Why Magus?

[Parallaxe]

Hello.

Is the Magus (NOT the sword saint, that is another discussion) just worse than a Sorcerer for this game?

Given the power of spells and the raw amount of spell casting you get in the game it feels like the Magus is just worse than the Sorcerer (or Wizard).

The added melee damage seems to be inferior to the amount and power of high level spells.

Other opinions?

[Edstyles]

Originally posted by Parallaxe:

Hello.

Is the Magus (NOT the sword saint, that is another discussion) just worse than a Sorcerer for this game?

Given the power of spells and the raw amount of spell casting you get in the game it feels like the Magus is just worse than the Sorcerer (or Wizard).

The added melee damage seems to be inferior to the amount and power of high level spells.

Other opinions?

well you are more of a meele as a magus than a caster. So doesnt make sense to pair them that way. Magus is good but not necessarily the best meele. Its a tier i would say.

If you want a caster then wizard is your pick , but just so u know casters have very few spells early game and only a very few of them are actually usefull early game and this game is all about being strong early so you may potentially dislike being a caster . specially if you are not spontaneous caster.

My suggest is to try a certain companion in game that is a caster and see how you like it.

[Yannir]

Well, Magus is a Fighter with spells rather than a Sorcerer with melee skills. Their spell list encourages the use of armor, for example. They gain benefits to casting in melee. Sword Saint just takes it a step further.

So, you're asking the wrong question. You wouldn't replace a Sorcerer/Wizard with a Magus. You'd replace a Fighter. Or an Archer if you're the ranged archetype.

Magus is like a 50%/50% split between Fighter and Wizard where a Bloodrager is more like 70% Fighter and 30% Sorcerer. SS is somewhere between those.

[Edstyles]

im currently trying the black blade magus . Its probably slightly inferior to sword saint but its been fine so far on core.

[mbradtke]

sorcecer is a full spellcaster, magus is melee DD and a bit of a tank as well, arcane casters tend to become very powerful mid-late game but they are lacking the early levels, of course you could also play a sorcecer with a warrior dip and set starter attributes that fit a fighter and go eldrich knight, is up to you, lots of options, magus is more straight forward and you can make less mistakes here and will always be useful while you can make more mistakes with a melee sorcecer but sorcecer has more potential probably but in general prestige classes are more for advanced playstyles if u have a certain plan

[Erei]

Also don't forget that each class have BaB that grow with level. This will add more attack per turn and increase your base chance to hit. Sorcerer have the lowest, magus have a higher one. Meaning a more martial oriented character will benefit a lot more from it.

In essence, if you want pure caster then sorcerer. If you want to use magic to "buff" your martial character, then magus.

It's the same between cleric/oracle vs warpriest. The first are more casters, the others are more hybrid.

[Razer]

Magus got hit hard after the change to elemental barrage which they could proc on every attack. The class is built around a kit that has no use in WotR which is spell combat. Two handing a weapon is always going to do more damage over adding a single attack with a touch attack since they just to crap damage compared to how strong everything else is in the game. Let alone most enemies later in the game are immune the those damage types of those spells too.

I kind of was thinking to use intensified spell (new feat) to go along with completely normal spell to make it more useful, but then I think two handing is still more powerful in the end. The whole class is just poor in terms of class mechanics.

Sword saint is great in that it focusses on offense and defense more than any other magus. Not sure if it surpasses a base fighter though, but it's good. Eldritch Scion is another solid option due to the bloodlines.

You can turn magus into a caster, but you're losing other things in the progress and that would probably only work with Eldritch Scion, but then why not pick sorcerer?

In terms of what's good there's better options than Magus in all respects. If you want a spellcasting figther? Best to go with bloodrager (primalist still the best class). you want full spellcasting but also melee? Then just go sorcerer and dip into Eldritch Knight. You want a bit of both? Skald is the best class there and provides so so much more.

I really like the Magus class for some reason. But ultimately it's just not very good compared to the other classes that do similar things.

[Parallaxe]

Hello.

You basically confirmed my own thoughts. As it stands the abse mechanic of Magus is useless. I can see it being much better in a low power setting but here with unlimited power it just can't keep up.

The exception of course is sword saint which many think is the single strongest archetype in the game (properly built that is). But I dislike super OP stuff.

Anyway, thx for the answers.

[Razer]

Originally posted by Parallaxe:

Hello.

You basically confirmed my own thoughts. As it stands the abse mechanic of Magus is useless. I can see it being much better in a low power setting but here with unlimited power it just can't keep up.

The exception of course is sword saint which many think is the single strongest archetype in the game (properly built that is). But I dislike super OP stuff.

Anyway, thx for the answers.

