Ability modifiers and ability usage / spells


Rules Questions


Just thought I'd get a couple of things cleared up.
Domain powers usable 3 times a day + wisdom:

1) If I have wis of 12, then cast owl's wisdom on myself, can I use it 4 times a day, or 6 times a day?

2) If I have wis of 16, then drink a dexterity mutagen (-2 to wis), can i use it 6 times a day, or 5 times a day?

Spells:

3) If i'm a cleric, with wis 10, but someone casts owl's wisdom on me, can I cast upto 4th level spells or not?

4) If i'm a cleric with wis 12, then I drink a dexterity mutagen (-2 to wis), can I cast upto 2nd level spells or not?


*sniff* Is that the pungent scent of a can of worms being opened I smell?

(1) & (2) According to the CRB, neither of these changes your uses/day. According to this FAQ as written, both of them change your uses/day. This may or may not be the intent of the FAQ.

(3) Doesn't matter, since you have none prepared. :-P

(4) By the CRB, yes. By the FAQ, no. (The FAQ also results in fighters hit by a ray of enfeeblement being crushed under the weight of their own armor, which seems the same as this to me.)

Let the arguments begin!


Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:

*sniff* Is that the pungent scent of a can of worms being opened I smell?

(1) & (2) According to the CRB, neither of these changes your uses/day. According to this FAQ as written, both of them change your uses/day. This may or may not be the intent of the FAQ.

(3) Doesn't matter, since you have none prepared. :-P

(4) By the CRB, yes. By the FAQ, no. (The FAQ also results in fighters hit by a ray of enfeeblement being crushed under the weight of their own armor, which seems the same as this to me.)

Let the arguments begin!

Why is it whenever I try to ask what i think is a simple question it opens up worm cans?!

Oh, and just for the sake of arguments lets all just PRETEND this hypothetical cleric is a spontaneous caster. (I should have used charisma and oracle for the example, but I was being lazy and following on from my previous domains question.)

In all seriousness though, I'd love to hear a definitive answer to this.

It says: "(clerics) who receive owl's wisdom do not gain any additional bonus spells for the increased Wisdom, but the save DCs for their spells increase." But is that referring to just bonus spells or being able to cast the normal spells from character progression?
"(to) cast a spell, a cleric must have a Wisdom score equal to at least 10 + the spell level. "
Now clearly base spells and bonus spells from having high wis are different things...
Regardless, I'm just so confused...


(3) & (4) are pretty much the same---that is, the one thing that we know is that bonuses and penalties act identically. So by the CRB, the level you are able to cast at does not change; by the FAQ as written, it does; by the FAQ's intent, who knows for sure, but IMHO it probably does.

Whereas in (1) & (2) IMHO the FAQ does not mean for the uses/day to change, even though it straightforwardly implies that it does change.

(And we'd all love to have a definitive answer to these. I'm not kidding about this being a real mess.)


Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:

(3) & (4) are pretty much the same---that is, the one thing that we know is that bonuses and penalties act identically. So by the CRB, the level you are able to cast at does not change; by the FAQ as written, it does; by the FAQ's intent, who knows for sure, but IMHO it probably does.

Whereas in (1) & (2) IMHO the FAQ does not mean for the uses/day to change, even though it straightforwardly implies that it does change.

(And we'd all love to have a definitive answer to these. I'm not kidding about this being a real mess.)

From that FAQ link i gather the following (answering my own questions):

"The purpose of the temporary ability score ruling is to make it so you don't have to rebuild your character every time you get a bull's strength or similar spell; it just summarizes the most common game effects relative to that ability score."

1) 4 uses per day.

2) 6 uses per day.

3) (pretending spontaneous - so going by oracle instead) "To learn - a spell, an oracle must have a Charisma score equal.... etc" So you CAN cast 4th level spells, but you havnt learned any. So no.

4) "To cast a spell, a cleric must have... etc" So you KNOW the 2nd level spells, but you can't cast any. So no.


Even if we went by the FAQ temporary ability score increases do not last long enough for you to rest and regain your uses/spells per day.

So any increase in uses/spells per day that you may gain doesn't help because you haven't rested.


SillyString wrote:
Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:

*sniff* Is that the pungent scent of a can of worms being opened I smell?

