My point is that the things the fighter has to do to make themselves work are easier and less prone to disruption.Yes but that's kinda the point of the class: low complexity, no rotations needed, just a box o' tricks. If that's what you want for playstyle, I would not try and shoehorn a Magus into it, I would just play a fighter.
PF2E is not - as far as I can tell - about rewarding complex builds and class mechanics with bigger damage. The reward you get for playing a gish is that you get to play a gish, not that some easter egg gish build will let you be as good as the specialist at their specialty.
Now there's no wrong way to play here; if someone wants to be the fighter (role) with their Magus (class), have at it! But to me, the observation that the spellstriking Magus doesn't do fighter as well as fighter, doesn't convince me spellstrike needs an upgrade.
Nobody's really asking for a spellstrike upgrade. We're arguing for an action economy improvement (to maybe hit those numbers more often) and against the spellstrike nerf that so many people seem to want to implement by removing focus spellstrikes.
At flexibly targeting enemy weaknesses in combat. One cantrip or AoE spell and arcane cascade at the start of combat can prep you for rounds of triggering weaknesses without moving yourself into a dangerous position and you don’t need to have anything special prepared in advance.
Refer to my previous comment about weaknesses both not actually closing the DPR gap and being substantively available to fighters as well.
It is a totally different fighting style. Moving into melee in a round before you will be able to spell strike is generally not going to work out for anything but a targe magus.
True! It’s even worse than I said!
At flexibly targeting enemy weaknesses in combat. One cantrip or AoE spell and arcane cascade at the start of combat can prep you for rounds of triggering weaknesses without moving yourself into a dangerous position and you don’t need to have anything special prepared in advance.Refer to my previous comment about weaknesses both not actually closing the DPR gap and being substantively available to fighters as well.
No. The fighter does not have the ability to flexibly target weaknesses with the ease of a magus. It is not even close. The fighter can get lucky, and be relatively prepared to target a handful of weaknesses spending multiple rounds not doing what they want to do to do it. The magus can likely cast a spell at range that does the right type and then AC and it’s done for as long as necessary. If they need to switch mid combat, it’s likely as easy as just spell striking or reapplying AC if they are going to use the new one a lot.
If you don’t think that’s worth it, that is fine. Different play styles and all. But the magus is very good at hitting weaknesses and changing up which ones with little notice.
Magus is better at hitting weaknesses, but not enough to close the DPR gap. And sometimes the fighter also gets to hit the weakness. And a lot of the time (most of the time?) there's no weakness to begin with.
That's not exactly great for magus.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm honestly struggling to understand what are the points trying to be made here
People aren't asking for a Magus nerf when they say they want Focus Spellstriking to go.
I mean, they are when that is the specific request. "I don't want to feel like I need to archetype to optimize my character" is the reason behind it, but there are a lot of different possible solutions besides taking out focus Spellstriking. For instance, baking focus attack spells into the Magus themselves would be an alternative that would buff the class. Buffing or nerfing isn't inherently good or bad in and of itself, but the net result of their changes can be either.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is it so hard to imagine this "nerf" actually ending up feeling like an overall buff to the Magus that opens up far more build choices and options for everyone, as long as the damage difference between Spellstriking with Magus spells and Spellstriking with archetype Focus spells is made up for in some other way that doesn't involve spending Focus points on it? For example, by buffs to the lackluster Arcane Cascade, better Magus class feats, more spellcasting resources, or whatever.
If they actually gave sufficient buffs, this’d be great. It could be a less one note and more fun class.
But the magnitude of buffs necessary to compensate would be very large, and I’m worried the same Paizo that hit psychic dedication with like 3 different middle fingers to magus (any one of which would have been sufficient if not overkill) all at the same time isn’t going to provide the level of buff necessary for chopping down the one thing keeping magus even a semblance of on par with other martials.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You understand that none of those things require removing focus spellstriking right?
If they print focus spells worth using, why would you use them on archetype focus spells?
If cascade and abilities tied to it are worth using, the need to spellstrike every round goes away.
You only have so many actions available to you. If you need to add extra limits to some options to make some others worth using, maybe they weren't good in the first place.
