| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Would this be in addition to the strike target not getting a save?
IMO, it's either a Reflex save or an Attack roll.
I'd take a penalty on both Fortitude and Will save, while they remain as is, because spells that force those are similar to poisons, diseases, illusions and mind-affecting effects. They still do require an interaction of some sort.
Reflex saves, however, are based on your reflexes, but when the spell detonates the millisecond you get Spellstruck, there's no way you can evade this.
It's literally the "Dodge this!" scenario from The Matrix.
"1 fewer action required" is so strong it carries the entire summoner chassis. You are wildly underselling how good that is.
Have you ever thought that Spellstrike is a "Casting a Spell via your weapon" variant, which keeps the 2-action move?
To be fair the Summoner doesn't have to pay back that freed up action on a later round. So the magus action deference is "worse" on that front. (big quotes)
The idea of arcane cascade giving stronger benefits while Spellstrike isn't charged is kinda cool though.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are few things this community likes more than to say the magus is fine *waves hand* don't talk about the magus. Its deplorable action economy is justified, its bad spellslot design is justified, its rote play cycle is justified. Spellstrike isn't a trap, you don't need to do the thing your class traded everything for, every round even though you can't use it on round 1 anyway. Magus players telling the community it needs improvements are to be shouted down by the non-magus playing masses. You're not allowed to have more fun with the class.
They don't think it be like it is, but it do.
There are multiple Magus players in this thread saying they aren't wildly unplayable or broken or whatever else you are claiming they are - and despite that, still saying some small things could be tweaked to smooth our minor rough edges.
There isn't some conspiracy going on.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are few things this community likes more than to say the magus is fine *waves hand* don't talk about the magus. Its deplorable action economy is justified, its bad spellslot design is justified, its rote play cycle is justified. Spellstrike isn't a trap, you don't need to do the thing your class traded everything for, every round even though you can't use it on round 1 anyway. Magus players telling the community it needs improvements are to be shouted down by the non-magus playing masses. You're not allowed to have more fun with the class.
They don't think it be like it is, but it do.
There are multiple Magus players in this thread saying they aren't wildly unplayable or broken or whatever else you are claiming they are - and despite that, still saying some small things could be tweaked to smooth our minor rough edges.
There isn't some conspiracy going on.
And here we have a perfect example. It barely took more than 1 minute.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And here we have a perfect example. It barely took more than 1 minute.There are few things this community likes more than to say the magus is fine *waves hand* don't talk about the magus. Its deplorable action economy is justified, its bad spellslot design is justified, its rote play cycle is justified. Spellstrike isn't a trap, you don't need to do the thing your class traded everything for, every round even though you can't use it on round 1 anyway. Magus players telling the community it needs improvements are to be shouted down by the non-magus playing masses. You're not allowed to have more fun with the class.
They don't think it be like it is, but it do.
There are multiple Magus players in this thread saying they aren't wildly unplayable or broken or whatever else you are claiming they are - and despite that, still saying some small things could be tweaked to smooth our minor rough edges.
There isn't some conspiracy going on.
Yeah, we all know conspiracy theories (which this idea basically is) can't really be disproven and are just constantly taking everything as evidence of its existence.
There's also a whole other thread that was made by Magus players to talk about what changes could be made to smooth out the small wrinkles, but I guess it's convenient to ignore that.
Convenient to label the opinions of others as conspiracy.
I actually would like to see the Magus lose greater weapon spec and get nothing in return. Let magus have more reason to want to be in arcane cascade.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Convenient to label the opinions of others as conspiracy.
I actually would like to see the Magus lose greater weapon spec and get nothing in return. Let magus have more reason to want to be in arcane cascade.
The class certainly doesn't need more insentives to use a dead class feature such as arcane cascade. I truly considered it the worst action tax in the system.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think Dariush is being hyperbolic to emphasis their point but it's true.
Like, whenever you try to point out Magus' issues on the subreddit you'll likely get downvoted before the topic dans reach any steam and discussion.
I know, I tried.
Tbh Bluemagetim, greater weapon spec+arcane cascade is what makes magus normal strike be equal to fighter's legendary weapon spec. It's a small thing but I love it because it just illustrate perfectly what the magus is: the combination of two discipline being greater and make it reach the level of legendary specialists.
