| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Friend of mind just discovered this crazy level 20 imperial sorcerer tech.
Components:
Spellshape Mastery
Explosion of Power
Extend Blood Magic
And you can add melodious spell and demoralize boosters as well
How it works:
We cast an extend blood magic, and because extend blood magic is a one action spellshape, it's action cost is reduced to a free action by spellshape mastery. Because it's also a bloodline spell, it triggers blood magic, which we can choose to make explosion of power instead of the normal blood magic effect.
Notably, we don't care about extend blood magic's *effect* at all. That can expire unused for all we care, we're not forced to use it. What we're looking for (the blood magic effect) triggers just from casting the bloodline spell, which is conveniently reduced to a free action for us by spellshape mastery.
All told you can use this up to 3 times on your turn for an average of 30d6 -> 105 explosion of power damage. Then you can actually take your turn, as all you've done to this point was use free actions and focus points - and maybe a quickened stride to get into melee range. Or split up the explosions of power across multiple turns, you have the option.
But it gets better
Spellshape mastery allows up to apply spellshapes as a free action, and while extend blood magic is a spellshape, it's also a spell - and nothing says we can't apply a spellshape to that spell - we're not applying multiple spellshapes to it, since it's own spellshape is modifying the next spell we cast (if we ever get around to casting it, which we likely won't).
So what spellshapes are would be useful to apply to extend blood magic? Well, there's only one I can think of. Melodious spell. As part of using the spellshape, melodious spell allows us to attempt a demoralize check. Notably, this doesn't have to be vs the target of the spell - it's just a normal demoralize you can use on anybody.
So we can add free action demoralizes to our free action explosions of power.
That's already pretty lit, but we can upgrade this. My friend and I have found two routes to take this down:
1. Single Target Debuff: Use fear of god (also a free action btw) against your desired target before the rest of the combo. This turns our combo into effectively a free action ancestral memories at home, applying up to frightened 4. Unless the boss is immune to mental (they always are). But hey at least you do a bunch of damage as well.
2. Horde Control: Use menacing prowess, terrified retreat, and to bully lower level enemies as a free action. If you're doing this, you probably want to trigger the combo 1/round instead of all in round 1, so you can keep whacking people with fleeing until you run out of focus points or roll a nat 1 (even ridiculer can't save you from that). Honestly, you could do without the explosion of power for this set up, it's really just a bonus.
Dealing with reactive strike
Actually I lied, you don't have to deal with reactive strike. Nothing here has the manipulate trait, surprisingly enough. Stride right up to to that +4 boss and morb all over them, disruption free. Disruptive stance will trigger off concentrate actions, but honestly if you're at melee range with a disruptive stance fighter good luck anyways. Maybe you can bait him into wasting his reactive strikes on disrupting free action melodious spells or something.
After the combo:
Then you just take your whole turn lmao. Could get some more explosion of power procs if you wanted to, cast a spell, whatever, the world is yours. Just with an enemy down ~100hp and demoralized to hell. My friend suggested 3 action legendary negotiation asking them to surrender.
Additionally funny that this is for imperial sorcerer, which is already one of better subclasses on a pretty good class. So you have that going for you as well.
I'm pretty sure you can only gain one effect per distinct trigger. I wonder if that would impede this strategy any.
Well, the trigger is the blood magic spell and you free cast it 3 separate times so that shouldn't be an issue. I don't recall blood magic being a 1/turn effect.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How it works:
We cast an extend blood magic, and because extend blood magic is a one action spellshape, it's action cost is reduced to a free action by spellshape mastery. Because it's also a bloodline spell, it triggers blood magic, which we can choose to make explosion of power instead of the normal blood magic effect.
For GMs that want to call shenanigans on this...
Extend Blood Magic is indeed categorized as both a Spellshape and a Focus Spell of its own. Which seems like a bug to begin with. It would be better as a Focus ability rather than a Focus Spell. It would still cost a Focus point to use, it just doesn't need to be classified as a spell. Neither do Monk stances like Clinging Shadows Stance.
But that would be a houserule to prevent the shenanigans.
For RAW, there is in Extend Blood Magic itself:
If your next action is to Cast a Spell that grants you a blood magic effect...
You can have only one extended blood magic effect at a time.
Extend Blood Magic gets counteracted for being invalid if the actions used after it are not Cast a Spell. Casting another instance of Extend Blood Magic is also not a valid option to satisfy that requirement since you can only have one effect of it at a time.
You will need to find another Blood Magic generating spell for Extend Blood Magic to affect. Which is the intended use case for this ability.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
How it works:
We cast an extend blood magic, and because extend blood magic is a one action spellshape, it's action cost is reduced to a free action by spellshape mastery. Because it's also a bloodline spell, it triggers blood magic, which we can choose to make explosion of power instead of the normal blood magic effect.For RAW, there is in Extend Blood Magic itself:
If your next action is to Cast a Spell that grants you a blood magic effect...