Good point. I can see some sufficiently large buffs necessitating nerfing spellstrike though, depends how much of a rework you’re giving the class.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do appreciate how quickly we went from "focus spellstriking is broken" to "you're being unfair to the magus, surely it can do better than this."“Magus doesn’t beat fighter damage even if it gets focus spell spellstrike every round, already turned on arcane cascade, and gets two free map-10 strikes cause it’s somehow recharging for free”
“Uhhh, that’s not being fair to magus, magus is better than that”
?????????
Actually yeah you two are right, I seriously don't even understand what's going on here anymore.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
If the Magus class can Spellstrike with Focus spells, that indirectly makes Conflux spells weaker because they compete for the same resources. I don't get why people don't understand this reasoning and push back against it so hard.
Because literally every other class with focus spells can opt into other focus spells without their focus spells needing some kind of special protection to not feel inadequate.
This is what irks me: you're looking at the Magus, and you're seeing that people are opting into other focus spells despite having those already in their kit. Rather than ask yourself whether conflux spells could do with some improvements, or whether the Magus could stand to have those focus spells they archetype for baked into their kit in some form, your first reaction is: "we need to stop this emergent gameplay completely by taking this interaction out of the Magus." You can try to spin this whichever way you like, but this by itself is a nerf, and pretending that it's a buff by pushing players to play the Magus as intended only makes sense when you're presuming that you know better than literal hundreds, if not thousands of players. I don't think that's a healthy mentality to follow for balance changes, and unlike Kalaam, whose proof of concept at least includes quality of life improvements to the class, you don't seem to have anything to suggest in compensation for what you're taking away, you're just fixated on this one change. I would not trust you to balance the Magus, because I don't believe you have the best interests of other players at heart.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think making all focus spells recharge spellstrike along with giving better conflux spells would expand the value of all focus spells and make it a choice of whether to spellstrike with one or use it to recharge while doing or ranged strike or something
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
True, but not every other class has to limit their choice of archetype Focus spell to one specific and very narrow pool of spells
Because other classes get the focus spells that cater to the players' desires from the get-go. The Magus is exceptional in that they do not. Specifically avoiding giving players something they clearly want, and taking it away to boot, does not strike me as the optimal solution to this problem.
Wouldn't it be cool if Magus could pick other Focus spells from archetypes without it feeling like a bad decision? For example Athletic Rush or Qi Rush or could be a great openers to follow with Arcane Cascade, or Lay on Hands to provide some team support, or Weapon Surge to increase your hit and crit chance with Spellstrike, or Scholarly Recollection to make Magus's Analysis far more likely to work... I'm sure you get my point.
I do, which is why I believe giving the Magus either focus attack spells, or retooling conflux spells to also have an attack spell function for greater versatility. That way, they wouldn't need to pick an archetype just for that, and could instead opt into other focus spells instead.
I haven't submitted any proof of concept, because much like Kalaam I get frustrated when I try to debate anyone using actual maths and examples on this forum and it feels like a waste of time, as the assumptions they make about how the game is played and comparisons they make to other classes can be so far inside the white room that it is literally blinding. If you wanted an example of an idea that I have though:
(add this text to the bottom of Arcane Cascade)
Additionally, while in Arcane Cascade you deal increased damage with your Arcane spells, including when you cast them as part of a Spellstrike. This bonus damage is 1d6 with cantrips and 1d8 with spells cast from your spell slots, and it is of the same type as the bonus damage that Arcane Cascade is adding to your Strikes. The bonus damage increases to two dice at 5th level, three dice at 9th level, four dice at 13th level, and five dice at 17th level.
Debating the math of a class is one thing, providing a proof of concept for a solution is another. The reason why I encourage people to develop their thoughts into suggestions is because it can often help flesh out the thought itself: in this case, the immediate issue I see with your proposal is that it raises the ceiling of burst damage the Magus can output, especially at early level when the class's burst damage is already exceptionally high. A 1st-level Magus using your version of Arcane Cascade with shocking grasp and just a d8 weapon would deal an average of 26 damage in one hit, meaning a crit would on average one-shot most PL+2 creatures at that point and even quite a few PL+3 creatures. I therefore question whether this benefit is helpful to the Magus or at all healthy.