In a sense i'd kind of like that to apply to spells through a save penalty on primary target on S-Strike too, on a single target by mixing martial and magic it can equal the efficiency of a full caster.
Some of Kalaams desire seemed reasonable with the goal of making Magus a bit more flexible.
I just think the overall powerpoint of the class is too high.
If a class feature flat out providing more damage typed able to trigger weaknesses is a dead class feature then it suggests to me the class has too much going for it already.
I think Cascade is only "dead" because the action economy make it either situationaly worth it (ennemy with a weakness to exploit) or just well... inconvenient. It's a stance that takes 2 to 3 actions to enter so to speak.
If it had more things tied to it (being a prerequisite for some action compression actions, or other special attacks for off turns) that'd be nice.
Then again some will complain it's giving too much to magus because it's already so strong with infinite focus spellstrike etc etc (and i'll answer again that the issue is with focus spells)
|
Cascade is the main pain point for me. There's just a conflict between trying to do the most damage the fastest (stride, spell strike) on round one and the suggested play style of the more nuanced subclass mechanics. You can't do both and choosing to use your subclass stuff doesn't always feel like the best choice in a fight initially.
And it depends heavily on your subclass.
Sparking Targe's bonus is very niche, using Raise a Shield against spells and a bit more hardness. It's good but if there is no spellcasters on the other side, not worth using.
Starlit Span straight up has no use for it.
Inexorable Iron is pretty neat especially in longer fights with a lot of chip damage.
Unfurling Brocade on the other end can really need it since it really upgrades all of your manoeuvers (reach grappling, etc)
I think make the cost of enterring it worth it by tying a lot of actions and benefits to it would be good. Not damage necesseraly but utility.
Have it be the "now that I've mixed magic with my weapons I can do stuff that normally required years of training" whatever. Augmenting abilities by the combination of the two arts.
Can be magic flavored martial actions like Knockdown, or wholy unique ones like a strike that reduces energy resistances for a round or two.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are few things this community likes more than to say the magus is fine *waves hand* don't talk about the magus. Its deplorable action economy is justified, its bad spellslot design is justified, its rote play cycle is justified. Spellstrike isn't a trap, you don't need to do the thing your class traded everything for, every round even though you can't use it on round 1 anyway. Magus players telling the community it needs improvements are to be shouted down by the non-magus playing masses. You're not allowed to have more fun with the class.
They don't think it be like it is, but it do.
It's kind of weird that, when confronted with people who don't share your gripes, to imagine there's some community wide conspiracy to keep the Magus down instead of like... people just enjoying the class and not liking some of the horrible suggestions meant to 'fix' it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think he mentionned a conspiracy, just annoyance at knee jerk reactions from a lot of the community whenever you mention changing stuff on magus.
And come on, you can't say all suggestions are horrible.
If you believe magus has no issue and will never need a fix, why do you even come here lol
I could see arcane cascade becoming something like Bespell Strikes or other similar feats that could give you like a lesser spellstrike in a sense. What I mean is that it could be a free action that triggers when you use spellstrike that gives you 1d6 damage that could heighten every 2 or 3 spell levels for a single attack. Or even better, keep the idea of the extra damage but make it its own bespoke 2A activity that requires you to have spellstrike uncharged but that would recharge if the attack is succesful. This would have magi bounce between spellstrike and, for a lack of a better name, lesser spellstrike to do their gist. 1A conflux spells would still be there if you want to be a little more efficient and spellstrike with more frequently too.
I think the may problem I have with the class, besides arcane cascade, is that Paizo doesn't want people to spellstrike every turn and kind of encourage to not do it due to how the class is built, though the people that want to play a magus do want to spellstrike every turn and you can more or less do it as long as you have enough focus points. Neither of the two stances is wrong here, but I feel the class doesn't fully commit to either and, ideally, I think the class should allow both playstyles to work.
How did you read 'some' as 'all' or that the magus was perfect?
The why is obvious, to discuss the class and the things that make it work or don't work.
Some of that involves talking about the things that don't work well, like arcane cascade or some of the class' bad feats. Some of that involves disagreeing with 'fixes' that seem like they'd do more harm than good (like a suggestion earlier in the thread to limit spellstrike only to slotted spells).
And it depends heavily on your subclass.
Sparking Targe's bonus is very niche, using Raise a Shield against spells and a bit more hardness. It's good but if there is no spellcasters on the other side, not worth using.