(1) & (2) According to the CRB, neither of these changes your uses/day. According to this FAQ as written, both of them change your uses/day. This may or may not be the intent of the FAQ.

(3) Doesn't matter, since you have none prepared. :-P

(4) By the CRB, yes. By the FAQ, no. (The FAQ also results in fighters hit by a ray of enfeeblement being crushed under the weight of their own armor, which seems the same as this to me.)

Let the arguments begin!

Why is it whenever I try to ask what i think is a simple question it opens up worm cans?!

Oh, and just for the sake of arguments lets all just PRETEND this hypothetical cleric is a spontaneous caster.

In all seriousness though, I'd love to hear a definitive answer to this.

THE DEFINITIVE ANSWER IS HERE!!! LOOK UPON IT AND TREMBLE MORTALS!!!

-->:

It definitely wouldn't be a can of worms if there was a definitive answer. Expect table variation.

RAW, it would seem, doesn't say that your spell slots are dependent on your wisdom score. You simply cannot cast if your score is not high enough. It would also seem that you can prepare spells in those slots, so long the spells are of a sufficiently low level (thus a 10th level cleric with a Wisdom of 10 can prepare A LOT of Orisons.)

Now, I would argue, if you cast Spontaneously, you can, when your Wisdom goes from 10 to 14, cast 4th level spells based on these previously existing spell slots. The problem is that you still don't learn any spells, as it's well established (if not RAW) that you need a Permanent bonus (such as from a base score or a Headband +2 that you where for more than 24 hours) in order to learn spells.

Thus, if you already know the spells, you could cast them. This might happen because:
- You had a +4 Headband of Wisdom, but it was destroyed, and now you've had a Owl's Wisdom cast on you.
- You spontaneously apply Metamagic to your Cantrips in order to use up your new high level slots (QUICKENED STABILIZE!!! HOORAH!!!)

Please note, a Cleric's Spontaneous Cure/Inflict uses up Spells, not Spell slots.

This is how...:

You open a can of worms. Unleash the War of Hounds!

EDIT: Gauss, do you know of a FAQ that says you don't get spell slots if you don't have a sufficiently high ability score? I thought it was just you couldn't learn the new spells/gain bonus spell slots for a high ability score.


SillyString wrote:

From that FAQ link i gather the following (answering my own questions):

"The purpose of the temporary ability score ruling is to make it so you don't have to rebuild your character every time you get a bull's strength or similar spell; it just summarizes the most common game effects relative to that ability score."

1) 4 uses per day.

2) 6 uses per day.

3) (pretending spontaneous - so going by oracle instead) "To learn - a spell, an oracle must have a Charisma score equal.... etc" So you CAN cast 4th level spells, but you havnt learned any. So no.

4) "To cast a spell, a cleric must have... etc" So you KNOW the 2nd level spells, but you can't cast any. So no.

I think I'll stick to this unless anyone has any objections and can tell me exactly why i could be wrong, as far as i can see this lines up with the FAQ and the CRB, at least with how i perceive both its RAW and RAI...

I mean the quotes are from both the FAQ and the spellcasting class abilities of the cleric and the oracle, and as far as i can see neither contradict eachother, but i could be wrong.

Basically, any "per day" effect including spells (known OR prepared at the start of that day) are determined at the start of the day, which assumes no temporary bonuses or penalties, beyond those that have become permanent from being active for more than 24 hours. So those per day abilities/spells dont vary throughout the day as you gain or lose modifiers. HOWEVER, not having a high enough stat because of a temporary does prevent you from casting a spell at that moment, but as soon as your stat returns to normal you can cast again.

Thus, owl's wisdom and similar dont help unless to offset a penalty or to increase DCs / checks /saves. (which is plenty already, dont get greedy.) Similarly, temporary penalties dont make you rewrite your character sheet's known/prepared spells every time, as per the RAI and RAW of the FAQ and CRB.

I'm putting that lid on them worms, for the time being.


Anonymous Warrior, the point here is not that you don't get the slots. It is that you cannot use them until you rest and regain your spell slots/uses per day.

Temporary ability score increases don't typically last long enough to do that.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Easiest way to understand the rules and how this works, is to track daily uses separate from "current uses per day".

