through a dungeon. A poster offered to you that a minute/level spell could get you through more than one encounter. And this was clarified to you at least once since then.
Likewise, no one said than an hour/level spell won't get you through a dungeon. Rather, you are being reminded what your argument was at the start (buffs and other non-damaging spells are a drain from resources needed to attack) and what it is now (non-damaging spells are okay if they're compensating for an inability to do things). The problem, in both cases, is that the argument is both vague (in terms of what will be used, and how much is available) and generalized. "I'll use magic to overcome my constant physical limitations" is no better than "You don't have 16 Frostbites to get through the day."
The vast majority of magi found the pearl (of power) clutching over a low strength score nothing to worry about and managed to deal with it for a level or two before handy haversacks and mithral armor kick in. Without that baseless objection Cookie cutter magi are going to pull ahead.
Again, there's an assumption that certain resources will be made available to make a character struggling with basic things viable. The reality is mithral armor is prohibitively expensive until level 5-6; it doesn't make a difference for a character with Strength 7 until a Belt of Giant Strength shows up (a chain shirt weighing 12 lbs is better than one that weighs 25 lbs, but you're still looking at 24 lbs with armor, weapon, spell component pouch, and clothing); and it makes no difference, ever, for a Kensai.
A Handy Haversack accounts for 50% of the wealth a character created past 1st level is recommended to allocate toward wondrous items. Unless you have someone else craft it for your character... making the build that much more reliant on someone else.
Anyways, I have no idea what "the vast majority of Magi" do, but I feel pretty confident saying that no one on this thread can speak for them. All any of us can reasonably do is focus on specific situations, take into account actual level-by-level class features and other abilities, and accurately reference the game's stated recommendations and published material.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The vast majority of magi found the pearl (of power) clutching over a low strength score nothing to worry about and managed to deal with it for a level or two before handy haversacks and mithral armor kick in. Without that baseless objection Cookie cutter magi are going to pull ahead
At what level do you think this is? Because strength builds also get better gear and options as they level up, except they don’t have to burn wealth to make up for those shortcomings.
|
|
Ant Haul
Source Advanced Player's Guide pg. 201
School transmutation; Level alchemist 1, arcanist 1, cleric 1, druid 1, hunter 1, investigator 1, medium 1, occultist 1, oracle 1, psychic 1, ranger 1, redmantisassassin 1, sorcerer 1, summoner 1, summoner (unchained) 1, warpriest 1, wizard 1
I don't see the magus here.
So we need another guy that will cast it for us?We spend a feat to get it from the wizard list?
Buy a wand, spend skill points in UMD, and hope we roll well?
A pearl of power doesn't work that well at low levels. A wizard will not be happy to freeze a spell slot for a non-combat spell when he can prepare only a few slots.
OK, I think we're seeing some of the disconnect.
Frostbite, not Snowball: An easy misunderstanding, no hard feelings. Really though this could easily be Shocking Grasp, I just used Frostbite to show that it doesn't Have to be Shocking Grasp. The point here is that spells add damage, so you don't need it all to come from your stats. This also speaks to things like "Frostbite doesn't work on undead". OK fine, so don't use Frostbite on undead, use something else ... That spell really wasn't the point of the post. The "Spell tangent" as you put it came up because you were advocating a single build that uses Dervish Dance and Shocking Grasp and nothing else. Once again this may not have been your intent, but it is what you've conveyed.
Running out of spells: Regardless of your thoughts on my choice of spell the Dervish Magus, the Shocking Grasp Magus, the Strengh Magus, the non-Dervish Dex Magus all have the same number of spells, so they'll all have problems running out. None of them have any better or worse time with this than each other. If you're really worried about this, try plying an INT-Magus, you'll have more spells and more Arcane Pool to play with. Regarding Frostbite, this spell lasts 1 hit per level, to a maximum of 1 round per level. This means it will last an entire combat if you need it to, thus saving you spell slots. This at least could get you away from the "cookie cutter builds you seem to see too often.
