| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You are absolutely correct. Casting Defensively and Fighting Defensively are two completely different actions and using one does NOT automatically instate the other.
To aid your argument with your DM… if Casting Defensively implied Fighting Defensively then the Casting Defensively action would tell you to take a -4 penalty on any attack rolls and gain a +2 bonus to AC as part of its action. This is not the case though. Casting Defensively has its own rules entirely separate from fighting defensive and there are no rules stating that use of either action applies the effects of the other. Your DM would have to find such a rule to prove his view correct, otherwise the rules do not support his stance on this issue.
|
You are correct.
Casting defensively allows you to try casting a spell without being subject to an Attack of opportunity.
A magus can take an additional penalty on his attack rolls, up to his Intelligence bonus, and add the same amount as a circumstance bonus on his concentration check, but it is a voluntary action, not a mandatory one.
You are correct.
A couple of questions for your GM.
If a wizard casts a spell defensively that requires an attack roll, does your GM also force the wizard to fight defensively, applying the -4 to the attack roll for the spell?
If a wizard casts a spell defensively that is not an attack spell, does the wizard still get a +2 to AC as though fighting defensively even though the wizard has not made any attacks as required by fighting defensively?
Basically, has your GM treated other casters in this way? Or are they making a special exception for the magus?
Is there a specific part of the rules your GM is pointing to when he/she says that casting defensively forces you to fight defensively?
What the posters above said.
If your GM continues to argue that position, ask if it’s also okay that you use spell combat (a full round action) as part of a charge (also a full-round action). Or if prior to your Spell Combat you take a 5-foot step through difficult terrain (also a full-round action). Or if the spell you cast as part of spell combat has a casting time of one full round. Or if after your Spell Combat you can get a free Withdraw (also a full-round action).
I mean, if you’re going to be stuck with those penalties (which, worst-case scenario, you can offset with the Arcane Accuracy or Accurate Strike Arcana, Blade Tutor’s Spirit, etc.), you may as well exploit the benefits they afford. I’m fairly sure your GM will rush to shut that Pandora’s Box quickly, though.
If your GM continues to argue that position, ask if it’s also okay that you use spell combat (a full round action) as part of a charge (also a full-round action). Or if prior to your Spell Combat you take a 5-foot step through difficult terrain (also a full-round action). Or if the spell you cast as part of spell combat has a casting time of one full round. Or if after your Spell Combat you can get a free Withdraw (also a full-round action).
None of these would correlate with defensive fighting as meaningful comparisons. The GM has misunderstood fighting defensively - does not mean they misunderstand these other rules.
Secondly, my dm has been playing kingmaker (the owlcat game) where there is a defensive toggle. I think he believes you need to toggle that to cast defensively AND fight defensively. I believe this toggle is only for the -4 atk +2 ac bonus, but oh well.
Kingmaker is a pretty good adapatation of the pathfinder rules for a computer game, but should not be used as a source reference.
In Kingmaker all spell casters will automatically try and cast defensively if they are threatened (regardless of whether the fighting defensively toggle is turned on or not).
You can verify this by taking a level 1 caster, putting yourself in a threatened area, and then casting spells repeatedly. Notice that sometimes the character will get attacked (failed their defensive cast) and sometimes they will not. (I can't recall if the combat log also shows their d20 roll to cast defensively).
This behavior however is different from how defensive casting works in the pen and paper version. In the pen and paper, if you fail your defensive casting roll, you simply lose the spell but do not provoke any attacks.
None of these would correlate with defensive fighting as meaningful comparisons. The GM has misunderstood fighting defensively - does not mean they misunderstand these other rules.
If your GM continues to argue that position, ask if it’s also okay that you use spell combat (a full round action) as part of a charge (also a full-round action). Or if prior to your Spell Combat you take a 5-foot step through difficult terrain (also a full-round action). Or if the spell you cast as part of spell combat has a casting time of one full round. Or if after your Spell Combat you can get a free Withdraw (also a full-round action).
The GM misunderstood one of the basic aspects of Fighting Defensively: what type of action it is, and how a given type of action interacts with another type of action. What other reason is there to try to apply Fighting Defensively penalties to Spell Combat unless you don't understand that basic rule?
That's a rhetorical question, of course, and one to which neither I nor truly can definitively the answer. The point of listing the above examples to the GM was a tongue-in-cheek way of pointing out that Fighting Defensively isn't simply a modifier to apply to a given action, but an action in and of itself.
The GM misunderstood one of the basic aspects of Fighting Defensively: what type of action it is, and how a given type of action interacts with another type of action. What other reason is there to try to apply Fighting Defensively penalties to Spell Combat unless you don't understand that basic rule?That's a rhetorical question, of course, and one to which neither I nor truly can definitively the answer. The point of listing the above examples to the GM was a tongue-in-cheek way of pointing out that Fighting Defensively isn't simply a modifier to apply to a given action, but an action in and of itself.
Fighting defensively is not an action. It is something you can do when taking specific actions: using a standard action to make an attack or taking a full attack action.
Fighting Defensively as a Standard Action: You can choose to fight defensively when attacking...
The mechanic is: are you making an attack as part of a standard action? If yes, you can apply fighting defensively.
It is not: Use a unique standard action to make one attack and gain the bonuses/penalties.
Given this, you could use vital strike (standard attack action) and fight defensively. You could also use a standard action to make a cleave attack, and fight defensively.
And similarly
Fighting Defensively as a Full-Round Action: You can choose to fight defensively when taking a full-attack action.
When taking a full attack action, you can choose to fight defensively. The action you are taking is the full-attack action, not the fight defensively action.
You can also spell combat (full round action that counts as a full attack action for things that can occur during a full-attack) and fight defensively. If fighting defensively was its own full round action you could not spell combat with it as each would be its own unique full round action. Note that this is a unique feature of spell combat that it qualifies as a full attack action for things that can stack with a full attack (eg, haste).
Charge (a full round action) cannot be used with fighting defensively. It is neither a standard action attack or a full attack. A charge with pounce also does not qualify. While you are getting a full attack, you are not taking a full attack action.
The wording on both can certainly be confusing though
Fighting Defensively as a Standard Action
Fighting Defensively as a Full-Round Action
Both of these seem to imply it is its own special action. But reading the rest shows that is not actually the case.
Touché, monsieur bbangerter!