Starlit Span straight up has no use for it.
Inexorable Iron is pretty neat especially in longer fights with a lot of chip damage.
Unfurling Brocade on the other end can really need it since it really upgrades all of your manoeuvers (reach grappling, etc)I think make the cost of enterring it worth it by tying a lot of actions and benefits to it would be good. Not damage necesseraly but utility.
Have it be the "now that I've mixed magic with my weapons I can do stuff that normally required years of training" whatever. Augmenting abilities by the combination of the two arts.
Can be magic flavored martial actions like Knockdown, or wholy unique ones like a strike that reduces energy resistances for a round or two.
Actually I am a sparkling targe fan. Conflux spell is great for action compression and whether its spells or just strikes they can keep on the offensive while keeping that shield up.
Im also not the kind that cares to use focus spells to increase damage(I mean having to go Psychic). I want to slot spell options that give maneuverability or ranged area options(take advantage of being able to position for cones and lines from the front lines.) As a 1 hander and shield character sparkling targe gets to keep high offensive capability just because of spellstrike.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you want that sense of realism/simulationism, you're not playing the right game. In PF2, you can 'dodge' a fireball even if it goes off right in your face and you're unconscious and unprotected.
Reflex saves, however, are based on your reflexes, but when the spell detonates the millisecond you get Spellstruck, there's no way you can evade this.
Can you dodge a flaming rune's effect or a poison applied to it? No... Hence why you shouldn't be able to dodge an imbued spell. That's my reasoning.
If I use Ignition, the target doesn't get a chance to dodge or even reduce the damage. If I use Fireball, I should get a similar outcome.
While you're at it, care to list me other abilities that force a Reflex save upon getting hit by a melee attack? Pretty sure those are scarce.
I think Cascade is only "dead" because the action economy make it either situationaly worth it (ennemy with a weakness to exploit) or just well... inconvenient.Absolutely it's situational. +1 damage per strike for 1 action, in cases where you're not triggering a weakness, is only worth, what, 4-6 total HP of damage in a typical combat? Lots of 1a options will end up contributing better than that. But the same "it's only situationally useful" criticism could be leveled at animal companions and familiars, or Sanctification, or or or... Classes do contain situational class features. That's not necessarily a problem. But I agree, this one is weak. Bumping it up a point or making it a free action if/when you do something else (cast a non-spellstrike spell?) is the sort of change I think would work. +2 seems to be the 'new normal'. Exemplar, Swashbuckler, Runesmith, basic Rage (before instinct) bonus...they're all +2 or +1 with something additional.
For a lot of those other features, they don't require an action in an already tight economy for their class though, this is the pain point.
A Ranger/Druid with animal companions can easily have a third action available (precision range mainly cares for landing one attack, flurry has great action compression that gives them room, druid as most full casters won't often have to move so commanding their companion after casting a spell is easy) plus as they advance they become semi-independant and can act for 1 action without costing you any.Sanctification is a passive trait to your spells and abilities.
Or monk stances, monk has incredible action economy, so the cost of enterring a stance is very light, since it's just their equivalent of "drawing your weapon".
Magus has to do both (unless they use arcane fist or natural attacks), though this is usually not an issue since a lot of people explore dangerous areas with their weapon out.
I'm not necesseraly against the stance costing an action, if there is more things to make it worth it. More possibilities once you're in that stance, like monks getting special actions tied to specific stances (Dragon Roar for example with Dragon Stance)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's kind of weird that, when confronted with people who don't share your gripes, to imagine there's some community wide conspiracy to keep the Magus down instead of like... people just enjoying the class and not liking some of the horrible suggestions meant to 'fix' it.
So here's what's weird to me: Pathfinder's online community, whether on the forums, the subreddit, or the Discord server, is infamous for being extremely defensive of the game and averse to any kind of criticism, let alone suggestion for change. Each of us has made at least one criticism of some game element that got us shouted down by one or more people patting themselves on the back for being guardians of good sense, even when they didn't have a clue what they were talking about. All of us have wished at one time or another that the members of this community got to listen to each other more, speak less ignorantly, and generally just behave like adults trying to have an intelligent conversation with each other.