So if you have normally 4/day and have used 3 today, then adding +4 to an ability would raise your uses per day to 6/day. If you then use 2 more for a total of 5/day then lose the +4 your daily use is back down to 4/day and you have used 5 today. So you don't have any more to use. You still don't if you add +2 to your ability, as that is 5/day and you have used 5. If you again add +4 you are back to 6/day and you have used 5.

No temporary increase will change your spell slots per day, so none of this matters for spells you can cast.


James Risner wrote:


Easiest way to understand the rules and how this works, is to track daily uses separate from "current uses per day".

So if you have normally 4/day and have used 3 today, then adding +4 to an ability would raise your uses per day to 6/day. If you then use 2 more for a total of 5/day then lose the +4 your daily use is back down to 4/day and you have used 5 today. So you don't have any more to use. You still don't if you add +2 to your ability, as that is 5/day and you have used 5. If you again add +4 you are back to 6/day and you have used 5.

Except im not sure adding temporary bonuses effects uses of abilities per day, in fact in almost certain they DONT, as the other things that are considered "per day"(determined at the start of the day) are not, example: known/prepared spells, mental focus points, rounds of rage (rages specifically state they dont increase through temporary con) and many many more. Thus as the intention of the FAQ link is clearly simplification: "The purpose of the temporary ability score ruling is to make it so you don't have to rebuild your character every time you get a bull's strength or similar spell; it just summarizes the most common game effects relative to that ability score." I dont think you should be continually recalculating your uses of abilities per day, rather that they are fixed at the start of each day.

(also explaining the specific mention of temporary bonuses ceasing to be considered temporary after 24 hours)

This is the simplest interpretation of the rules, both as written and for gameplay, and this lines up perfectly with the FAQ and CRB.

Although at the start of this thread I was actually hoping the inverse was true, because it would allow more flexibility and benefit from utilising the buffs in an overpowered way (and thats my style), after being presented with the information it seems pretty clear what the intention was/is and it doesnt even conflict with the RAW.

James Risner wrote:
No temporary increase will change your spell slots per day, so none of this matters for spells you can cast.
CRB wrote:
To prepare or cast a spell, a cleric must have a Wisdom score equal to at least 10 + the spell level.

So it cant give you extra spells, or extra spell slots, or make you unlearn/unprepare any, but temporary penalties damn sure can make you not be able to cast.

(again, how I would have loved the opposite to be true, alas.)

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

In short, SillyString, you are going to get table variance on your interpretations.

Mine is based off of years of rules, FAQ answers, and developer quotes.

Pretty much the whole point of the rules, the FAQ, and the various developer quotes is to prevent utilising the buffs in an overpowered way (and thats my style).


James Risner wrote:

In short, SillyString, you are going to get table variance on your interpretations.

Mine is based off of years of rules, FAQ answers, and developer quotes.

Pretty much the whole point of the rules, the FAQ, and the various developer quotes is to prevent utilising the buffs in an overpowered way (and thats my style).

I dont think theres much room for alternate interpretations personally, and my saying "utilising the buffs in an overpowered way (and thats my style)." was in the context of "how i would love for your interpretation of continually being given more stuff when you get temporary bonuses to be true, because that would result in a way to end up... utilising the buffs in an overpowered way (and thats my style)." so you seem to have misunderstood that too. I just enjoy making the most out of optimizing builds, but I am a stickler for rules and must make sure every step of my understanding is backed up by SOLID raw or errata. Your interpretations may be based off of years of gaming experience, but that just means more risk that you've formed bad habits, and I prefer to base my understanding on RAW rules directly from the RBs, FAQs and developer intervention.

My interpretation of the CRB and FAQs on this is simply to stick to the simplest option, being that unless it specifies you should recalculate something based on uses/day rules, dont. So no greedy extra uses when you temp buff.

Still, we all run the risk of someone producing more recent developer quotes that directly undermine our arguments, and should that happen, I shall always be happy to admit fault and convert!


Player: I am going to cast a spell that gives me extra uses per day.
GM: Ok! You will get them when you next rest and wake up like normal.
Player: But, my spell won't last that long!
GM: Huh, well I guess it won't work then will it?

This is actually an old issue. It cropped up back in 3.X. Pathfinder fixed it with the changes they made to temporary ability scores but then they went back on that (via the FAQ).

But, back in 3.X it didn't work unless the increase lasted long enough to be useful.