You can have only one extended blood magic effect at a time.
Extend Blood Magic gets counteracted for being invalid if the actions used after it are not Cast a Spell. Casting another instance of Extend Blood Magic is also not a valid option to satisfy that requirement since you can only have one effect of it at a time.
You will need to find another Blood Magic generating spell for Extend Blood Magic to affect. Which is the intended use case for this ability.
It doesn’t matter if extended blood magic doesn’t extend a blood magic. We don’t care about the effects of the spell, we care that it was cast at all, because that’s what triggers our blood magic. If you use, say, reach spell, but then just don’t cast a valid spell after it, the fact that you used reach spell doesn’t go away - it just doesn’t increase the range of any spell.
Let’s say you cast an extended blood magic spell (thus triggering explosion of power) and then begin casting a different spell, but got counterspelled. Obviously the spell you were casting is disrupted and doesn’t do anything, and the extended blood magic effect is wasted, but you wouldn’t roll back time itself and undo the explosion of power, or the focus point used for that matter. It’s a separate spell. What happens after only matters as to the effects of the spell, not the fact that you cast it.
The part about only having one extended blood magic effect is irrelevant as well, since we never create any extended blood magic effects in the first place and even if we did (and you applied a counteract to this situation) we’d still be casting the spell. If you cast dispel magic and fail the counteract roll, you still cast dispel magic. You just didn’t counteract the effect you were targeting - but that has no bearing on something like a blood magic proc that just cares if you cast the spell.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
May as well add a bloodline robe and a familiar for a pair of 1/day free focus point effects.
Extend Blood Magic is indeed categorized as both a Spellshape and a Focus Spell of its own. Which seems like a bug to begin with. It would be better as a Focus ability rather than a Focus Spell. It would still cost a Focus point to use, it just doesn't need to be classified as a spell. Neither do Monk stances like Clinging Shadows Stance.
There are actually a couple of other spellshape focus spells, so it's hard to call it a bug in that sense since it seems an intentional design decision.
May as well add a bloodline robe and a familiar for a pair of 1/day free focus point effects.
Lmao even better
Dunno if the build has enough features space for familiar (probably?) but bloodline robe is 100% getting on there, that’s peak.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Don't forget to make use of Anoint Ally on whoever your frontliner is so you don't have to go into the fray yourself!
But yeah this is a funny interaction for sure.
This might be mega-disintegrate if you can cast some powerful spells with it.
So what spellshapes are would be useful to apply to extend blood magic? Well, there's only one I can think of. Melodious spell. As part of using the spellshape, melodious spell allows us to attempt a demoralize check.
I love Melodious Spell for that effect!
Side note: I recommend getting Pitch-Perfect Projection from the Dandy archetype to get that free "Reach Spell" on Demoralize from Spellshape Mastery. You can even use that spellshape on the Melodious Spell spellshape itself, because Melodious Spell is "an action that creates an auditory effect with a range" (Demoralize, 30ft range), effectively chaining 3 spellshape actions into one thing!
This might be mega-disintegrate if you can cast some powerful spells with it.
Disintegrate is an imperial bloodline spell...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Interesting. Don't think I'd allow it... even though Extend Blood Magic grants a Spellshape, it's a Focus Spell; i.e. you're still using Cast a Spell, which is a different thing from a Spellshape Action. So I wouldn't let you cast it as a free Action.
Putting all that aside, don't forget that Explosion of Power damage has a Basic Reflex Save. At 20th level, a lot of the time you're going to be getting less than the average damage.
So what spellshapes are would be useful to apply to extend blood magic? Well, there's only one I can think of. Melodious spell. As part of using the spellshape, melodious spell allows us to attempt a demoralize check.I love Melodious Spell for that effect!
Side note: I recommend getting Pitch-Perfect Projection from the Dandy archetype to get that free "Reach Spell" on Demoralize from Spellshape Mastery. You can even use that spellshape on the Melodious Spell spellshape itself, because Melodious Spell is "an action that creates an auditory effect with a range" (Demoralize, 30ft range), effectively chaining 3 spellshape actions into one thing!
This might be mega-disintegrate if you can cast some powerful spells with it.Disintegrate is an imperial bloodline spell...
Mega-disintegrate is a used in conjunction with level 20 wizard feat Spell Combination. It's a level 10 slot with two level 8 disintegrates combined into it used with true strike.
Since activating this is just 3 free actions and a stride to position yourself, you can cast whatever you want on top of it.
Does the spellshape entry itself limit the combo?