I don't understand how you came to this conclusion at all. This feels like you are attacking my personal character because we disagree about this.
If someone says: "We should really take this benefit away from X," and spends the near-entirety of their time talking about how that benefit should be taken away without even making a vague suggestion of how to compensate for this loss, that does not leave me with the impression that the person cares much about X at all, quite the contrary. When I've talked in the past about wanting to nerf or remove aspects of the Magus, I've also expressed what I'd want to do with the power budget this would open up, or advise caution regarding how this could disrupt players' existing builds. In the case of focus Spellstriking, I've encouraged looking for solutions that give players what they clearly are looking for out of that situation, instead of taking things away. It's not your character here that's the problem, so much as the mentality you're applying, which I think could use a touch more empathy.
But why does the "Spellstrike, but stronger than with a basic cantrip, but also without expending daily resources" design space have to be filled by spending Focus points on it though?
What exactly do you believe focus spells are for, if not this exact kind of situation? The entire point of focus spells is that they're stronger than cantrips, but still replenishable in-between encounters. The replenishable nature of focus spells is why players pick those on the Magus, so that they don't have to dip into spell slots to Spellstrike for better-than-cantrip damage.
I'm not convinced that people are so glued to the idea of spending Focus points on Spellstriking that they would reject it being removed, if the damage boost it provided was replaced with a way to get to that level of power or close to it while getting to keep their Focus points for other things.
Sure, if you have a way to offer stronger and attrition-free Spellstrikes, that'd be great. So far, though, your proposal I think doesn't quite achieve that, and instead I think would push players to expend spell slots on Spellstikes.
Ultimately, I think people are just doing it because it feels good to do damage equivalent to spending their spell slots while not spending their spell slots, not because it feels good to dump the whole Conflux mechanic in the trash. Do you disagree?
I don't disagree at all, I don't want to throw conflux spells in the trash either. I don't, however, believe continuing to allow focus Spellstriking means getting rid of conflux spells, especially as their action compression is still useful in certain situations to melee Maguses.
My suggestion would only be responsible in this situation for an average 3.5 of that total damage, or 7 on a critical hit. I think it's a bit hyperbolic to say that it is my suggestion pushing this combo into overpowered territory when it's only contributing about 15% of the total average damage, and it requires both Casting a Spell and spending an action entering Arcane Cascade to get there.
I can't help but feel that the complaints about debating people on math and white-room scenarios carry a bit of projection with them at this point. Let's break this down together:
To put it another way: your proposal would likely induce many more instances of Maguses one-shotting boss enemies at early levels, something that already happens now and leads to anticlimaxes. This is why I am personally very cautious around any suggestion that raises this burst further, because that can genuinely be quite unhealthy. The above also doesn't factor in runic weapon shenanigans, at which point we can add another die to a weapon that's also more likely to hit and crit, to the point where one-shotting even PL+3 monsters becomes a much more likely prospect.
How would people feel about changing arcane cascade from:
requiring 1 action and your most recent action this turn being to Cast a Spell or make a Spellstrike,
to just requiring 1 action without the spellcast requirement, but being a free action to go into it if you cast a spell or spellstrike? I feel like this would help it quite a bit. Maybe even up some numbers on it?
The fact that the requirement and the action itself will usually eat up an entire turn to set up is a huge obstacle.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I honestly feel comparing anything to an optimized fighter is unfair tbh.
Re: DPR-Other than Fighter, how does Magus measure up to the other martials:
Barbarian, Champion, Commander, Guardian, Gunslinger, Monk, Ranger, Rogue, Thaumaturge.
I play with a fighter who swaps between sword and board and two-handing, and honestly the class seemed overrated in terms of dpr after a certain point unless you go with something weird or spicy. It could just be because this was Age of Ashes, or because he hasn't gotten the greater tier striking rune yet (we just hit lvl 10), but my water kinetic blasts keep up with his strikes when we both don't crit, and Im guessing my dice luck is pretty nuts because I swear I crit more than he does. My crit damage luck is pretty terrible though, especially early on, and he's basically building a rather standard fighter.
