|
There is a difference between divine and arcane magic. We are arguing one exception to that general rule. D&D and PF are full of exceptions to general rules.
Regarding the arcane/divine divide there are many exceptions. One of the more prominent is the bard. He can cast cure spells (normally the province of the divine) as arcane spells. All the bard's spells are arcane. The bard if he takes the scribe scroll feat could write an arcane version of cure spells. Another bard can use this but a wizard cannot because it is not on his spell list.
A witch is also an arcane caster and presents the same question.
The question here also becomes can a divine caster use a cure scroll scribed by a bard. I think the obvious answer is yes based upon what I presented before.
Wizards cannot cast spells from divine scrolls (not unless they use UMD or something similar).
But can a wizard add a spell from a divined spell scroll into his spellbook (provided that it IS on his spell list)?
I'd say yes in a very limited sense. An arcane theurge can do it. Also I would allow the spells in the Arcane(magic) domain to be learned cross class. Other than those two exceptions no.
I'm sure there's isn't a concrete "you can't do exactly this" in the rules but the separation of divine and arcane is clearly established. The core says you can't use the "wrong" kind several different ways. Just because we've found an edge case that isn't specifically listed doesn't mean we should just allow it. The precedent is clear. Follow the pattern.
That being said...
I'm convinced the divine version of protection from evil looks like this when you read magic it: "ask God."
Same with all the divine spells. Even were a wizard to decipher the divine version of spell he could manage, the result wouldn't be useful to him. Following its instructions just doesn't work. With Use Magic Device, he can manage though.
I'm sure there's isn't a concrete "you can't do exactly this" in the rules but the separation of divine and arcane is clearly established. The core says you can't use the "wrong" kind several different ways. Just because we've found an edge case that isn't specifically listed doesn't mean we should just allow it. The precedent is clear. Follow the pattern.
That being said...
I'm convinced the divine version of protection from evil looks like this when you read magic it: "ask God."
Same with all the divine spells. Even were a wizard to decipher the divine version of spell he could manage, the result wouldn't be useful to him. Following its instructions just doesn't work. With Use Magic Device, he can manage though.
Isn't the bigger problem balance. If the two Ar interchangeable a cleric could hand a wizard copies of all the spells that are on both lists.
|
|
That is a problem and that situation is what prompted this thread (according to RD).
Here is the thing though. If you read all the divine spell stuff it never says that divine magic is prayers. The only spell that is a prayer is Prayer. Even that one does not say pray in the spell description.
Spells are not granted by a divine being (according to the rules). Now if you angry up your specific divine being then he can take your spells away (similar to a paladin). In previous editions this link was much clearer. The power of the deity you worshiped limited your maximum spell power (demigod, lesser god, greater god). In this edition it is not so clearly linked.
In terms of balance I think this is not such an issue. The cleric would need to take the scribe scroll feat, pay the cost of the scrolls, and then the wizard needs to pay to scribe them (negligible but part of the overall cost here). If the cleric, who is not guarnteed to have a high int, has shorted spellcraft then he could fail with some frequency. In rich campaigns that, like all magic item creation, will be a problem, in others not so much.
edit:
I just want to add that the rule says: . Instead, the character chooses a particular time of day to pray and receive spells. It undercuts my point a bit but it is important to notice that you pray for spells. These spells you receive are not listed as being different from arcane spells except that to cast a divine scroll you must have the divine spell list. Otherwise the scroll is not limited for other uses.
|
|
I'm sure there's isn't a concrete "you can't do exactly this" in the rules but the separation of divine and arcane is clearly established. The core says you can't use the "wrong" kind several different ways. Just because we've found an edge case that isn't specifically listed doesn't mean we should just allow it. The precedent is clear. Follow the pattern.
The problem with precedent in this game is that the rules are chock full of exceptions. Exceptions to rules is the stock in trade of this game. From individual classes that mix arcane and divine (witch, bard, theurge--maybe others) to class abilities that override certain rules.