Gauss wrote:

Player: I am going to cast a spell that gives me extra uses per day.

GM: Ok! You will get them when you next rest and wake up like normal.
Player: But, my spell won't last that long!
GM: Huh, well find one that does. :P

Player: FINE, i'll go make my own rules, with blackjack, and hookers! in fact, forget the rules! ^-^

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGi6Q1pNbS0

Gauss wrote:
Pathfinder fixed it with the changes they made to temporary ability scores but then they went back on that (via the FAQ)

Yeah, I think it's still fixed, and they dont intend the FAQ to unfix it, what they fixed from 3.x to PF was to make temps function differently for the purpose of uses/day rules such as spells and class abilites, and the FAQ just clarifies that non-uses/day stuff that isnt listed in the CRB does update itself and they just didnt list every single example of that because it'd fill up the whole damn page. (He even says as much in the FAQ)

PF has many great examples of the way rules can become vague if not clearly defined with keyword hierarchies, and i'm sure i'm not normal for finding that as interesting as i do.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

SillyString wrote:
base my understanding on RAW rules directly from the RBs, FAQs and developer intervention.

If that is your actual intent, then follow my suggestion.

Otherwise, you will run into people who don't agree with your interpretation. When that happens, there is no amount of "but this is the only interpretation" that will sway someone that reads a different interpretation than you.


James Risner wrote:
SillyString wrote:
base my understanding on RAW rules directly from the RBs, FAQs and developer intervention.

If that is your actual intent, then follow my suggestion.

Otherwise, you will run into people who don't agree with your interpretation. When that happens, there is no amount of "but this is the only interpretation" that will sway someone that reads a different interpretation than you.

I don't know, most people i talk to seem pretty open to coherent factual discussions, and are often willing to listen to such explanations rather than stubbornly clinging to what could be misconceptions. I just so happen to thoroughly believe i have been presented more evidence of the logic behind the RAI and RAW to support the theory I'm arguing in favor of.

Should new evidence actually be introduced to disprove this theory, in a similar way to the examples provided in this thread count against yours, then I shall rethink my stance. Until then I am content to have found the answers to the questions asked when I created the thread.

Advice: A good way to open me up to your way of thinking more would be to present me with examples of abilities whose "uses per day" are widely accepted as being modified by temporary modifiers, to contrast the way examples of known/prepared spells, mental focus points, rounds of rage and others count as supporting factors to undermine your theory. that's fair, right? Such entries must exist in at least one official PFRB to support you, and showing me such an example, provided the text isnt indicative of "exception rules" would certainly improve your case.

I'm very open to the possibility of being wrong, I just like to be shown why, rather than just told so without supporting evidence, apologies if this is a frustrating stance to have, I mean no offense.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

SillyString wrote:
I'm very open to the possibility of being wrong, I just like to be shown why, rather than just told so without supporting evidence, apologies if this is a frustrating stance to have, I mean no offense.

You seemed to have a preconceived stance and you seemed to be unwilling to accept any evidence to the contrary. If you had that stance, it would be very frustrating. Many of these discussions fall into the frustrating model. An example would be the hundreds of threads still saying you can gain Sneak Attack with a ranged weapon by being in "flanking" position despite the Gang Up FAQ saying you can't. We never got a new FAQ but we did get a PDT post saying no and they wouldn't be updating Gang Up since it is clear as is that ranged attacks can never be flanking. It still doesn't stop many people from saying that position isn't "RAW".

---

Getting back to the topic at hand, the FAQ makes it clear that temporary bonuses

PDT FAQ wrote:

You're usually not using the spell for a 1 min./level increase in your carrying capacity, so that isn't mentioned there

A temporary ability score bonus should affect all of the same stats and rolls that a permanent ability score bonus does.

So everything that uses the store temporarily uses the new higher score.

Sean K Reynolds while on dev team wrote:

The shortest version probably is: any *rolls* based on that ability use the temporary or permanent ability modifier.

You don't roll bonus spells, bonus hit points, rage rounds, numbers of uses of channel energy, and so on. You do roll ability checks, skill checks, break checks, damage, saving throws, attack rolls, and so on.

This confirms the FAQ and goes on to give us semi-reliable way to separate out what may be a way to separate things that are improved vs things that are not.