And yet, when it's convenient, we still throw each other under the bus. We still like to isolate and gaslight people making criticisms we don't like, misrepresent their position, twist their arguments into straw men, and become the very kind of people we want less of in the community. And this is ultimately why the problem is so ubiquitous: it's not an "us versus them" situation where only a certain few are guilty of this bad behavior (though some certainly do lean into it more than others), all of us are guilty of being this kind of person, and until we challenge this hypocrisy, we will continue to sabotage any chance at meaningful discussion in these spaces.
More to the point: while I do think Dariush is painting with slightly too wide a brush in dividing the discussion around Magus players versus non-players (as you've said, several Magus players have also opposed certain criticisms and suggestions), they're also not imagining a conspiracy here so much as calling out the community on bad behavior, which is obvious to see even on just this thread. People have tried to make excuses for several of the Magus's flaws, and you are among those people, Squiggit. People even now are trying very hard to portray critics of the Magus as unreasonable while avoiding engaging with the actual substance of the criticism being made. You talk about how justified it is to rail against bad suggestions, yet you've made not a peep about Bluemagetim's insistent requests to make the Magus even worse at regular Strikes. It's all very selective and very agenda-based, and had more effort been put into looking for common ground, rather than just focusing on differences, this thread could've had more smart people working together, rather than against one another.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I find it very interresting that Runesmith has a feat that gives them an extra action to trace a rune (or contribute to the 2 actions version to trace one at range) as a feat, given it can be a very action hungry class from what I've read so far.
The downside being you cannot invoke the power of runes this turn.
So essentially you free yourself up to potentially do more things in your turn without being unable to do your setups for next rounds, or dedicate it to a very big setup, at the cost of not paying it of right away.
That's an interresting idea, might be too "must have" to be a feat instead of a class feature tho but that's what playtesting will determine.
I wonder if something similar could work on Magus. I think not since it already has other options with focus spells recharging spellstrike. But the idea of a "you gain an extra action this turn to recharge spellstrike, but can't spellstrike on this same turn" could be freeing. But likely too good.
Anyway, I feel like runesmith and magus will be like two brothers lol.
I'm not necesseraly against the stance costing an action, if there is more things to make it worth it. More possibilities once you're in that stance, like monks getting special actions tied to specific stances (Dragon Roar for example with Dragon Stance)Well there are feats that require you be in it, but I guess players don't think they are worth it? The idea you suggest has the advantage of not requiring Paizo to change the mechanics - they could just add feats to the class that either give some big benefit for being in cascade, or give you an action that puts you in cascade in addition to whatever else the feat does.
Yeah exactly, there could be more of those. And some actions built in too.
Among some I suggested, augmented strikes like a magus version of knockdown dealing splash damage or something, hitting to inflict a penalty to saves for a round, reducing resistances, maybe a melee variant of Cascading Ray etc etc
And actions that compress recharge with a skill. Like Tumble Through or Feint for Laughing Shadow, but only if you are in the stance
I'm not necesseraly against the stance costing an action, if there is more things to make it worth it. More possibilities once you're in that stance, like monks getting special actions tied to specific stances (Dragon Roar for example with Dragon Stance)Well there are feats that require you be in it, but I guess players don't think they are worth it? The idea you suggest has the advantage of not requiring Paizo to change the mechanics - they could just add feats to the class that either give some big benefit for being in cascade, or give you an action that puts you in cascade in addition to whatever else the feat does.Yeah exactly, there could be more of those. And some actions built in too.
Among some I suggested, augmented strikes like a magus version of knockdown dealing splash damage or something, hitting to inflict a penalty to saves for a round, reducing resistances, maybe a melee variant of Cascading Ray etc etc
And actions that compress recharge with a skill. Like Tumble Through or Feint for Laughing Shadow, but only if you are in the stance
Main thing I want for arcane cascade is for it to not take two actions to activate. Though hey if more bits and pieces like this suggestion can make it more dynamic and remain balanced it does seem fun.
If you'll pardon my playing devil's advocate for a moment; The 1st-level Magus feat of Magus's Analysis does combine Recall Knowledge with recharging, with the caveat of recharging your spellstrike being contingent on a successful recall knowledge roll. I personally have not met the magus player who likes this feat, myself included. What would make your proposal different?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd be different because it wouldn't be a feat, and more easily rely on skills reliant on your primary modifier for your subclass (athletics and acrobatic quite often).
It's also more often useful to perform than just recall knowledge that, while useful, can be redundant while you face several of the same ennemies or ones you've already thought and know the weaknesses of.