In either case, running out of Frostbites for the day is not a consideration—not anymore than running out of Shocking Grasps.It really is. Because if you assume you won't, then the question "what do I do when I'm out of spells" doesn't matter at all. If you assume you will (or that you're going to be fighting undead) you have to ask yourself how good am I without the spell?
I think you misunderstood the premise here. Yes the Magus I proposed will be less effective if they run out of spells, but so will your Dervish/Shocking Magus. This isn't unique to a particular build or chosen spell, this is just a part of the class. Its like saying "Wizards are no good once they run out of spells". It doesn't really change by having a different build. And yes I realise having DEX-to-damage will make you slightly more competitive once you do run out of spells than a DEX-Magus without DEX-to-damage, but since the premise you gave us here is a 16-round adventuring day that doesn't seem like a problem for either build. If anything this gives the STR-Magus an advantage since they can take Extra Arcane Pool and have enough weapon enchants and spell-recalls to last longer.
Running out of spells: Regardless of your thoughts on my choice of spell the Dervish Magus, the Shocking Grasp Magus, the Strengh Magus, the non-Dervish Dex Magus all have the same number of spells, so they'll all have problems running out. None of them have any better or worse time with this than each other. If you're really worried about this, try plying an INT-Magus, you'll have more spells and more Arcane Pool to play with. Regarding Frostbite, this spell lasts 1 hit per level, to a maximum of 1 round per level. This means it will last an entire combat if you need it to, thus saving you spell slots. This at least could get you away from the "cookie cutter builds you seem to see too often.
In one of their replies to one of my earlier posts they did say that the Kensai archetype IS the cookie cutter dervish dance dex magus… so… apparently their overpowered dex magus is more limited in spells due to both diminished spellcasting and replacing spell recall… but that should be a point against the Dex magus…
If I had cash I would be willing to bet it your memmory is off. Which AP ?
Maybe in Homebrew, but not in AP's. We play exclusively AP's and I can't remember ever encountering anything that's immune to precision damage. so it happens so seldom that it's forgettable.
Let's see, we're up to Jade Regent, and while I know it has happened, I can't specifically remember encountering things that are immune to precision damage often enough to ever really worry about it.
the time we encountered something immune to Magic Missile was much more memorable.
To be fair, it's not unusual for a GM/table to forget that a creature is immune to precision damage. The most common occurrence is from oozes.
Let's see, we're up to Jade Regent, and while I know it has happened, I can't specifically remember encountering things that are immune to precision damage often enough to ever really worry about it.
the time we encountered something immune to Magic Missile was much more memorable.
I played that campaign with my Tengu ninja and got shut down a lot.
There were
Those are the ones I specifically remember, and it happened often enough that those were feeling par for the course. I mean.. yeah if you're the one shooting the magic missiles and the rogue is the one having a series of really bad nights that stands out more to you....
There were ** spoiler omitted **
That big beastie went down pretty quick to the enlarged, hasted, blood ranger, and the hasted paladins holy smite..
That big beastie went down pretty quick to the enlarged, hasted, blood ranger, and the hasted paladins holy smite..There were ** spoiler omitted **
so buckets of inprecision damage then :)
Wow, this thread really did stay active after I said I had moved on since the second page of this thread, that's wild. I figured that since I agreed to disagree while stating I have much less PF1 experience than pretty much everyone here, that would have been the end of it. It seems there are a couple of folks that agree with me though, partially or in whole, which is cool I guess.
I want to post some stuff about my character here for people to analyze and understand my position/figure out what I may have done wrong in the creation process.
~First off, this campaign is set currently in a frozen wasteland area with very few successful civilizations and lots of danger in just traveling alone. It grim-dark, and in just three battles we fought a group of goblins with a shaman that used a blood tsunami spell of some sort; a smoke haunt that nearly made us sweat to death just trying to fight it; and some evil Bogeyman guy with crazy fear powers and a bunch of amalgamated children made faux flesh golems as his lackeys. I've learned that I can't be running around with low AC and HP here...so naturally my next character is a frail Witch. More on that in another post.