I also played an unarmed strike magus, and she felt quite fine to play. She felt on par with the superstition barb (it was that dark archives set of oneshots meant for playtesting, so spell casters were common) and the psychic. I wasn't using focus spells for spell strikes either
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is important to remember that the magus remaster changes are probably already decided on, so until we see see what that looks like, we are more just bouncing our personal ideas around off each other than trying to convince any one with any decision making power to do any thing.
I really hope we get a single target Rank 4 spell attack roll slot spell with a range of touch that does something like 8d10 acid damage with +2d10 heightening. I think that plus 2 or 3 mid rank spell attack roll spells with decent damage and a good debuff effect will make spell a lot spell striking good enough to need no outside buffing.
Realistically, it would probably be enough for Arcane Cascade to add extra damage to spell striking with cantrips, but I think it would be even cooler if every spell strike you did with a cantrip stacked a new instance of Arcane cascade onto your existing one, but only if the damage type was different, incentivizing using different cantrips instead of just the one highest damage one.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Focus points do so many different things for different classes and archetypes that it's impossible to really sum up what I think they are for in general. What I don't generally think they are for is just adding a tonne of raw bonus damage to something you would already be doing, without any additional action cost.
I mean, this is exactly what Foretell Harm does, and it effectively works like a focus spell. Similarly, ancestral memories is just a pure buff to your spell's accuracy, and therefore its damage. I also think it's really simple: focus spells take on a lot of forms, for sure, but every time, they offer power superior to that of cantrips in a manner that is limited within an encounter, yet replenishable in-between. Many of these focus spells deal damage, as well, so focus spells are absolutely there to help with damage-dealing and act as substitutes for slot spells.
Like, imagine if there was a free action Focus spell that just said "Your next attack roll cantrip this turn deals 1d6 bonus damage if it hits." with a +1d6 per rank heighten on it. Doesn't that seem excessively strong compared to other Focus spells? Isn't that kind of what people seem to want to use Focus Spellstriking for right now?
So, weapon surge for cantrips? Explosion of Power in much more limited form? No, I don't see the big deal with this, because clearly this kind of damage booster exists already. Why do you ask?
Part of the reason I don't do maths discussions much is because I make a lot of mistakes trying to get my ideas down in text format, and people are quick to jump on mistakes here. I made a mistake and mixed up 1d6 and 1d8 here and you were right to point it out - but you didn't do it in a nasty way, and you still covered other reasons why my proposal doesn't work well, so thanks for that at least.
Anytime, that's what feedback is made for. This is also why I tend to submit my own homebrew and suggestions for feedback, because even though people aren't always nice about it in spaces like Reddit, people are quick to catch mistakes, inaccuracies, or simply ideas that would work really well and that I'd missed.
The idea of the feature is to simultaneously bring cantrip Spellstriking closer to the current damage of Focus Spellstriking, make expending slots on Spellstriking feel a bit better at higher levels, and compensate a bit for Magus having a lower spell attack bonus/spell save DC by letting their attack spells deal some more damage when they aren't Spellstriking. I don't think it fails to do any of those things, but you're right that it does probably push Spellstriking over the top a bit as it is at low levels.
I think the idea you're presenting is sound, though mainly because you're talking about cantrips. I think if you wanted to raise the floor of what the Magus can do without raising the ceiling, you could just make the bonus damage apply to cantrips only, without having it apply to slot spells as well. It might make slot attack spells less attractive by comparison, and I honestly think that's fine; the Magus in my opinion is a much more diverse class when they're not pushed to use their four spell slots to Spellstrike or otherwise try to deal raw single-target damage.
In fairness, every single thing you just mentioned costs an action except Foretell Harm, which is great - but it is significantly weaker than the 1d6/rank difference between Gouging Claw and Fire Ray.
Indeed, but unlike what you're comparing, all of these bonuses layer onto existing spells, including slot spells. There is a major difference here between buffing a spell that's already meant to be at maximal strength, or a Strike that can potentially deal huge amounts of damage, and buffing a cantrip to be as good as a focus spell. In a similar vein, Spellstriking with gouging claw means that as a martial class, you're spending two extra actions by default to add the damage of about a 0-MAP d12 weapon, which ultimately isn't terribly efficient unless you're a ranged build, which is why Starlit Span is ovepowered.