Spellshape
Source Player Core pg. 302 2.0
Actions with the spellshape trait tweak the properties of your spells. You must use a spellshape action directly before casting the spell you want to alter. If you use any action (including free actions and reactions) other than casting a spell directly after, you waste the benefits of the spellshape action. The benefit is also lost if your turn ends before you cast the spell. Any additional effects added by a spellshape action are part of the spell's effect, not of the spellshape action itself.
The part saying you must use a spellshape action directly before casting the spell you want to alter.
It says must, meaning it may not be an option to use a spellshape and not cast a spell you want to alter. If that is true then sure the character can cast extend into extend but then must commit to a spell that doesnt also require they cast a spell after like extend requires.
If a player is declaring they want to use an action on a spellshape they also need to have the actions to cast a spell after it or they dont meet the requirements in the spellshape description that they must use it directly before the spell they want to alter.
I can see someone argue that this statement is just ment to determine order of things not a requirement to actually follow through but It seems to me that it can be enforced as written as a requirement.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you use any action (including free actions and reactions) other than casting a spell directly after, you waste the benefits of the spellshape action.
Pretty clear that you can do any action after the spellshape if you don't mind losing the benefit. Which this technique doesn't.
Does the spellshape entry itself limit the combo?
Spellshape
Source Player Core pg. 302 2.0
Actions with the spellshape trait tweak the properties of your spells. You must use a spellshape action directly before casting the spell you want to alter. If you use any action (including free actions and reactions) other than casting a spell directly after, you waste the benefits of the spellshape action. The benefit is also lost if your turn ends before you cast the spell. Any additional effects added by a spellshape action are part of the spell's effect, not of the spellshape action itself.The part saying you must use a spellshape action directly before casting the spell you want to alter.
It says must, meaning it may not be an option to use a spellshape and not cast a spell you want to alter. If that is true then sure the character can cast extend into extend but then must commit to a spell that doesnt also require they cast a spell after like extend requires.
If a player is declaring they want to use an action on a spellshape they also need to have the actions to cast a spell after it or they dont meet the requirements in the spellshape description that they must use it directly before the spell they want to alter.
I can see someone argue that this statement is just ment to determine order of things not a requirement to actually follow through but It seems to me that it can be enforced as written as a requirement.
The very same rules specify what happens if you don't use Cast a Spell immediately after (you waste the spellshape) so its clear to me that its intended for you to be able to "waste" them by using other actions in between.
The very same rules specify what happens if you don't use Cast a Spell immediately after (you waste the spellshape) so its clear to me that its intended for you to be able to "waste" them by using other actions in between.Does the spellshape entry itself limit the combo?
Spellshape
Source Player Core pg. 302 2.0
Actions with the spellshape trait tweak the properties of your spells. You must use a spellshape action directly before casting the spell you want to alter. If you use any action (including free actions and reactions) other than casting a spell directly after, you waste the benefits of the spellshape action. The benefit is also lost if your turn ends before you cast the spell. Any additional effects added by a spellshape action are part of the spell's effect, not of the spellshape action itself.The part saying you must use a spellshape action directly before casting the spell you want to alter.
It says must, meaning it may not be an option to use a spellshape and not cast a spell you want to alter. If that is true then sure the character can cast extend into extend but then must commit to a spell that doesnt also require they cast a spell after like extend requires.
If a player is declaring they want to use an action on a spellshape they also need to have the actions to cast a spell after it or they dont meet the requirements in the spellshape description that they must use it directly before the spell they want to alter.
I can see someone argue that this statement is just ment to determine order of things not a requirement to actually follow through but It seems to me that it can be enforced as written as a requirement.
It seems to have that verbaige to clearly show free actions and reactions are not compatible but it doesnt qualify the prior sentence by necessity. The following sentence about your turn ending and losing the benefit seems to be there for situations where someone else's reactions stops you and you ahve no actions left.
I can see why you pointed it out though, but I can see alternate explanations for those lines.
I think that if the rules stated "You must use a spellshape action directly before casting the spell you want to alter," without any of the following text, then I would interpret that as there being no choice but to use the relevant spell after the spellshape. Because of the text stating that the benefits are lost when using another action, however, that to me implies that it is possible to use a spellshape and then do something else that doesn't gain the spellshape's benefit, like the combo mentioned in the OP. It's very silly and highlights why certain benefits are generally tied to casting spells with a minimum action cost, but it also looks like a lot of fun, especially at 20th level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that if the rules stated "You must use a spellshape action directly before casting the spell you want to alter," without any of the following text, then I would interpret that as there being no choice but to use the relevant spell after the spellshape. Because of the text stating that the benefits are lost when using another action, however, that to me implies that it is possible to use a spellshape and then do something else that doesn't gain the spellshape's benefit, like the combo mentioned in the OP. It's very silly and highlights why certain benefits are generally tied to casting spells with a minimum action cost, but it also looks like a lot of fun, especially at 20th level.
