Ezzard's page

Ezzard wrote:

That's what Forums are for. Not that any of that should matter in a section only about answering questions.

That's why I answered your question. However, I believe in the "teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime" concept, which is why I like to not simply answer such a question, but try to give out tools so people can maybe find the answers to future questions on their own.

Pathfinder is a fairly straightforward rule system - Abilities do what they say they do, and only what they say they do. Unless something otherwise wouldn't be covered by rules at all, you shouldn't extrapolate.

Ezzard wrote:

It isn't clear so I asked.

"He does not, however, gain other benefits a character of that class would have gained."

That's a noble philosophy, but all you did was be snarky. I guess that's the height of free education.

Does it say so? No? Then it does't.

You could get four levels back with the Boon Companion feat, but that's it.

It isn't clear so I asked. That's what Forums are for. Not that any of that should matter in a section only about answering questions.

None the less thank you for taking the time to answer. It will help with troubleshooting.

If I roll a Mythic Theurge and use druid instead of cleric does increasing my mystic theurge level scale my animal companion?

Bloodline Mutations are not an archetype. They're something completely different, with seperate rules.

And those rules state they can't interact with features that are altered or replaced.

Clearly I'm not going to make any headway with that so I'll leave it alone for the time.

All the bloodline mutation rules say on the topic of replacing bloodline feats is this:

"Alternatively, a bloodrager or sorcerer can select a bloodline mutation in place of a bloodline bonus feat, provided her class level is at least equal to the level of the bloodline ability the mutation normally replaces." MaTT pg. 10

Unlike the rules for the option of replacing a bloodline power, there is no mention of bloodline feats altered by an archetype being forbidden. Therefore, any bloodline feat, altered or not, can be replaced by a bloodline mutation.

The rules you refer to do not specify "Bloodline Powers"

Here is a quote from the FAQ regarding Crossblooded+wildblooded

"archetype rules say none of the alternate class features can replace or alter the same class feature from the class as another alternate class feature."

The key word being Feature. Not power, or feat. Class feature. Having said that I have looked into it and cannot find a way in which the feat selection is altered. Outside of the fact that it lets you select from two bloodlines. If that alone counts as the Class Feature being altered I am unsure.

Regarding Blood mutations: "cannot swap a bloodline power that she has altered or replaced with an archetype for a bloodline mutation."

It goes on to say "Alternatively, a bloodrager or sorcerer can select a bloodline mutation in place of a bloodline bonus feat, provided her class level is at least equal to the level of the bloodline ability the mutation normally replaces."

The second quote only shows that you can select a feat instead of a power. Nothing implies the alternative is immune to the rules on swapping with altered/replaced features.

Please prove me wrong.

Anyway. I've made a thread just for this topic. Thank you for the effort you've put into this tangent that came up but I'd rather any further discussion take place on the new thread. That way it's easier to look up the topic in the future. Instead of sharing a link that doesn't address the topic until part way through. Not to mention the awful title that doesn't hint at it at all.

Crossblooded Sorcerer + Blood Havoc is the name of the new thread.

Build.

Crossblooded
-bloodlines: Orc/Draconic(Fire).

At level 7 we take blood mutation (blood havoc) instead of the level seven feat.
(and of course, have or plan to take spell focus evocation.)

This will provide a total of +3 damage per damage die on evocation fire spells.

My personal concern is that the Blood Havoc mutation could not be taken with Crossblooded Sorcerer.

Full disclosure I'm fairly certain you can, though it still sounds to good to be true.
I am remaking this post as it's own topic thread to make it easier to search for the answer in the future. I would still like anyone who can provide support for this build to do so.

Thank you for your time.

vhok wrote:

so i was right the first time, and the other guy simply didn't bother reading bloodline mutations >_<

Yes. It's not even ambiguous or anything, the rules are crystal clear that a wildblooded or corssblooded Sorc/BR can select a Bloodline Mutation in place of a bloodline feat. It's not an uncommon thing that people over-generalize rule sections. If I had a gold piece for every time I saw someone claim that a Monk's US counted as manufactured and/or natural weapons (omitting the "for spells and effects" part)...

@Azothath: I wasn't replying just to you (which is why I didn't quote your post), bur rather commenting on the topic of archetype rules and the respective FAQ.