Everything else you said makes sense really, so I'm happy to concede the points - although I will continue to have doubts about Focus Spellstriking surviving the Remaster given the recent changes to Amps. I guess we'll have to wait and see; as others have said, the changes are likely already decided upon, so these kinds of discussions, suggestions and speculation are interesting but probably not worth getting too involved in.
I don't disagree, I think there is a nonzero chance that Paizo might cull focus Spellstriking, but I think that would be ill-advised, just as I think it was a mistake to nerf the Psychic MC archetype into the ground like they did. The Psychic's remaster I think included a lot of mistakes in judgment, and the treatment of imaginary weapon in my opinion was one of them.
To be fair, I'd imagine in the coming months there is enough time for small adjustements before everything is fully locked in and going to the printer.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Really, I think the biggest reason that Spellstrike is so valued is that Arcane Cascade is weaker than it should be.
If the extra damage from the Arcane Cascade stance was doubled (2 points of force or whatever damage type; increasing to 4 with weapon specialization and 6 with greater weapon specialization), that may make it less of a "need" to Spellstrike as often as possible. This would increase the Arcane Cascade damage to half that of an Elemental instinct barbarian's Elemental Rage, but the magus can choose the damage type (and even switch it mid fight) while the barbarian is locked into one (or two at most with Elemental Evolution).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not convinced that people are so glued to the idea of spending Focus points on Spellstriking that they would reject it being removed, if the damage boost it provided was replaced with a way to get to that level of power or close to it while getting to keep their Focus points for other things.
If it was just a damage boost at least personally I would be. One of the most fun things about focus spellstrikes is how it frees up your slotted spells for other stuff. For all the talk about build variety, the era of shocking grasp in every slot was clearly the low point for the magus and some of the ideas around removing focus spellstrike seem to want to bring that back, which is tragic.
not because it feels good to dump the whole Conflux mechanic in the trash. Do you disagree?
I'm not sure I even agree with the premise. I still see good conflux spells being used with some frequency. The ones that I routinely see getting ignored and dumped in the trash are the ones that just don't work very well, but nerfing a magus' focus spell options won't make anyone care about Thunderous Strike.
I think if you wanted to raise the floor of what the Magus can do without raising the ceiling, you could just make the bonus damage apply to cantrips only, without having it apply to slot spells as well. It might make slot attack spells less attractive by comparison, and I honestly think that's fine; the Magus in my opinion is a much more diverse class when they're not pushed to use their four spell slots to Spellstrike or otherwise try to deal raw single-target damage.
I think it might also be an issue in itself, there's so few attack spells already and slotted ones have the power budget to be more than just damage, including rider effects or special benefits of different kinds that are a big part of the fantasy I think.
Unless spellstriking with save spells is massively buffed (smite-like functionnality for basic saves ones etc, doubt we'll ever be able to smite a Slow) I think we'd lose a lot of build diversity if spellstriking attack slots become useless by comparison.
I think it might also be an issue in itself, there's so few attack spells already and slotted ones have the power budget to be more than just damage, including rider effects or special benefits of different kinds that are a big part of the fantasy I think.
In theory, yes. In practice, not really. The two attack spells I can think of that don't do damage are tangle vine and telekinetic maneuver, whereas much more popular picks for the Magus tend to be shocking grasp and polar ray. There really isn't that much utility to be missed in the attack slot spells we have now.
Ideally yes, the Magus should do more than just damage with Spellstrike, and that's something I'd very much want to, but that's something that is far more likely to be found in save spells, as you also mention, rather than attack spells.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean there is some that do damage and another effect, and while they aren't the highest damage spells (because they have other utility) it's nice to see more of those.
Even Fire Ray and Winter Bolt, two very popular focus spells to grab for that, have powerful utility (forcing a movement/interract action to avoid more damage).
You can't really have that on cantrips, it makes the spells feel more unique than *just* different damage types.
From the top of my head i'm thinking of Sticky Fire and Threefold Limb as that's what I have access to with my current character, but i think there's some others.
To be fair quite a few focus spells could be reflavored in the normal spell pool for that >.>
Fire Ray into acid damage, name i Caustic Beam.
Winter Bolt into raw physical, with earth or metal trait and call it Shattering Spire Spear.