Rules exceptions are everywhere. Follow the general principle is not really a good guideline unless you are making an ingame call.
Like I said before, I think the rules support this corner case. I would not allow it in my game but if we are talking RAW then the case exists.
What the heck, I'll toss in my two cents. I say yes, the wizard can copy the spell once they decipher it. Remember, he's not actually casting the thing, which would require the proper ability score and casting type. Also, whether or not the scroll is divine or arcane, Read Magic or a DC 20-29 Spellcraft check is still required to understand what the heck is written down. Since magic is so similar once it's put out into the world anyways, as seen by how the same spells are treated identically when cast by both a divine and arcane caster, we can infer there's some sort of universal code to it that a wizard can translate. Plus, arcane magic is just reversed engineered from divine magic on Golarion anyways.
|
Logically, it would make perfect sense to not be able to scribe it.
A scroll is very different than a spellbook. A scroll is a completed spell, placed on paper.
A spellbook is a list of instructions on how to cast a spell.
Last I checked, divine casters don't carry spellbooks, in part because it isn't the casting of the spell that is the source of the magical outcome, rather it is the divine source providing the power.
I can write the words and the motions in a book. For arcane casting, that is enough. If you move and speak properly, it happens.
For divine casting, it isn't the motion or the words, persay. It's that you have been permitted to access the divine power because of who you are.
In a scroll, the person who made the scroll "loaded" it with the spell. You are just releasing it.
With memorization...different mechanic.
|
|
I think another thing to consider is that a scroll is consumed by copying into a spell book. I think there is a decided RAI that a divine scroll can't be used this way. There is circumstantial evidence that it can't be used this way. There is the "use" verb regarding scrolls. I think the case against it it pretty strong.
So here's a possible mechanical explanation (as I see it) to why a wizard who can scribe a scroll into her spellbook can't cast it from the scroll.
Scrolls are spell completion items, which means that most of the spell is already cast, only a final bit is required from the user. A lot of spells that are both divine and arcane has a different requirement, that is, Divine Focus vs. material component. Thus, even if the wizard can spend an hour studying the scroll getting the gist of the spell, the divine finishing touch of the scroll (throwing a hand in the air shouting "Aaahhhh") doesn't work for her. She could, on the other hand, use an arcane finisher (pointing a finger, saying something like "A'ffharagst"), even on a scroll made by her wizard friend, because they have left a part of the spell for the user to finish which is about as sensible to her. She is able to recognize this difference and deal with it in written form, but is unable to finish casting the divine spell directly as that way of doing it does not make sense to her (she would be prone to failing at it, maybe pronouncing the aaahhhh wrong as anyone untrained in UMD would).
|
For more RAW confusion you can have a divine scroll that a cleric/scriber cannot use. For example a cleric couldn't cast a scroll of a domain spell that is not a cleric spell, The user must have the spell on her class list. Domains do not add to your class spell list.
A cleric gains one domain spell slot for each level of cleric spell she can cast, from 1st on up. Each day, a cleric can prepare one of the spells from her two domains in that slot. If a domain spell is not on the cleric spell list, a cleric can prepare it only in her domain spell slot. Domain spells cannot be used to cast spells spontaneously.
- or did i miss something?
But I see no evidence of this anywhere in the rules.
The very fact that they absolutely differentiate between Arcane and Divine seems to be the evidence.
They clearly and unambiguoulsy state that there is a difference between magics: Arcane and Divine.They clearly and unambiguously state that Divine casters can only use divine scrolls and Arcane casters arcane ones.
If the intent was not there to make them different and seperate then there would just be 'Magic' and 'Scrolls' and no seperate sections on Divine scrolls and Divine Magical Writing and Arcane scrolls and Arcane Magical writings.
Whilst the mechanics are handle nearly identically for the two for ease of play, it is clear there are differences in the very fact that they classify them as different, Arcane and Divine.