In various posts over time, things like "spells per day" have tended to fall into the "temporary bonuses don't last long enough" to work. Any other "get your uses once per day with an action" tend to fall into that mold. But things that say "CHA targets excluded" or "CHA uses per day" and "CHA rounds per day" with no pre action, tend to be allowed.

Since there is no agreed upon RAW interpretation that is universal, any discussion on the topic is moot. It will result in table variance if there is a disagreement on the RAW.


James Risner wrote:

Getting back to the topic at hand, the FAQ makes it clear that temporary bonuses

PDT FAQ wrote:

You're usually not using the spell for a 1 min./level increase in your carrying capacity, so that isn't mentioned there

A temporary ability score bonus should affect all of the same stats and rolls that a permanent ability score bonus does.

So everything that uses the store temporarily uses the new higher score.

What it says is all "stats and rolls" not uses of abilities, nowhere does it say uses of abilities are "stats and rolls". And there's a reason the same FAQ doesnt say uses of abilities fall under this catagory.

Sean K Reynolds while on dev team wrote:

The shortest version probably is: any *rolls* based on that ability use the temporary or permanent ability modifier.

You don't roll bonus spells, bonus hit points, rage rounds, numbers of uses of channel energy, and so on. You do roll ability checks, skill checks, break checks, damage, saving throws, attack rolls, and so on.

"You don't roll bonus spells, bonus hit points, rage rounds, numbers of uses of channel energy, and so on." - And so on being uses of abilities like domain 3+wis uses, because you dont roll to determine how many times you can use it. You've done a wonderful job of illustrating more evidence as to why your idea of recalculating how many uses per day of the domain ability you get after every temporary bonus and penalty is completely against RAW and RAI.

Well judging from this i'm glad I managed to bring you round to my way of thinking, finding that Sean K Reynolds quote that perfectly sums up what i've been trying to convey and that clarifies the FAQ in favor of this is the icing on the cake.

To summarise:
Con modifies bumber of bonus hitpoints - temporary con does not.
Con modifies number of rage rounds - temporary con does not.
Cha modifies number of channel energy uses - temporary cha does not. (Thank god you found this one, seeing as it works EXACTLY like a domain power)
Thereby we can assume because it is also not listed in the FAQ AND is not a "stat or roll":
Wis modifies number of domain ability uses - temporary wis does not.

Ergo your:

James Risner wrote:

Easiest way to understand the rules and how this works, is to track daily uses separate from "current uses per day".

So if you have normally 4/day and have used 3 today, then adding +4 to an ability would raise your uses per day to 6/day. If you then use 2 more for a total of 5/day then lose the +4 your daily use is back down to 4/day and you have used 5 today. So you don't have any more to use. You still don't if you add +2 to your ability, as that is 5/day and you have used 5. If you again add +4 you are back to 6/day and you have used 5.

idea is very far from Sean K Reynolds's definition of the rules, my definition of the rules, the FAQ's definition of the rules and the CRB's definition of the rules. Put simply: All of these state that temporary modifiers only effect stats and rolls, not uses per day of abilities.

You HAVE to see where I'm coming from by now, this is by no means a matter of interpretation anymore, the RAW and RAI from every single source line up perfectly without contradicting. If you must houserule your tables so casting owls wisdom grants additional domain ability uses then that's your deal, but it seems pretty clear what the rules say about it.

PS: Apologies if someone responds to this expecting another response tonight, I'm heading towards sleep.


James Risner wrote:
SillyString wrote:
I'm very open to the possibility of being wrong, I just like to be shown why, rather than just told so without supporting evidence, apologies if this is a frustrating stance to have, I mean no offense.
You seemed to have a preconceived stance and you seemed to be unwilling to accept any evidence to the contrary. If you had that stance, it would be very frustrating.

Pot. Kettle. Black.


Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
James Risner wrote:
SillyString wrote:
I'm very open to the possibility of being wrong, I just like to be shown why, rather than just told so without supporting evidence, apologies if this is a frustrating stance to have, I mean no offense.
You seemed to have a preconceived stance and you seemed to be unwilling to accept any evidence to the contrary. If you had that stance, it would be very frustrating.
Pot. Kettle. Black.

Hah, yes, I must admit I was hoping he would come up with something that could cast doubt on the clarity of the rules, mainly because I enjoy the healthy debate and genuinely don't mind being corrected as long as i learn something.