Then again it'd probably be easier for paizo to write new attack spells if it was easier for other casters to make use of them.
Even Fire Ray and Winter Bolt, two very popular focus spells to grab for that, have powerful utility (forcing a movement/interract action to avoid more damage).
You can't really have that on cantrips, it makes the spells feel more unique than *just* different damage types.
Right, and I very much agree, but the examples you cited are focus spells, not slot spells. Sticky fire's enfeebled 1 condition is just about the weakest debuff you could apply, whereas threefold limb isn't universally available as an uncommon option either. Focus attack spells tend to be among the varied options here, strangely.
Then again it'd probably be easier for paizo to write new attack spells if it was easier for other casters to make use of them.
This to me is a big reason why I don't think the Magus ought to have to rely on attack slot spells at all. Despite the fact that arcane casters have the best synergy with attack spells due to the combination of having the best attack spells and sure strike, attack spells are generally really unpopular due to how unreliable they are compared to save spells. I can't confirm whether this is something the developers are explicitly aiming for or not, but a lot of former attack spells like shocking grasp and polar ray were replaced by save spells in the remaster, which makes me feel like attack slot spells are being deprecated. This puts the Magus in a precarious position where the thing they're meant to synergize the most with doesn't offer that many options. If focus Spellstriking were to be culled, that would leave the class with even fewer options to choose from.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah I know those are focus spells. I believe they are so good in big part because they are a renewable ressource so missing with them feels less like a waste.
Maybe attack spells should be relegated to focus spells mainly/only but then it means most of them are hard to access without multiclass, which means a lot of builds will be samey.
Converting more of them into slot spells would be good, I don't see much reasons not to do so, even if it's straight up the exact same spell with no change. Their value as focus spells wouldn't be diminished by that.
And the more I think about it, the more I think keeping focus spellstrike in but letting any focus spell recharge it so it's a tactical choice when to use them for different purpose might be the simplest way to go about it
What do you have to archetype in to get winter bolt and fire ray?
Cleric of Yamatsumi archetype. Cleric Dedication, Basic Dogma (Domain initiate [cold]), Advanced Dogma (Domain Initiate[fire]).
What do you have to archetype in to get winter bolt and fire ray?Cleric of Yamatsumi archetype. Cleric Dedication, Basic Dogma (Domain initiate [cold]), Advanced Dogma (Domain Initiate[fire]).
Green faith also works by taking advanced dogma (expanded domain initiate) at 8. That's also the route you'd take if you wanted withering grasp (decay domain).
That's if you want both, if only one is enough there is more deity choices thankfully.
Otherwise all Magi would be either hippies or weebs lol
Honestly a feat like 1e Spell Blending or Broad Studies arcana (if I recall the name right) to be able to adapt a focus spell from a different tradition could be interresting. Maybe only for offensive ones tho. Something like "select one focus spell from the wizard, cleric or druid lists that has the attack trait and is of a level you could cast, you adapt it into your own magic and reproduce it as a conflux spell" or something like that.
Oh green faith let’s you get both? Green faith W, get your winter bolt, fire ray, *and* godless healing.
It's a bit weird to get powers from a godless faith/philosophy though. Does it really work like that?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It don’t have a god, so
It’s kinda just the “you’re a Druid” faith in flavoring.
I remember the bit of rule about cleric/champion following pantheons that they still need to follow a particular god within it (at gm discretion etc). But for a philosphy without any god that's a bit weird.
Seems to be a case where it's up to your GM to allow it or not. Couldn't find anything clear about that in the rules. The classes themselves call for following a specific deity granting you powers.
It has a divine font, what’s the point of that if you can’t play a green faith cleric?
And there are faiths you can’t be a cleric of that don’t have divine fonts.
Yeah i know that's what's weird
That's if you want both, if only one is enough there is more deity choices thankfully.
Otherwise all Magi would be either hippies or weebs lol
You do typically want two focus spells. Not only do you need a 3rd focus spell to cap your focus points, but fire isn't as reliable a damage type as physical was with IW. Your choices then are force fang, winter bolt or withering grasp.
I would take withering grasp because winter bolt doesn't double its base damage on a crit and enemies can just detonate the xd12 saveless blast on someone, and that one does double on a crit.