I wouldn't say Sword Saint is OP. It has very slow spellcasting progression and medium BAB. It gets some really good unique feats, but a fighter can do the same basically and gets more feats and has high BAB. I think Mutation Warrior outclasses Sword Saint. Of course if you're looking to go to unfair then the INT to AC may be required. I don't play those high level difficulties.

I saw a video of a guy doing Eldritch Scion build with Azata with Zippy Magic and spamming Chain Lightning. That can definitely work, but it's an investment into offensive spells for a class that has some limitations around it. Spellcasting progression is slower than sorcerer, but then again Eldritch Scion is a good melee class as well. So I think there's something to say for it if you don't want to multiclass, but you do want a spellslinging melee character. It's not OP. It's not the best, but it's definitely viable. Just pick an elemental bloodline and a dragon secondary bloodline and you're good to go with that.

If you're not into the offensive part, but just want the arcane buffs and party buffs then Skald is the way to go. They get rage powers that extend to the team and the best defensive spells from the wizard spell list. Lot's of skillpoints and skills. It's a very versatile character.

I played NWN2 as a Bard (3.5 Bard was really good) and I enjoyed it so much I wanted to play that in Pathfinder too, but Pathfinder doesn't have Curse Song and the AoE of the Bard song buff is not stackable, plus limited use. There's also no Legionaire's March that turns all characters in the team into high BAB characters including additional attacks. Then I found Skald, which is more combat oriented, but still has some bard features. It was a alot of fun playing that class. Especially later in the game when you can give everyone increased critical multiplier and pounce.

[Erei]

Probably the best thing about sword saint is crit fishing. Although it was nerfed a lot. I would not call it "OP" nor "useless" either. The big issue is how fast your arcane pool will vanish.

As for sorcerer being a better martial than magus, i'll say no. best they can do is probably spend lot of time and resources trying, but whatever they do the magus can to, and they start as better martial.

Sorcerer literally have the worse BAB of the game (with wizards), so inherently they are the worst martial in the game. Less attack per round, less hit chance. Then you have the attributes, which quickly becomes a mess (con, obviously, dex for ac maybe hit chance, charisma or whatever for spellcasting, most likely strength unless you burn feats....). You need basically everything at this point. Which is also an issue for gear (you want martial gear but also caster gear that often compete for the same spot). And also feats. Sorcerers are not exactly feat rich, but you need spell oriented feat and martial oriented feats. Worst still if you go finesse (2 extra feat or 1mythic and 1 feat). Can't multiclass much either, the more you do, the less effective your sorcerer spellcasting is (unless it's loremaster but it's hardly a martial either). Multiclass too much and your spellbook is just a magus one. At this point you just have a DIY magus.
Now you might say "but transformation !". True, but you only get +4 which is meh at mid-late game, not to mention it's enhancement like all the belts and stuff and you get +6 eventually. And then you can't cast anymore, which lead to the question "why do you play sorcerer to use a spell to become a worse martial that get all that stuff and more inherently ?". The magus don't need it. And even if you want it on your magus, they can cast it anyway (up to level 6 spells). And if you really, really want all those buffs then pick a brown fur transmuter and you have them. In this race, sorcerer start behind and no matter how much they try to keep up, the magus can do it to. So you'll never really bridge that gap. Eventually, you'll invest a LOT just to try to be the same.

While martial sorcerer can work, it's a lot of work to be what a martial is by default. The big issue I see, is why play magus when you can play a regular martial and have a pocket brown fur give you all the goodies.

[Edstyles]

yeah sword saint isnt op . Its ok . The extra ac is nice but not needed. In the end pets are some of the best tanks . So an arcanerider might actually be just as good if not better imo at least in the early game and thats when you want to be powerful.

[Razer]

Originally posted by Erei:

Probably the best thing about sword saint is crit fishing. Although it was nerfed a lot. I would not call it "OP" nor "useless" either. The big issue is how fast your arcane pool will vanish.

As for sorcerer being a better martial than magus, i'll say no. best they can do is probably spend lot of time and resources trying, but whatever they do the magus can to, and they start as better martial.

Sorcerer literally have the worse BAB of the game (with wizards), so inherently they are the worst martial in the game. Less attack per round, less hit chance. Then you have the attributes, which quickly becomes a mess (con, obviously, dex for ac maybe hit chance, charisma or whatever for spellcasting, most likely strength unless you burn feats....). You need basically everything at this point. Which is also an issue for gear (you want martial gear but also caster gear that often compete for the same spot). And also feats. Sorcerers are not exactly feat rich, but you need spell oriented feat and martial oriented feats. Worst still if you go finesse (2 extra feat or 1mythic and 1 feat). Can't multiclass much either, the more you do, the less effective your sorcerer spellcasting is (unless it's loremaster but it's hardly a martial either). Multiclass too much and your spellbook is just a magus one. At this point you just have a DIY magus.
Now you might say "but transformation !". True, but you only get +4 which is meh at mid-late game, not to mention it's enhancement like all the belts and stuff and you get +6 eventually. And then you can't cast anymore, which lead to the question "why do you play sorcerer to use a spell to become a worse martial that get all that stuff and more inherently ?". The magus don't need it. And even if you want it on your magus, they can cast it anyway (up to level 6 spells). And if you really, really want all those buffs then pick a brown fur transmuter and you have them. In this race, sorcerer start behind and no matter how much they try to keep up, the magus can do it to. So you'll never really bridge that gap. Eventually, you'll invest a LOT just to try to be the same.