Its just that must is an imperative. You can't qualify it in general English except when you include words like unless.
the sentences following the must statement do not use qualifying language which reads to me as being there for conditions like they provide as examples, free actions or reactions on the part of the PC.
And then the second sentence after the must statement covers things like getting counter-spelled or having your spell interrupted. Lets say the spell you were going to augment was a single actions spell and got interrupted, that clause makes it so a second attempt of casting it does not benefit from the spellshape.
So that is what i mean by there being non conflicting explanations for the following sentences that do not qualify the imperative.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It seems to have that verbaige to clearly show free actions and reactions are not compatible but it doesnt qualify the prior sentence by necessity. The following sentence about your turn ending and losing the benefit seems to be there for situations where someone else's reactions stops you and you ahve no actions left.I can see why you pointed it out though, but I can see alternate explanations for those lines.
If you cant use actions other than Cast a Spell after using a Spellshape action, then the whole sentence is wasted space, and moreover it goes against the Spellshape actions themselves, all of which are "If your next action is to X" (or similar wording, but theyre always an if clause). Why write it as a conditional if the intent is for you to be unable to do anything but Cast a Spell?
It seems to have that verbaige to clearly show free actions and reactions are not compatible but it doesnt qualify the prior sentence by necessity. The following sentence about your turn ending and losing the benefit seems to be there for situations where someone else's reactions stops you and you ahve no actions left.I can see why you pointed it out though, but I can see alternate explanations for those lines.
If you cant use actions other than Cast a Spell after using a Spellshape action, then the whole sentence is wasted space, and moreover it goes against the Spellshape actions themselves, all of which are "If your next action is to X" (or similar wording, but theyre always an if clause). Why write it as a conditional if the intent is for you to be unable to do anything but Cast a Spell?
For the reasons above.
You might try to get a free action or reaction you normally would be entitled to do and the first sentence after the must sentence is saying you can do it but you lose the benefit of the spellshape.The second sentence after the must sentence incorporates what happens if others interrupt your cast a spell.
Its not wasted, its just covering its bases.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Look if you don’t like the tech you can just ban it. You don’t have to try to cope your way out of the paper bag
Look if you don’t like the tech you can just ban it. You don’t have to try to cope your way out of the paper bag
Its not that I think the rules do not allow doing it to a degree, its that I think the rules prevent a third extend blood magic in the same turn.
You can say to the GM i am using extend blood magic for my first action. The GM asks what spell are you going to alter with it? (that is part of the imperative sentence.)
You can say I am altering another cast of extend blood magic. The GM responds and what spell are you going to alter with the second cast?
At that point the last actions needs to be a spell that isnt also a spellshape because the player does not have the actions to even have another spell to alter with the third spellshape.
You absolutely do get the explosion of power in between the first two extends by raw. I just dont think the third one in the same turn is possible.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Its just that must is an imperative. You can't qualify it in general English except when you include words like unless.
I agree with this, though the word "must" is also used to indicate a necessary component to produce a desired result, e.g. "you must break at least one egg to make an omelette." My impression is that this is the meaning here, i.e. "You must use a spellshape action directly before casting the spell you want to alter in order to apply the spellshape's effects to the spell," except the sentence as written is overly terse and thus lends itself to a different interpretation in isolation. The subsequent text, however, makes it clear that it is in fact possible to use actions other than casting the spell you'd want to alter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Its just that must is an imperative. You can't qualify it in general English except when you include words like unless.I agree with this, though the word "must" is also used to indicate a necessary component to produce a desired result, e.g. "you must break at least one egg to make an omelette." My impression is that this is the meaning here, i.e. "You must use a spellshape action directly before casting the spell you want to alter in order to apply the spellshape's effects to the spell," except the sentence as written is overly terse and thus lends itself to a different interpretation in isolation. The subsequent text, however, makes it clear that it is in fact possible to use actions other than casting the spell you'd want to alter.
I can see that angle.
It could be seen as a requirement to satisfy rather than an imperative.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It seems the last line "Any additional effects added by a
spellshape action are part of the spell’s effect, not of the
spellshape action itself." could also be used to stop this from happening. If one were to rule that blood magic was an additional effect of that particular spellshape it wouldn't take effect unless a spell was cast with it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It seems the last line "Any additional effects added by a
spellshape action are part of the spell’s effect, not of the
spellshape action itself." could also be used to stop this from happening. If one were to rule that blood magic was an additional effect of that particular spellshape it wouldn't take effect unless a spell was cast with it.
No, because that only refers to the effects of the spellshape itself, which OP doesn't care about ("the extending effect").
But bloodmagic is something else entirely, a class feature that triggers upon any bloodline spell being cast, and Extend Bloodmagic is such a spell - just like a spellshape with the manipulate trait would trigger a Reactive Strike regardless of any spell being cast afterwards.