~Tonga was a 2nd lvl Aphorite Magus whose final stats (so including rolls and racial bonuses and everything like that, in order of STR to CHA) were 18, 13, 15, 18, 13, 10. Her entire character was that she was an 8ft tall 300 lb crystalline woman who was raised by a volcanic dwarf, which lead her to be an exceptionally tough and talented blacksmith. Her call to adventure was to protect people and learn how to fight in different environments, with the goal that as she traveled she would make weapons that benefitted each community in her travels so that mortals had a better chance of survival in the harsh conditions, and her innate magical ability was something she was learning to adapt into her blacksmith work by studying various types of magic and magic items/weapons on her journey.
~I was told by PF1 Reddit that I HAD to take Combat Casting as my 1st lvl feat even though I failed to understand why at the time, and that at 3rd lvl I should take Power Attack because I was building a STR-Based Magus that was wielding both a Lucerne Hammer and an Earthbreaker. I figured that wanting a big beefy half-caster that swings around some big weapons meant that I should prioritize INT and STR, and since we've never done point-buy and I rolled two 16s, a 15, two 13s and a 10...I now realize that the BEST I could have done was to throw one of the 16s in DEX and just take a 15 in INT, but at the time I was putting my highest numbers into what I thought were my most important stats and just trying to make do with the rest.
~I took the Eternal Smith alt racial trait and we were allowed to start with 2 traits of our choice, of which I chose Bladed Magic and Spark of Creation to go towards the whole blacksmithing aspect...but perhaps I should have picked different traits to get closer to what I wanted for combat?
~We had some homebrew, like all of us being able to grab something extra based on a god we worshipped (mine was smithing-based) or bonus racial traits made by my DM, but the latter were factored in during just the last couple of sessions. In a party that has a Dhampir getting bonus action economy when he drinks blood at the risk of failing saving throws to attack his own party, a warpriestess who was probably not supposed to be able to attack AND cast spells via RAW (who also had a magic shield), and a Witch Hunter that essentially started the campaign with a magic spear that can absorb a couple of candle flames to deal an additional 1d6 fire dmg (but could be higher if it absorbs more fire)...my homebrew was being able to use Spell Combat and Spellstrike while wielding my Lucerne Hammer/Earthbreaker. It didn't really seem that strong at first, and I originally asked for it just to keep with the character idea, but I learned about STR and a half later on and kinda felt like I was cheating my DM. It wasn't until even later that I realized that wanting to be a Spellstrike-focused Magus and trying this wasn't even close to the kind of dmg I would get by going a Dex build and crit-fishing, and I would have had a higher AC to boot. Later on, I got the ability to cast Color Spray 2/day and 3 natural AC as my homebrew racial traits, but that wasn't really relevant.
~I'm still FIRMLY a believer in that classes should not be designed to punish players or take negatives in/be bad at what they are designed to do, even at early levels. IMO, good class design clearly pushes you towards being able to accomplish what you are supposed to do right out the gate at 1st level but to not be very efficient at it, and you begin to actually excel at what your class does as you level up and by 4th or 5th lvl your unique path of choices should start to reveal itself to really give that custom experience that just gets even better as you go. Magus in particular to me seems to punish the player for choosing the class in a multitude of ways, and instead of really pushing the class forward in later levels, instead, you end up mostly just trying to make up for all the deficits you started with. In a system that takes as long as it can to reach a level cap of 20, that means lvl 10 is halfway there, and that is IF you are running a campaign for that long without it ending prematurely: as such, why should it take a player until 7th level or 10th lvl to feel like their class is finally able to do what the class is supposed to do?
~That said, I will admit that I think my rolling being generally awful outside of critical moments/out of combat had a bit to do with my negative experience. When your class is supposed to cast spells and put them into your weapon but you can never hit the enemy with your weapon, that puts a damper on your enjoyment and investment...but not having to take negatives in the first place just by picking the class would only improve this aspect, ya know? Part of the problem was also how I need more to do in combat than just mostly smacking the enemy, which I learned that being Spellstrike-focused obviously doesn't do that for me, but I thought having the spell flexibility would be enough...but all these small negatives adding up just pushed me away from the class.