While martial sorcerer can work, it's a lot of work to be what a martial is by default. The big issue I see, is why play magus when you can play a regular martial and have a pocket brown fur give you all the goodies.

How good your individual character can get also depends on your party. Not every party will have a brown fur transmuter or a skald even though those teams do very well due to increased party buffs.

A sorcerer can be a better martial class with multiclassing into Eldritch Knight as I mentioned before. you basically turn it into a medium BAB class, but retain your bloodlines and full spellcasting progression.

In the end, it's not about who is the most OP or who does what better though. It's about role playing and what you want your MC to be in terms of character and class. Not everyone plays on unfair and needs to min max ;)

[Brother Santodes]

the reason magus is utterly broken is that you will hit the target the AC does not matter.
it's just Dimension Blade it doesn't need casts to be good at anything but they still aid a lot.
and the number of strike you can do is more then enough to kill every boss int he game.

and Sword Saint is just stupid you get weapon master the reason fighter have good DPS while not been a fighter...

[Erei]

Originally posted by Razer:

How good your individual character can get also depends on your party. Not every party will have a brown fur transmuter or a skald even though those teams do very well due to increased party buffs.

A sorcerer can be a better martial class with multiclassing into Eldritch Knight as I mentioned before. you basically turn it into a medium BAB class, but retain your bloodlines and full spellcasting progression.

In the end, it's not about who is the most OP or who does what better though. It's about role playing and what you want your MC to be in terms of character and class. Not everyone plays on unfair and needs to min max ;)

While I kinda agree on party composition and the rp part, I still don't feel like sorc/ek is a better gish. I mean, magus can cast with offhand and martial (range or melee depending) with the main hand. For RP, you can't beat that for a gish IMO. Plus you get all the arcane weapons and possibly mage metamagic. Magus is quite literally the "out of the box" gish. Sorc + EK is the DIY gish.
And if you go more powergaming, then magus can go up to lvl 6 spells which is nice. The rest can be cast by a mage type or using scrolls.

And let's be honest, most people tailor their party around the MC, rarely the opposite.

[Razer]

Originally posted by Erei:

Originally posted by Razer:

How good your individual character can get also depends on your party. Not every party will have a brown fur transmuter or a skald even though those teams do very well due to increased party buffs.

A sorcerer can be a better martial class with multiclassing into Eldritch Knight as I mentioned before. you basically turn it into a medium BAB class, but retain your bloodlines and full spellcasting progression.

In the end, it's not about who is the most OP or who does what better though. It's about role playing and what you want your MC to be in terms of character and class. Not everyone plays on unfair and needs to min max ;)

While I kinda agree on party composition and the rp part, I still don't feel like sorc/ek is a better gish. I mean, magus can cast with offhand and martial (range or melee depending) with the main hand. For RP, you can't beat that for a gish IMO. Plus you get all the arcane weapons and possibly mage metamagic. Magus is quite literally the "out of the box" gish. Sorc + EK is the DIY gish.
And if you go more powergaming, then magus can go up to lvl 6 spells which is nice. The rest can be cast by a mage type or using scrolls.

And let's be honest, most people tailor their party around the MC, rarely the opposite.

The offhand spellcasting I think really only works in turn based. In hectic battles you're not going to use that feature at all. Especially if you're in melee range since you'll want full damage so two handing a melee weapon. It'll be very situational.

I'm not saying Magus is bad right, and it is stronger than Sorcerer in therms of melee, but my point was mainly that if you want a full spellcasting class and still want melee then Sorcerer/EK is your route. And there's nothing wrong with it. It's not a DIY I feel since EK is a prestige class. But I get your point. If looking at pure classes then Magus does something that no other class can bring to the table. The question more is, are you ok with the sacrifices to both classes it represents to take the middle ground.

Like I said, I really like the magus class. Or rather the idea of it. It's just that in WotR it never really shines.

[Glyph]

Magus can be very strong. Spell combat and spellstrike together can output a lot damage in a single action, especially since you can make spells crit when you do it. Unlike a sorcerer when you're out of spells a magus is a passable melee fighter. Managing spells and melee together can get onerous so I do favor the sword saint just for simplicity.