I can see why it'd be hard to change inaccurate preconceptions if a person has had them for a long time though. I generally start each rules question I post with a "blank-slate" open-minded attitude, then let everyone post the facts and references to determine the answers. In this case, the CRB and developer quotes do a good example of detailing the kinds of things that dont change, and the FAQ you first linked and other developer quotes do a good example of listing the "stat and rolls" that do change, but werent included in the CRB for (ironically) simplicity's sake.

PS: I'm still open to being corrected if someone can post something that specifically states the contrary and overrules the CRB, FAQ and developer quotes! If you have something like that please don't hold back!!

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Looks like Pathfinder has a considerably cleaner framework of rules and much of my understanding came from 3.5 Sage advice rulings (irrelevant for Pathfinder.)

Here are some notes showing that /day things a rounds/day do not increase, but things that use the ability do like selective channel, plus anything that uses it in a die roll or as a measurement like encumbrance.

Abilities don't count for Feat Prerequisites and are treated in unspecified other ways differently.

Preventing a temporary bonus from being used as a consumable is more important than treating it just like a permanent bonus in every way.

Initial design of Barbarian would have temporary Con bonuses won't increase rounds of rage.


James Risner wrote:
Looks like Pathfinder has a considerably cleaner framework of rules and much of my understanding came from 3.5 Sage advice rulings (irrelevant for Pathfinder.)

Well i'm glad we've managed to come to some degree of understanding on the matter. I do agree that the understanding of the rules we now have is much cleaner, and (lets face it) that's their general goal for all things in pathfinder.

Thanks to everyone for the continued links to relevant sources and helping us clarify these rules!

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

SillyString wrote:

) If I have wis of 12, then cast owl's wisdom on myself, can I use it 4 times a day, or 6 times a day?

2) If I have wis of 16, then drink a dexterity mutagen (-2 to wis), can i use it 6 times a day, or 5 times a day?

3) If i'm a cleric, with wis 10, but someone casts owl's wisdom on me, can I cast upto 4th level spells or not?

4) If i'm a cleric with wis 12, then I drink a dexterity mutagen (-2 to wis), can I cast upto 2nd level spells or not?

So to summarize, based on developer comments, FAQ, and the rules the answers would be:

1) 4/day (no benefit for the temporary bonus for /day abilities.

2) 6/day (penalties don't reduce your effects)

3) no additional spells for temporary bonuses

4) no reduction on your spells for temporary penalties


James Risner wrote:

So to summarize, based on developer comments, FAQ, and the rules the answers would be:

1) 4/day (no benefit for the temporary bonus for /day abilities.

2) 6/day (penalties don't reduce your effects)

3) no additional spells for temporary bonuses

4) no reduction on your spells for temporary penalties

Correct, with one exception.

4) "To (learn or) cast a spell, an (oracle in this case) must have a Charisma score of" -This isn't a uses per day thing, this is a flat out binary you can/cannot cast that's determined on your turn based solely on a stat check as a qualifier for the spells. It isnt something determined at the start of the day or at level up like uses and all the things that temporaries cant change. So this likely falls under the category of something that can still prohibit your ability to cast a spell during your turn, at least until the penalty fades. This brings it into line with all the linked rules we've posted so far, unless otherwise contradicted at a later date.

So in this instance we're talking about spells, so:
step 1, learning a spell known /spell slot @ level up = assumes no(/ignores) temporary modifiers
step 2, uses per day/spell book @ start of day = assumes no(/ignores) temporary modifiers
step 3, determining actually casting the spell for this turn (simple stat check to determine yes/no) = factors in temporary

The reason why the inverse isnt true (gaining more) is that you cant add to or modify your spell list on the fly, but you can still be denied access to casting a spell you would otherwise know, based on the stat check.

Basically, temporaries can't modify something that has already been determined, such as uses per day and other things determined at the start of the day. But they can modify something that has yet to be decided: "Am i denied access to this spell this turn?" -"yes"

So to paraphrase my third post:

SillyString wrote:

1) 4 uses per day.

2) 6 uses per day.

3) no.

4) no. (because although there's no reduction to spells, you can still be denied your ability to cast via the on-turn stat check when casting)

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Ability modifiers and ability usage / spells All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.