As I said, I really didn't plan on posting here again, but I'll look back for any quotes to this comment for any advice on what I could have done better in this case.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wow, this thread really did stay active after I said I had moved on since the second page of this thread, that's wild.
Yeah I realised the other day that I only joined this thread after you left, and I think I joined in the first half of the thread. Welcome back, nice to formally meet you ;)
I was told by PF1 Reddit that I HAD to take Combat Casting as my 1st lvl feat even though I failed to understand why at the time, and that at 3rd lvl I should take Power Attack because I was building a STR-Based Magus that was wielding both a Lucerne Hammer and an Earthbreaker
Yeah both of those are bad advice if you ask me. You can Spell Combat from outside most enemies' AoO range with a Lucerne Hammer, meaning you don't need to cast defensively. And while Power Attack is good, its not essential. I usually don't take it until +4 BAB for the +6 damage. +3 damage isn't super likely to make the difference between a kill or not, but the -1 to hit absolutely can. In fact, as you say later you had trouble hitting things this could have been part of the problem. Classes like Fighter and Barbarian need it to add damage but the Magus has a ton of other damage options that don't impose an accuracy penalty, but no pressure.
I now realize that the BEST I could have done was to throw one of the 16s in DEX and just take a 15 in INT, but at the time I was putting my highest numbers into what I thought were my most important stats and just trying to make do with the rest.
You're right, you could have, but I would definitely put my highest 2 rolls into my attack-stat followed by my casting stat. More INT gets you more spells per day, higher spell DCs, more Arcane Pool Points .
It wasn't until even later that I realized that wanting to be a Spellstrike-focused Magus and trying this wasn't even close to the kind of dmg I would get by going a Dex build and crit-fishing
I mean ... how much damage were you expecting to do on a level 2 Magus? A Scimitar crit with Shocking Grasp is only 6d6+10 damage or so, which is likely about the damage you were doing on a a crit with your weapon without even taking Spellstrike into account. If you do go for a crit-fishing build there is literally no weapon a DEX build can use that a STR-build can't, so ...
That said, I will admit that I think my rolling being generally awful outside of critical moments ...
I hear that -_-
My Bloodrager in our campaign has an attack routine of something like +30/+25/+20/+15/+10, and I just picked up RAGING BRUTALITY and Improved Critical, so I was excited to hit for 4d6+47 damage with a 15-20 crit range for the first time. Last session I attacked some tentacle monster with an AC of 29, ready to bring the pain ... My dice rolled 1, 3, 8, 5, 14. That's 5 misses on an enemy who's AC was lower than my attack bonus. No amount of optimizing can save you from a dice curse =P
As for the rest of it, it sounds like a fun campagin. I'm sorry it didn't work out for you. I can see how it was frustrating, but all I can say is that this class clearly doesn't gel with your playstyle. Yes the Magus has some drawbacks, but that's because the bonuses it gets are phenomenal. It does require some planning, but any weaknesses can be overcome by using the class abilities given to you ... well any weakness except cursed dice.
I'm not going to tell you to play more Magi and you'll love it, maybe this class just isn't for you. However it goes though I hope you find classes and character concepts that you do enjoy. As I said earlier, I think the OCCULTIST class might suit you better.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Her call to adventure was to protect people and learn how to fight in different environments, with the goal that as she traveled she would make weapons that benefitted each community in her travels so that mortals had a better chance of survival in the harsh conditions, and her innate magical ability was something she was learning to adapt into her blacksmith work by studying various types of magic items/weapons on her journey.
~I was told by PF1 Reddit that I HAD to take Combat Casting as my 1st lvl feat even though I failed to understand why at the time, and that at 3rd lvl I should take Power Attack because I was building a STR-Based Magus that was wielding both a Lucerne Hammer and an Earthbreaker.
~I took the Eternal Smith alt racial trait and we were allowed to start with 2 traits of our choice, of which I chose Bladed Magic and Spark of Creation to go towards the whole blacksmithing aspect...but perhaps I should have picked different traits to get closer to what I wanted for combat?