Tripping or Tumbling Through an ennemy will always be useful, even if you've thought dozens of the same type before.
For Recall Knowledge you do get a feat to make it more regularly useful with Knowledge is Power but I don't know anyone who likes it either, lots of micromanaging with it (since each of the bonuses applies once, so you have to keep track of each, for each ally you've shared the information with).
By having possibly 2 skill actions tied each study, it gives you options as to what to do on off turns to be useful while preparing for the next turn.
Especially if some feats support it.
For example, Inexorable Iron might not always be able to Shove or Trip with its weapon if it doesn't have the right traits (for example you use a greatsword) but some low level feats that replicate abilities like Knockdown, with a magical twist, could be your option for off turns.
Or maybe it could be another benefit of being in the stance, Inexorable Iron can trip and shove with two handed weapons regardless of traits. That'd have to be tested and discussed, maybe other actions would be more appropriate.
Tldr: Those actions are more reliably useful to your and the party, no matter the ennemies. You tumbling through into position to provide flanking, creating a distraction to sneak out of danger, or disarming an opponent to mess with their accuracy or action economy is always valuable.
Also, you are forgiven. Lol.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tldr: Those actions are more reliably useful to your and the party, no matter the ennemies. You tumbling through into position to provide flanking, creating a distraction to sneak out of danger, or disarming an opponent to mess with their accuracy or action economy is always valuable.
Also, you are forgiven. Lol.
Lol. Glad to be forgiven! More importantly, glad to see you flesh this idea out. ;-)
You're welcome, I like rambling about my ideas lol
That kind of action compression both helps the magus do more than just spellstrike and helps it spellstrike more comfortably.
In theory at least
I think there's a misunderstanding ? Maybe I misread you.
My suggestion is to have skill actions recharge spellstrike, in the condition of being in arcane cascade, not to enter cascade by doing skill actions.
I think i'd rather have cascade give the opportunity to have more options in your attacks on top of that small elemental damage boost rather than just make that damage bigger by 1 point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A +1 point to damage is pretty much meaningless to the magus. In fact, I'd say any boost to damage is meaningless next to spellstrike, which is the real damage steroid of the class. I think it would be much better if it was dropped in favor of something more fun / useful.
If anything I'd only probably keep it for the laughing shadow since its kind of their shtick to have that extra damage to compensate for being Dex-based.
Just having the damage we have now, to exploit weaknesses, is fine as is. Just more damage isn't the solution to make cascade more interresting.
It's just a design space left mostly unexplored within the class outside of a few feats and the benefit of the class features
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh I hadn't noticed but one of the feats of runesmith is basically my suggestion for saves on spellstrike.
Remote Detotation:
Range strike on an ennemy, on a hit or crit you can invoke all of the runes on them.
On a crit they have -1 to their saves.
So hey !
Runesmith also has INT KAS and Legendary Class DC progression, and runes are far more limited (and currently somehow do more damage than) spells. So I'd take that equivalence worth a grain of salt.
Yes absolutely.
Though they do quite impressive damage right now. Like for 3 actions you can use two runes and detonate for two times 2d6 for every 2 character level.
Assuming both a longsword here.
With the Tracing Strike feat assuming both it and the magus hit, it can vastly outdamage it. (Average 70.5 for Magus d6 cantrip, 97 for shocking grasp. 169 on a double failure to the strike+rune explosions.)
Even if the target succeeds both saves and takes half damage (99) it'd do as much as a spellstrike with a d12 slotted spell like shocking grasp. If it fails one it goes far beyond that. (134)
On a crit a Magus with a spellslot will outdamage (194), obviously, but as it is now that's pretty incredible damage with a lot of flexibility on how you apply it (could just do a single rune with the strike and detonate it for 2 actions. If the target succeeds at the save, it does barely less than a gouging claw spellstrike, for 2 actual actions without deferring one to later. And if it crit fails one (204) or both saves (309) well.... (unlikely to happen ofc but critfailing one and normal failing another can happen)
At higher level it has feats that allow to play a lot of runes at once (the canvas one for example is pretty incredible) too, so it's actually very flexible to deal damage.
Obviously damage balance is also the point of the playtest so the comparison is a bit unfair, since it's not the final version of the class.