To be 100% clear, the FAQ clarifies that the Crossblooded archetype does count as altering bloodline powers, and thus falls under the "a bloodrager or sorcerer cannot swap a bloodline power that she has altered or replaced with an archetype for a bloodline mutation" limitation in the Bloodline Mutation rules. However, the alternate option of replacing a bloodline feat with a mutation is not subject to that limitation. That Crossblooded alters the bloodlien feats just as much as bloodline powers is irrelevant.

"That Crossblooded alters the bloodline feats just as much as bloodline powers is irrelevant."

That makes no sense. It alters a feature of the class, ergo it can't be traded in for a blood mutation as it's an altered feature. At least that's what you've just explained, yet at the same time you find it irrelevant?

Ezzard wrote:

Theaitetos wrote:

Java Man wrote:

Correct, you cannot take a mutation in place of a power thwt was altered by an archetype.

But you can take a mutation instead of one of the bloodline bonus feats.

Quote:

Bloodline Mutations:

Alternatively, a bloodrager or sorcerer can select a bloodline mutation in place of a bloodline bonus feat, provided her class level is at least equal to the level of the bloodline ability the mutation normally replaces.

Crossblooded still alters or replaces how the bonus feats actually work. I enjoy the idea of more damage, but I don't see this working.

blood havoc is not replacing the bloodline feat feature, you are just choosing blood havoc at 7 in place of that specific feat choice.

also Bloodline Mutations are not archetypes and their is no rule like this in place for them, after re-reading it, it could be possible to take it at level 1 even with crossblooded. i just had not thought of this until you mentioned the stuff about replacing/altering feats

The concern I have is that Crossblooded alters how you select a bonus feat already. Thus, in my view, making it null and void. However I would very much like to be wrong here. So later today I will be making a separate post to perhaps catch a wider audience.

Java Man wrote:

Correct, you cannot take a mutation in place of a power thwt was altered by an archetype.

But you can take a mutation instead of one of the bloodline bonus feats.

Quote:

Bloodline Mutations:

Alternatively, a bloodrager or sorcerer can select a bloodline mutation in place of a bloodline bonus feat, provided her class level is at least equal to the level of the bloodline ability the mutation normally replaces.

Crossblooded still alters or replaces how the bonus feats actually work. I enjoy the idea of more damage, but I don't see this working.

Ezzard wrote:

I am losing my mind. Not long ago I found a bloodline, or a feat, or something that removed/replaced/altered a bloodline arcana to do +1 damage per damage die on spells of a school that the character had taken spell focus in.

For the life of me I can find no sign of it anywhere. As if my inner self gets off on withholding the memory. Please help.

sounds like you want to do a blasty blasty sorc, might i suggest, crossblooded bloodlines (orc and draconic or solar). then at level 7 when you get your bonus feat you can pick up blood havoc for a total of +3 damage per dice for fire spells +2 for any other spell as long as you have sell focus for that school and at minimum +1 to spell damage if its not fire nor has spell focus.

I could be wrong but I was under the impression Blood mutations could not stack with Crossblooded or Wildblooded Sorcs.

Bloodline mutations are what you want to look at.

Vecna bless you.

I am losing my mind. Not long ago I found a bloodline, or a feat, or something that removed/replaced/altered a bloodline arcana to do +1 damage per damage die on spells of a school that the character had taken spell focus in.

For the life of me I can find no sign of it anywhere. As if my inner self gets off on withholding the memory. Please help.

Yeah, accelerated drinker specifies 'You may drink a potion as a move action instead of a standard as long as you start your turn with the potion in your hand.' So long as you're doing RAW that's it, tails won't much help.

Well it helps prime it as a swift action turn 1 if you didn't have it in your hand already. Exploring that was the whole point of the OP and discussion. I believe we found our answer. Unless you think placing the potion from tail to hand isn't part of it's retrieval.

Name Violation wrote:

vhok wrote:

by raw. tail=tail hand=hand. no.

personally i have always hated accelerated drinker trait's rule of it has to be in your hand at the start of the turn. it makes what could have been an ok trait into a ok trait but only for a few fighting styles.

just use a spring loaded wrist sheath and put it in you hand as a swift action at the end of a previous turn or walk around with a potion in your hand everywhere

what if you two-weapon fight? drop the other weapon? double up in 1 hand?

two-handed weapon, can't make AOO's if you take off a hand to hold a potion
basically unless your combat style involves you having 1 hand free at all times this does not work. remember also slashing grace won't work if you carry around a potion. it is such a bad trait with the caveat of having the potion in hand at the start of the round.