~I'm still FIRMLY a believer in that classes should not be designed to punish players or take negatives in/be bad at what they are designed to do, even at early levels.
Humbly, I would ask you to consider whether the problem is not that the Magus was designed to punish players, but that the background you devised for your character--which I think is really cool, by the way--started overtaking your expectations for what your character could reasonably in combat.
With that in mind, you were in a tough spot--Pathfinder 1E already has a steep learning curve--and you unfortunately were given... not the best advice. Combat Casting isn't a bad feat, but between spells and synergy between Improved/Greater Spell Combat and your Arcana, it's not necessary and delays you from getting something that could make your Magus that much better. Power Attack should be a bonus for your character, and best taken when you can reliably/consistently offset the attack penalty. That said, it could have been taken at level one, if you're more interested in getting an extra +3 to damage every round of combat than the 3.5 you'll average from most 1st level damage-dealing spells.
Speaking of penalties, Spell Combat's penalty to attack rolls is not "bad design." It's nothing more than an effort to balance what Spell Combat provides with Two-Weapon Fighting. You're getting the same penalty you'd get if you took that feat at level 1 and got an extra attack with a light weapon in your off-hand.
With respect, this character had a lot going for her. You rolled great stats and your GM gave you a terrific benefit, which no official Archetype grants, and at no cost. I simply would've retrained Combat Casting into something else. At some point, the dice would have turned in your favor.
Wow, this thread really did stay active after I said I had moved on since the second page of this thread, that's wild. I figured that since I agreed to disagree while stating I have much less PF1 experience than pretty much everyone here, that would have been the end of it. It seems there are a couple of folks that agree with me though, partially or in whole, which is cool I guess.
I want to post some stuff about my character here for people to analyze and understand my position/figure out what I may have done wrong in the creation process.
~First off, this campaign is set currently in a frozen wasteland area with very few successful civilizations and lots of danger in just traveling alone. It grim-dark, and in just three battles we fought a group of goblins with a shaman that used a blood tsunami spell of some sort; a smoke haunt that nearly made us sweat to death just trying to fight it; and some evil Bogeyman guy with crazy fear powers and a bunch of amalgamated children made faux flesh golems as his lackeys. I've learned that I can't be running around with low AC and HP here...so naturally my next character is a frail Witch. More on that in another post.
~Tonga was a 2nd lvl Aphorite Magus whose final stats (so including rolls and racial bonuses and everything like that, in order of STR to CHA) were 18, 13, 15, 18, 13, 10. Her entire character was that she was an 8ft tall 300 lb crystalline woman who was raised by a volcanic dwarf, which lead her to be an exceptionally tough and talented blacksmith. Her call to adventure was to protect people and learn how to fight in different environments, with the goal that as she traveled she would make weapons that benefitted each community in her travels so that mortals had a better chance of survival in the harsh conditions, and her innate magical ability was something she was learning to adapt into her blacksmith work by studying various types of magic and magic...
I agree that classes shouldn’t be designed to punish players or prevent them from actually playing the class at low levels… and I’ve voiced this opinion many times regarding spellcasters (a very sinple fix for which is to give all primary spellcasting classes at least 3 bonus 1st level spell slots at level 1)…
however, as you’ve identified, your choice to put one of your rolls of 16 into int with a +2 racial rather than putting the 13 there and bumping your dex to 16 very well could have negatively impacted your experience by making you squishier than you should have been. And while Magus does get some benefits from high int, they really aren’t significant enough to sacrifice other stats for, and most of them you have to choose to gain as an arcana.
Combat casting is more beneficial on magus than most spellcasters, but it’s ultimately not necessary even for them and just a wasted feat… and power attack is a good feat, for full BAB classes… 3/4 BAB classes however struggle to make good use of it… especially at low levels… Magus would be better served with Arcane Strike at level 1-5 than power attack… power attack really isn’t worth it till BAB 4+ which for Magus is level 6…
Humbly, I would ask you to consider whether the problem is not that the Magus was designed to punish players, but that the background you devised for your character--which I think is really cool, by the way--started overtaking your expectations for what your character could reasonably in combat.