Since scrolls have several uses (as one shot spell storage devices and as mediums of spell knowledge trade to name the primary two for Arcanists) the section of what an Arcanist can and cannot USE would be applicaple to scribing spells from scrolls. Arcanists use arcane scrolls and cannot use Divine scrolls hence they cannot scribe divine versions of spells that are also on their arcane lists.
If an arcane caster isn't able to even cast a spell from a divine scroll, Ravingdork, what would you guess that the designers intended regarding the ability to learn the spell?
The problem with saying "Paizo make a clear distinction between Arcane and Divine" is that they don't in their modules. That, and Use Magic Device appears to modify many of these arguments.
For instance, the last 1e Adventure Path (Tyrant's Grasp) doesn't appear to state if any of its scrolls are divine or arcane. Granted I may have missed one, but the second scroll type encountered is Burning Gaze which is both a druid spell and a sorcerer/wizard spell - so is it divine or arcane?
If this is a mistake, I would expect it only in the first few adventure paths, by the last I'd expect it to be sorted. That they haven't gives me the impression that's isn't as much of a hard, absolute rule as it first appears.
This leads to the following problem: The druid and the wizard both ask if they can use it. I have to say "sure" because Paizo haven't made it clear which one it is. Even worse, PRD on Use Magic Device says: "In addition, casting a spell from a scroll requires a minimum score (10 + spell level) in the appropriate ability" - so for the aforementioned Burning Gaze is that Wisdom (Druid), Charisma (Sorcerer), or Intelligence (Wizard)?
That ambiguity in both arcane/divine and ability then gives a foot in the door for questions like this one.
Then the wizard becomes a mystic theurge and quotes the PRD's "Use Magic Device lets you use a magic item as if you had the spell ability or class features of another class" and says "So that allows me to scribe a divine scroll, and use my max-ranked Use Magic Device to learn that spell as a wizard, right?"
It's hard to say "no" when Paizo have given every indication they don't care by never specifying if scrolls are divine or arcane, and Use Magic Device does appear to allow the cross-over.
Does this take the cake for oldest necro?
|
|
The utility of a ten years necro is questionable, but it is very clear that the divine version of a spell isn't in your arcane class spell list, even if you have a spell with the same name in your spell list.
To reply to Andrew Rutherford, Paizo rarely specific if a scroll is arcane or divine, if a scroll of a spell like Summon planar ally is limited to a specific Ally of a specific deity, and so on simply because the loot in the adventure is meant to be usable by the most diverse party and playstyle as possible.
It is the GM job to decide if he wants a universe where a scroll of Summon planar ally is a scroll of Summon planar ally (Cayden faith) or is usable by anyone capable to cast the spell, it is the job of the GM to decide if the loot you take in the temple is all divine spells or if there are scrolls of arcane spells.
Paizo and the module writers don't know if your party has arcane, divine, or psychic spellcasters, so they create a more generic product. The nuances are the GM job.
Longest necro I've seen was 11 years, and this one's barely 10 even if you don't count the last time it was revived.
IIRC there's a default list of classes to go through for items where you don't know the actual source - first wizard, cleric, druid, and then the partial casters. It might be for PFS though.
|
|
Longest necro I've seen was 11 years, and this one's barely 10 even if you don't count the last time it was revived.
12 for what I know.
IIRC there's a default list of classes to go through for items where you don't know the actual source - first wizard, cleric, druid, and then the partial casters. It might be for PFS though.
PFS has that order for the crafting costs. In PFS, from what I know, scrolls are of any "class" that can cast them at the listed level. If a Cleric wants to buy a scroll of Cure Light Wounds at the end of an adventure, it is a divine spell, if a Bard or Witch in the same playing group wants to buy it, it is the arcane version.
AFAIK, it is done to be sure that the players can find equipment for their characters.
Saying that it isn't clear is very disingenuous. The fact that some module author may (or may not) have listed every magic item correctly does not mean that somehow the very clear indication in the basic rules on scrolls and their use are invalidated universally is not going to make much traction.