You seem to be fixated on builds. So allow me to clear up that having a free hand to have the potion dropped into will never be a problem for my Sorcerer. What still hasn't been made clear to me is: Can I drop it in my hand with the tail on the same turn it's retrieved as a swift action.

Looking at other instances of this Prehensile tails (such as Grasping Tail (Tiefling) it would appear that you can so far in as RAI. Why one race has to take a feat for the same benefit is beyond me but this is Paizo. I also guess monkey's are more commonly known to get up to "tail antics" so maybe that was the logic behind it.

vhok wrote:

by raw. tail=tail hand=hand. no.

personally i have always hated accelerated drinker trait's rule of it has to be in your hand at the start of the turn. it makes what could have been an ok trait into a ok trait but only for a few fighting styles.

just use a spring loaded wrist sheath and put it in you hand as a swift action at the end of a previous turn or walk around with a potion in your hand everywhere

So what are your thoughts on having it being retrieved by the tail an placed in the hand turn 1 so that it's primed for turn 2? Or would that placement be a whole separate action?

Why would you need to place the potion in your hands when it is already in your tail? Prehensile Tail allows you to manipulate object, just not wield weapons. This is probably due to the fact that the tail of a monkey (Varna) is not as strong as its arms, and lacks the leverage to use your full body weight to the weapon. I am not even sure you need accelerated drinker with prehensile tail to drink a potion.

I "need" it to be in my hand because accelerated drinker says it has to be in my hand at the start of my turn. Granted the rules for this trait likely didn't factor in tailed races when it was made. That's why I'm asking about it.

Also yes I could drink the potion without accelerated drinker or prehensile tail. But I would have to use a move action (at best) to retrieve the potion and then a standard action to drink it. I would rather it cost me a swift action on turn 1 and a move action on turn 2. Leaving me a standard action on both turns.

So I'll start with the trait Accelerated Drinker. I will provide it's rules and it's flavor text(with emphasis.) Normally I wouldn't involve the flavor text but I find that it seems to contradict the actual rules a bit. Not that it'll likely matter on ruling I just thought it was a funny little quirk of the trait.

"Accelerated Drinker:
You know how to drink a potion efficiently, such as by *not* using your hands, tossing it in the air and catching it in your mouth, or opening it with your teeth.

Benefit: You may drink a potion as a move action instead of a standard action as long as you start your turn with the potion in your hand."

Now I will add the racial trait Prehensile Tail from the Vanara stat block.

"Prehensile Tail:
A vanara has a long, flexible tail that she can use to carry objects. She cannot wield weapons with her tail, but the tail allows her to retrieve a small, stowed object carried on her person as a swift action."

So clearly accelerated drinker is designed to be primed. You need to decide what potion you are going to use prior to using the trait to drink it as a move action. What I want to know is can I use the Prehensile Tail on turn 1 to grab a potion as a swift action, then on turn 2 use Accelerated Drinker to imbibe that potion as a move action? If so do I need to state that the tail places the potion in my hand or is that assumed to be the case given that the item is "retrieved." Does placing it in my hand count as another action all together?

To start I will post the feature and it's rules in full.

Heavenly Fire (Sp): Starting at 1st level, you can unleash a ray of heavenly fire as a standard action, targeting any foe within 30 feet as a ranged touch attack. Against evil creatures, this ray deals 1d4 points of damage + 1 for every two sorcerer levels you possess. This damage is divine and not subject to energy resistance or immunity. This ray heals good creatures of 1d4 points of damage + 1 for every two sorcerer levels you possess. A good creature cannot benefit from your heavenly fire more than once per day. Neutral creatures are neither harmed nor healed by this effect. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Charisma modifier.

The text I want to focus on is this: *targeting any foe within 30 feet as a ranged touch attack*

Does this mean I can only target foes? If so am I not able to heal anyone except foes who's alignment is good? Many, when discussing this ability, speak of it as an additional method of out of combat healing. Is this generally recognized as a typo?

I'm making a Lizardfolk (the one from the advanced races "more races section") on hero lab. Had to build it from scratch. Anyway It's trying to tell me to add bonus languages based off my Int but I'm not sure Xenophobic allows that.

Nevermind I found this:

Xenophobic (0 RP)
Members of this race start with their racial language only. Races without a racial language cannot take this array. Furthermore, choose up to four languages (except for Druidic or other secret languages), one of which must be Common (or Undercommon, if the race is native to the underground regions). Members of this race with high Intelligence scores can choose from any of these additional languages.