With that in mind, you were in a tough spot--Pathfinder 1E already has a steep learning curve--and you unfortunately were given... not the best advice. Combat Casting isn't a bad feat, but between spells and synergy between Improved/Greater Spell Combat and your Arcana, it's not necessary and delays you from getting something that could make your Magus that much better. Power Attack should be a bonus for your character, and best taken when you can reliably/consistently offset...
Didn't quote your whole post for some reason, but anyway.
While I think it's less about the idea I had for my character out of combat conflicting with her in-combat and I do think that PF1 Magus has design flaws, I also recognize that not every system is made the same and part of older TTRPG design was to make you feel weak early on to cause more threat in combat and more satisfaction upon getting level ups. I personally think that later installments have figured out a much more balanced way of accomplishing this and changed players from feeling 'weak' to feeling 'inexperienced' and that those changes are for the best.
I completely understand the notion that someone who can cast spells AND fight in melee combat is super strong and needs to be balanced in some way to not outclass all other options, but it wouldn't be my first decision to take one of the classes first core features and immediately have it apply negatives to dice rolls unless ALL the other classes had very similar drawbacks, and I honestly just disagree with giving such a penalty in general. I think a much better way to balance such a concept is to put on other limitations, such as having limited types of spells that you can cast w/ Spell Combat or having to choose a limited number of your spells when prepared that can be cast with Spell Combat, and have it become broader or increased as you hit certain levels.
Considering the whole idea of dice rolls is that you have the chance to do well or poor at generally anything, the whole point of building a character is to increase the odds of success at what you want your character to be good at and sacrifice being bad at things they are okay with their character not being the best at. The point of a class in a system that has classes is that it is essentially a pre-packaged concept of what your character can be good at and a roadmap of sorts of where your character will end up. Imagine if the Fighter got a negative BAB at 1st lvl, or if the Wizard got negatives to their Spell DCs/Spell Attack rolls. Bards with negatives to Performance? Rogues with negatives to stealth and SoH? Clerics with negatives to the amount of healing they do? It's one thing to be a Barbarian who started with negatives to Diplomacy and a completely different thing if a Barbarian started with a negative BAB and negatives to Intimidate.
THIS is why I see the Magus as being designed poorly: instead of taking an alternate route to show being inexperienced and limited, the Magus gets negatives to rolls regarding their primary combat feature and spend class features that could be dedicated to making the class more fun and unique trying to cover for those negatives that didn't need to be there, and in addition to those negatives to combat you get a slower BAB increase and fewer bonus feats than Fighter and fewer spells known, fewer spells per day and less variety in your spell list than a Wizard.
Regardless, the biggest thing I learned is that I as a person need more in combat than just rolling big numbers and smacking things, so the more martial a class is the worse that will be for my enjoyment as a player. I thought that the Magus would give that to me and that Spellstrike would be 'hit with hammer, crazy spell now goes off' but the more I played the class and learned (and relearned) how things actually worked it would be better for me to A. make a character that DOESN'T focus on Spellstrike as much for big damage numbers and B. built a Magus that was more focused on combat maneuvers and spells that would work in tandem with combat maneuvers. Tonga was basically just 'buff to counter my negatives, now Spellstrike for big dmg' when it came to combat even if outside of combat I enjoyed her a lot.
When it comes to PF1, I've learned that the way for me to go is to either have an animal companion and be able to cause unique battle scenarios that way...or because this DM HATES animal companions, to just be a caster that focuses not as much on damaging spells and more on mixing things up on the battlefield with status effects and state changes. At the end of it all, I think that the truth is a mix of what everyone here has said: Magus (and PF1 as a whole) has some issues but also I have some disagreements with its design philosophy, and what I wanted out of Magus with Tonga wasn't really something the class was designed to give...although it was redesigned and I think it may give what I want now.
I really have the sudden urge to try and take on that combat maneuver Magus idea now...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I completely understand the notion that someone who can cast spells AND fight in melee combat is super strong and needs to be balanced in some way to not outclass all other options, but it wouldn't be my first decision to take one of the classes first core features and immediately have it apply negatives to dice rolls unless ALL the other classes had very similar drawbacks, and I honestly just disagree with giving such a penalty in general.