Far from disingenuous, it's onjectively right. The statement made was about modules, and for those, Paizo does indeed not make a clear distinction between arcane scrolls and divine scrolls. Yes, the rules say that scrolls are made type-specific, but that doesn't change the undeniable fact that in modules (and APs), Paizo does not make that distinction.
Your statement is really the disingenuous one. It's also not "some module author", it's the absolute standard throughtout all of Paizo's PF1 publishing. I'm not sure Paizo has put indication of the type of magic on any scrolls. I've looked through a couple of both AP books and modules, and found plenty of scrolls with absolutely no way to indicate the what type of caster they were crafted by (mainly found in generic treasure).
• If the spell is only arcane or divine, then it's an arcane or divine spell.
My spreadsheet say there're a total of 2905 spells in the game. Out of these spells, presuming that psychic casters can scribe their own type of scrolls, there're just twenty spells not scribable by more than one type (the alchemist exclusive spells that an Antiquarian can cast as arcane spells).
• If it's both, common sense would say to look at any other spells on the scroll and see what they are and use that as a strong indication.
What? Scrolls have only one spell...
• If all that fails, then you use the normal guidelines for determining class for spells or abilities. It typically goes: sorcerer/wizard, cleric, druid, bard, paladin, ranger.
Those are the rules for determining attributes of spell-like abilities duplicating the effects of spells that vary by caster. Using them for scrolls is nothing but a houserule, and one that vastly favors Wizards.
In PFS, (...) If a Cleric wants to buy a scroll of Cure Light Wounds at the end of an adventure, it is a divine spell, if a Bard or Witch in the same playing group wants to buy it, it is the arcane version.
PFS treats scrolls as typeless. "For the sake of simplicity, there is no difference between an arcane and divine scroll or wand. Thus a bard and cleric may both use the same scroll of cure moderate wounds." I apply that rule in my home games, as I see zero reason why scrolls should be typed - it only makes the game worse for everyone.
|
|
PFS treats scrolls as typeless. "For the sake of simplicity, there is no difference between an arcane and divine scroll or wand. Thus a bard and cleric may both use the same scroll of cure moderate wounds." I apply that rule in my home games, as I see zero reason why scrolls should be typed - it only makes the game worse for everyone.
I disagree. For me, it increases flavor with a minimal quantity of work on my part as a GM or player, and it allows better placement of treasure. If I want to give one-shot use of a spell, without making it available to be copied in the wizard spellbook, giving a divine version works well.
Choosing a deity is not required for many divine casters here is an excerpt from the cleric as an example “ As their powers are influenced by their faith, all clerics must focus their worship upon a divine source. While the vast majority of clerics revere a specific deity, a small number dedicate themselves to a divine concept worthy of devotion—such as battle, death, justice, or knowledge—free of a deific abstraction. (Work with your GM if you prefer this path to selecting a specific deity.)”. Therefore divine power must have a separate source available to such casters. This may lend some weight behind the argument that there is only one type of magic but multiple ways to access it. I don’t have a dog in this fight just throwing this out there to add to the discussion.
Perhaps it is the faith itself of divine casters that powers their magic as opposed to divine beings similar to the strength of will and mind that powers psychic casters.
In Golarion specifically, all clerics do have to pick a god, but the rules make this statement because not everyone plays on Golarion. But this was sort of undermined by oracle not at all needing to even worship the power that gave them power (nor even act in it's interest to retain them) and then that was further undermined by inquisitor being a spontaneous caster of their own will but also needing to worship their god to get their juice back. So.... Shrug
Druids don’t need to choose a deity only revere nature(admittedly fairly similar) but if they become ex-druids due to shifting away from neutral alignment the can immediately choose to become planar extremist druids which seem to draw power from the outer planes themselves so I don’t know how that fits in with the whole divine power mosaic.