Lizardfolk have no listed language options so I'll have to hash that out with my GM but otherwise this answered what I needed to know.

I'm making a Lizardfolk (the one from the advanced races "more races section") on hero lab. Had to build it from scratch. Anyway It's trying to tell me to add bonus languages based off my Int but I'm not sure Xenophobic allows that.

ok here is the math on the ability for a level 10 Occultist

maxium +6 damage
2 points = 1 damage

thats it, there is no half Occultist level added on that doesn't exist, your reading it wrong. the 1+1 per 2 Occultist levels is the maximum you are allowed to buff the impliment and adds no flat damage whatsoever.

smurf

So following along with that formula gaining a plus 6 would require an investment of 12 points?

i'm not sure how you have 10 Occultist levels divided in half equaling 10 but no your wrong about how the ability works.

it adds 1 damage for every 2 points you put in to a MAXIMUM of 1+1 for every 2 Occultist levels. so if your a level 10 Occultist you could invest 6 points into it maximum. it does not add any extra based on your level it just changes the maximum you can buff it up. so if a level 10 Occultist invests 4 points your total would be +2 damage

smurf

The formula I'm using is as follows.

1 investment costs 2 mental points. This gives me 1+Half my occultist level.

2 investments gives me 2+(half my occultist levelx2)

That's how it came out to 2+10. The ten results from investing twice.

******

Following the Math you just presented I'm not sure how the total bonus lands at +2 after investing 4 points could you run that one by me again?
I'm not saying that the ability doesn't work as you described I'm just not seeing how that calculation panned out. Feels like it should be more for 2 points at level 10.

So with this ability Let's say I've got 10 Occultist levels. If I invest 4 mental points. The damage bonus would be 2+10 right?
2(for four points invested)+10(half your level per incremental investment)

The implement channels and enhances the effects of damaging evocations. A spellcaster who bears the implement can add the implement as an additional focus component for any of his damaging evocation spells that have an instantaneous duration or focus powers with an instantaneous duration. If he does so, the spell or focus power deals 1 additional point of damage of the same type to each creature for every 2 points of mental focus invested in the implement, to a maximum of 1 + 1 for every 2 occultist levels you possess.

Yup, they're separate.

It sounds like you've been doing it exactly right.

Cool Beans. Thanks.

Bestow Cures and Greater Bestow curse.

Are these separate spells. My group uses Hero Lab and if I select the trait <Magical Lineage> I have to pick between either <Bestow Curse> or <Greater Bestow Curse>

I did not question this because, for years, the groups I've played have treated Lesser/Normal/Greater spells as being separate from each other. In the case of Bestow curse this seperation has been used to stack the effects of <Bestow Curse> and <Greater Bestow Curse>. Doing it this way one could effectively give an NPC (or PC) a -12 penalty on attack rolls, saves, ability checks, and skill checks.

Is this the correct use of these spells?

There's an FAQ for this one.

FAQ wrote:

Sorcerer, Crossblooded and Wildblooded: Can I take both of these archetypes for the same character?

No, because the archetype rules say none of the alternate class features can replace or alter the same class feature from the class as another alternate class feature. Because the crossblooded and wildblooded sorcerer archetypes both alter the bloodline arcana and bloodline powers, they aren't compatible archetypes.

Note that it is certainly within the GM's purview to allow this combination. However, the character should not be able to use the crossblooded archetype's ability to select a lower-level bloodline power that was replaced by the wildblooded archetype. For example, a wildblooded brutal (abyssal) sorcerer replaces "strength of the abyss" with "wings of the abyss" at 9th level; the character has "paid" for the wildblooded archetype by giving up "strength of the abyss," and can't use the crossblooded bloodline to select "strength of the abyss" as her 15th-level or 20th-level bloodline power.

Oh good. So I'm not loosing my mind. I tried several different searches and got nothing back. Anyway thanks for this.

Basically the title. It says I can prepare spells from one class in the spell slots of the other. How does this work if I want to prepare a Cleric spell in a Sorcerer spell slot?

So in my journey to make a Mystic theurge I came across the Empyreal bloodline/Cleric build. So I wanted to look into what a Empyreal is, even though most of the games I play in are homebrew.

So far I've discovered (very little) information on Empyreal Lords. I'm guessing they are involved in AP plots so I gave up on that.

I'm hoping someone here can give me something beyond "They are a divine entity."