Here's the thing. I don't think you do understand it, at least not fully. It's free action spellcasting packaged into a full attack, which no one else can do, and in exchange you're just taking the Two-Weapon Fighting penalty... which everyone else with that feat has to take. Also see the next to last quoted reply.
I think a much better way to balance such a concept is to put on other limitations, such as having limited types of spells that you can cast cast w/ Spell Combat or having to choose a limited number of your spells when prepared that can be cast with Spell Combat, and have it become broader or increased as you hit certain levels.
With respect, that would be poor class design, as it would encourage players even more to pigeonhole themselves instead of taking advantage of the Magus's spell list. And I can't stress this enough: your complaint about these penalties can be so easily solved by familiarizing yourself with the spell list and making sound tactical decisions.
All this takes trial and error, though. For example, casting Blade Lash from 10 feet away against a humanoid without a reach weapon (so as to avoid having to cast defensively), then taking a 5-foot step to take your attack against your now prone opponent (thereby turning the penalty from Spell Combat into a net bonus), and then taking an AOO against your opponent (again, with a net bonus) when they presumably try to stand up... is not necessarily obvious to someone new to the class.
Imagine if the Fighter got a negative BAB at 1st lvl, ...
He WOULD if he used Two-Weapon Fighting to gain a bonus attack, yes!
... or if the Wizard got negatives to their Spell DCs/Spell Attack rolls.
No, but if he tried to do so while in melee combat, he WOULD have to cast defensively with just a 45 percent chance of success--assuming an Intelligence of 18--to avoid an attack of opportunity!
Bards with negatives to Performance?
Starting a Bardic Performance is a Standard Action, which means the Bard doesn't come close to what a Magus gets to do with Spell Combat. Point of fact, the Bard can't do that until 13th level!
Rogues with negatives to stealth and SoH?
It is impossible for entry-level Rogues to use Stealth in combat. Even if you were hidden to begin with, Stealth immediately ends after you make an attack roll, and the check needed to hide again while in combat is prohibitive.
Clerics with negatives to the amount of healing they do?
Clerics are no more exempt than Wizards where casting defensively is concerned and, more to the point, they don't get to heal and fight at the same time at entry level.
It's one thing to be a Barbarian who started with negatives to Diplomacy and a completely different thing if a Barbarian started with a negative BAB and negatives to Intimidate.
... you get a slower BAB increase and fewer bonus feats than Fighter and fewer spells known, fewer spells per day and less variety in your spell list than a Wizard.
Fighters don't get to cast spells. Wizards don't get to fight well. Bloodragers only get access to 4th level spells. The Child of Acavna and Amaznen gives up half the Fighter's bonus feats, ALL of the Weapon Training, only gains 1st level spells at 5th level, only gets access to 4th level spells, and unless he's casting a Swift Action spell he always has to choose between spellcasting and attacking. Short of going VMC he never gets Spellstrike, and will never get Spell Combat.
Regardless, the biggest thing I learned is that I as a person need more in combat than just rolling big numbers and smacking things, so the more martial a class is the worse that will be for my enjoyment as a player. I thought that the Magus would give that to me and that Spellstrike would be 'hit with hammer, crazy spell now goes off' but the more I played the class and learned (and relearned) how things actually worked it would be better for me to A. make a character that DOESN'T focus on Spellstrike as much for big damage numbers and B. built a Magus that was more focused on combat maneuvers and spells that would work in tandem with combat maneuvers. Tonga was basically just 'buff to counter my negatives, now Spellstrike for big dmg' when it came to combat even if outside of combat I enjoyed her a lot.
Everything you just said here is absolutely valid. Simultaneously, it has nothing to do with the Magus being designed poorly. The Magus isn't right for what you like in this came. Again, that's perfectly fine. Simultaneously, the Magus achieves pretty much everything it was designed to do, notable omissions in its Spell List and an underwhelming range of Arcana notwithstanding.