But like yeah... it kind of pseudo spellstrike better than magus does lol
I forgot to note that, for now, all the damaging runes target Fortitude saves so that's a big limitation on how effective they can be against some ennemies since you have little to no options to target reflex or wisdom for damage (but have some for other useful effects)
Like big monster bosses usually have pretty high fortitude for example.
Also also:A picture of the graph I did real quick and dirty
Given that even on a missed strike one rune can still go off, and do some damage, while magus is all or nothing.
I believe it'll be nerfed, maybe the scaling will be 1d6 per 2 levels.
Or it'd go up to d8 of damage and be 1d8 per 2 levels, something like that might be more balanced already.
I'm not sure what you're getting at.
Like yeah, using magic to support other aspect of adventuring life is a great tool. That's why spells like tailwind are so good for travelling, stuff like instant armor to don your fullplate real fast, etc etc.
This is coming from a rather outside game mechanics position, but having both spells and swordplay skills sounds more like the same kind of diversification someone would have taking longbow training and also having training in melee combat. (Longbow training IRL took a lot of years to get good at).
I've always considered the fighter's in-game reason for having the best attack rating because they're the most dedicated to their weapon mastery training over others; barbarians fight angry, champions spend time in worship and learning their deity granted powers. In the case of the Magus the split training in swords and sorcery means less polish than a dedicated fighter and wizard respectively. While somatic components aren't really a consideration in the Remaster I usually imagined that a magus integrating somatic gestures into their weapon style meant that there would be movements a dedicated arms-master would find wasteful, but for the magus a necessary step for integrating spells into their weapon strikes; that's just my head-canon though.
The main advantage is that the warrior in question can enhance their own weapon and armor to bypass magical defenses. They aren't going to waste their time increasing the destructive force of a single strike unless they are doing something like trying to break through a gate during a siege, because it would take too much time to both use the incantation and then actually swing the sword.
Magic weapons and armor already do that though. In 1e it used to be that guns targeted touch AC, but with the elimination of touch AC that's not a thing anymore. I seem to remember one dev saying somewhere that one in-universe justification for why guns target regular AC now is that magic armor can already help ward off dragon fangs, so why not bullets? (I can't remember exactly where I read this though.) So I take this to mean that magic weapons and armor are already bypassing a lot of magical defenses. A wizard's AC might suck compared to an equivalent level fighter but that doesn't mean they don't have magical defenses at all. So with the magical arms race already taking care of that problem, why not enhance their strikes the way they do?
Mobility is the second potential use of magic that might be useful. But again, the benefit has to outweigh the extra cost in time to incant. Such a character would probably be using magic to reduce the burden of long forced marches across terrain instead of trying to use it readily on the field while in active engagement.
Tailwind. A 2nd-rank tailwind is easy enough to get on a wand and grant the caster enhanced mobility for several hours in a day. Other spells exist that ease logistical burdens and are usually low-enough rank that access to them isn't too much of a problem. Perhaps they haven't come up in this topic much since the thrust of the topic is more about polishing out what some people find rough about the Magus's combat capabilities? Or perhaps lower-rank spells taking care of such logistical problems already existing and generally working as intended?
Now a tradition that doesn't use incantations but does something like channeling magic in less aggressive ways could work. Like you have charges that are prepared in the morning where the individual is actually doing the incantations, and the warrior would then expend the charges during combat or over the course of the day. This would pair well with enchanting a weapon in the morning so that it can bypass magic defenses.
If I recall the Secrets of Magic book, much of daily preparations for spellcasters is actually spent casting the spell to about 90% or so completion. It's the incantations and gestures that finish the remaining 10% and manifest the effects.
Essentially yeah.
Also if I recall the book did describe Magi as drawing some of the gesture with the tip of their sword and stuff like that to replace the old somatic component, hence why they don't need a free hand.
It's irrelevant with the remaster but it's always a neat flavor details
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Who called it that Expansive would be better allowed AoE and base spellstrike allow saves ?
*toots his horn*
Also now that Sure Strike is nerfed maybe we can finally discuss spell options without "yeah but with sure strike you can too easily crit fish with that" now xD
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Great... now add that the target gets a -4 penalty on its save, if any, on a Critical Success and then we'll talk.
-2 on hit and -3 on crit (or -1 to -3) would be plenty enough math wise.
What I really want now is more actions to recharge with action compression lol
And maybe actual spell combat again, that'd be dope