| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The magus would need to use the ranged d4 version due to the wording in Ignition, which says:
"If the target is within your melee reach, you can choose to make a melee spell attack with the flame instead of a ranged spell attack, which increases all the spell's damage dice to d6s."
So you can only make Ignition as melee spell attack if the enemy is in your melee reach.
Now, if the enemy is within melee reach of the magus, they could choose to make ignition as a melee spell attack and then attack with a ranged attack, since Starlit Span says:
"When you use Spellstrike, you can make a ranged weapon or ranged unarmed Strike, as long as the target is within the first range increment of your ranged weapon or ranged unarmed attack. You can deliver the spell even if its range is shorter than the range increment of your ranged attack."
But because you would need to be shooting someone right next to you, it's not a very useful feature.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I agree with TheFinish that the wording precludes a Magus getting d6s unless adjacent. The Magus isn't choosing some melee version to launch at range; the Magus casts the spell and the spell acts accordingly.
I'll actually disagree here.
If I consider the normal spell text to be the "base" rules, and the Starlit Span to be the "more specific" override, then that also works to enable Ignition's melee version at range.
The spell does not get to "override" Starlit Span unless the GM thinks the spell text is specifically written to override it.
_______________________
What it comes down to is the RaI of that body text mechanic. And imo, the text of Ignition is clearly not intended to be a super-specific future-proof override of "melee at range" interactions.
To rephrase; the author wrote Ignition assuming the base case, where the PC needs to be in melee range to make a melee spell attack.
When something abnormal enables melee spell attacks at a distance, those abilities are actually rather soft / vague. They specify ~"the range of the spell", not something super narrow. There's no callout of "Range entry" or "Range parameter," etc.
That means the GM needs to think about the intent of Ignition's construction of that melee version option.
The GM might rule that the new "touch spell at range" ability updates/overrides "melee reach" text inside Ignition, same as the Range parameter.
Or, the GM might determine that the spell's specific construction was chosen with intent to prevent such an interaction.
Basically, if the GM thinks Ignition's text is intended to give it an alternate "melee reach mode," and they allow something like Reach Spell to work with the melee version, then it is being consistent to also allow Starlit Span.
If a GM is a RaW literalist, then no. That PoV means the Ignition text is not providing an alt range mode; it's a unique mechanic that really does require the target to be in melee range, full stop.
To them, they might say something like "the spell should have listed two different ranges in the Range parameter if it wanted to work like that"
________________
And this is a legit RaI required determination. Mechanics being created inside body text often do so without the table parameters like "Targets" "Range" etc. That's imo why the "see text" has become so popular. Paizo doesn't want players to get the wrong idea when the table entry says one thing, but the body text can contextually override it.
Paizo would rather not give them any table value, to force both options onto the same level, lol.
And Ignition being such an old spell fits into that progression perfectly, where a modern rewrite *would* likely list 2 range entries, or use that "see text" option.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Point the player to Gouging Claw and Telekinetic Projectile like all of the other Magi.
You could also allow the melee version of Ignition to work with Starlit Span as a houserule because it isn't overpowered.