Spell Sage -- Crafting items, scribing scrolls

[Douglas Muir 406]

So, the Spell Sage wizard archetype:

Quote:

At 2nd level, the sage's understanding of the spells of bards, clerics, and druids is so great that he can use his own magic in an inefficient, roundabout way to duplicate those classes' spells. Once per day, a spell sage can spontaneously cast any spell on the bard, cleric, or druid spell list as if it were a wizard spell he knew and had prepared. Casting the spell requires the spell sage to spend 1 full round per spell level of the desired spell (if the spell is on multiple spell lists indicated above, using the lowest level from among those lists) and requires expending two prepared spells of that spell level or higher; if the spell's casting time is normally 1 full round or longer, this is added to the spell sage's casting time. For example, if a spell sage wants to use spell study to cast cure light wounds (cleric spell level 1st), he must spend 2 full rounds casting and expend two prepared wizard spells of 1st level or higher.

The questions, then:

1) What happens if a Spell Sage uses this ability to craft a magic item? -- Based on a reasonable reading of the rules, it looks like he could do this. Both the rules and designer statements support a reading that it doesn't matter where the spell came from, as long as it's cast during the crafting.

2) What happens if he uses it to scribe a scroll? -- This is a more challenging question. There was a long thread on this forum a couple of years ago. It reviewed the arguments pretty well (go on, check it out), but didn't reach a firm conclusion. AFAIK, no Paizo staffer ever responded, so no official ruling has ever been made. There appeared to be three positions: (a) he can do this freely; (b) he can scribe scrolls of cleric, druid or bard spells, but then must make a UMD check to use them; or (c) he simply cannot scribe scrolls of these spells.

3) What happens if a Spell Sage tries to write such a spell into his spellbook? -- Note that the Spell Sage gets "back door" access to most of the wizard's spell list, because so many spells are both wizard and cleric, bard, or druid spells. Personally, I think that since he's casting them *as* cleric, etc. spells, he couldn't write them in his spell book -- or rather, he could, but it would be a waste of expensive ink and pages, as he could never take them as prepared spells. But a clear ruling on this would be nice.

-- I note that in terms of game balance, the Spell Sage is somewhat underpowered, especially at lower levels. He has a couple of really cool abilities, but he only gets them once or twice a day, and he sacrifices two of the wizard's best class features. No Arcane Bond *and* no Arcane School: ouch. So, even the most liberal answers aren't going to turn this into an OP archetype that everyone is rushing to play. I realize that doesn't make a difference in terms of RAW/RAI; just putting it out there.

Since this question has come up at least twice already without ever getting an official ruling, I'm FAQing it. Meanwhile, thoughts and comments welcome.

Doug M.

[VRMH]

Douglas Muir 406 wrote:

Both the rules and designer statements support a reading that it doesn't matter where the spell came from, as long as it's cast during the crafting.

Do you have a quotation for that? Because many spells can't be cast during crafting (due to lack of a suitable target, for instance). And the PRD uses the phrase "spell slots are expended from the caster's currently prepared spells, just as if they had been cast".

Quote:

3) What happens if a Spell Sage tries to write such a spell into his spellbook?

I don't think he can - a Wizard needs to have a spell memorised for that and the Sage merely has he ability to cast it.

[CBDunkerson]

The magic item creation rules do have text suggesting that spell pre-requisites can come from other casters or items;

"Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item's creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed)."

However, the descriptions for creating the various item types then all have text similar to;

"If spells are involved in the prerequisites for making the item, the creator must have prepared the spells to be cast (or must know the spells, in the case of a sorcerer or bard) but need not provide any material components or focuses the spells require. The act of working on the item triggers the prepared spells, making them unavailable for casting during each day of the item's creation. (That is, those spell slots are expended from the caster's currently prepared spells, just as if they had been cast.)"

Unless it is changed/removed I'd take the first quotation as an exception to the common case stated in the individual descriptions... MOST of the time the spell effect is expended by the creator without actually casting the spell. However, it is also possible to get the spell from another caster or item. The question then becomes whether the spell is in that case actually cast and somehow 'absorbed' by the item or again is 'imbued' in the item without actually being cast.

The latter would preclude the Spell Sage ability because they can only spontaneously generate the spell effect... not have it known, prepared, or stored like a spell from another caster or item.

All that said, I would probably allow it. Note however, that a Spell Sage who creates a Wand (or Scroll) of Cure Light Wounds still can't actually USE those items.

As for writing spells in a spellbook; that's much clearer. You need to have the spell prepared and the Spell Sage generates the cross-class spells spontaneously without preparing them. Thus, not going to happen without some other special option.

[ryric]

I'd allow this too, but especially for scrolls I'm not sure how useful some of it would be. Who can use an arcane scroll of divine favor, for example?

It would make the character very good at potions and wands, though. I really don't see that as being broken.