Please and thank you.

Is it possible to be both a crossblooded sorcerer and a Wildblooded sorcerer.

Keep in mind the teleportation circle is one way. If you need two-way travel between locations using Create Demi-plane spells would be a cheaper, more efficient method (vs 2 permanent teleportation circles). As you can use multiple castings to create an extra-planar bridge between two locations.

Step 1. Cast Create Demiplane lesser
Step 2. Make it permanent for 17,500gp
Step 3. Cast Create Demiplane Greater to create a permanent portal between point A and the plane.
Step 4. Cast Create Demiplane Greater to create a permanent portal between point B and the plane.

Strictly speaking the create demi-plane spells also don't have any sort of caster level requirement when it comes to permanency, but based on the pricing they should probably be 15th, 16th and 17th. Even so, since you only need to make the lesser version permanent you only need to be 15th level instead of 17th.

Thank you. This plan is incredible. It's a bit hilarious that bending reality to create your own world is cheaper than drawing circles on the ground. Oh magic how I love thee.

It would be cheaper to just hire a Wizard to cast the spells.

Price of scrolls: Spell Level * Caster Level * 25 gp

Price of spellcaster: Spell Level * Caster Level * 10 gp

Do you happen to have the book/chapter that is found in. I've never actually paid another wizard to cast a spell. So I guess I never paid any attention to it as an option.

It's just the CL * Spell level * 25 gp which gets cut in half by crafting, the material component has to be provided in full.

You actually provided the relevant quote there, the material component cost gets added to the base price and to the cost to create.

Good to have that cleared up. I asked because I was making a Teleportation Circle Scroll on Hero Lab. It included the 1,000gp in the base cost putting it at 4,825gp. It then split that in half making it 2912.5gp.

As far as making the scrolls I am aware I can't do it with a CL of 10. However due to circumstances of the campaign we are running the party does have access to a wizard who can make them. Though that may not matter as the expenditure is still to high. Going to have to beg the Government for a favor and my diplomacy skill leaves a lot to be desired.

EDIT: Upon reflection that scroll calculation seems to be correct. Still no additions for the permanency spell however. Oh well.

If the 2 scrolls are made at a caster level of 17 (not required for permanency; the 17th level wizard could have made it at a caster level of as low as 9, though it would need to be made at CL 17 to affect teleportation circle) then your CL 10 wizard will need to make a caster level check DC 18 in order to use each scroll successfully.

Quote:

...her own caster level is lower than the scroll spell’s caster level, then she has to make a caster level check (DC = scroll’s caster level + 1) to cast the spell successfully. If she fails, she must make a DC 5 Wisdom check to avoid a scroll mishap. A natural roll of 1 always fails, whatever the modifiers.

You don't need to be a wizard with CL 17+, but it does avoid losing a lot of money on scrolls which may blow up in your face.

Edit: if the question's whether the scrolls could work at all then yes they could. In most cases (and there's no reason I can think of why this would be an exception, there's no feats or other personal abilities involved) then casting spells from scrolls is the same as a spellcaster of the scroll's caster level casting those spells directly.

Thank you. I just needed to confirm that I could do it using scrolls made by a higher level wizard. Or rather I would be able to make a permanent teleportation circle without actually having a CL of 17.

Granted it's not ideal but I've stranded some NPCs off some 3000 miles away and gone and lost the artifact we used to teleport back and forth from that location. So it's nice to know I can correct that. Maybe.

I hate to add another question here but the price rules for scrolls states as follows:

"If the scroll has a material component cost, it is added to the base price and cost to create."

So a scroll of permanency made for Teleportation Circle would have 22,500 gp added to it's base cost making the total 24625. And if that were to be crafted it would be cut it in half would it not?

I might have to make a new thread for this.

If I'm a wizard with a CL of 10 can I cast the spell <Teleportation Circle> and then cast <Permanency> on it assuming both spells are cast from scrolls made by a different wizard of CL 17+?

Or do I need to be a wizard with a CL of 17+?

The point is that you don't listen to the counter-arguments. So it is pretty useless to argue with you.

The Sage ability doesn't make the spell a known spell for the class,...

You are correct. I read them. All of them. Both in this thread and several others. Yet here I am. Despite being told that I would refuse to leave until being validated I have fully accepted the majority rule. Despite being told I would "ragequit" my own thread others have done so.

It would seem that I am not the one who has trouble "listening" to opinions that run counter to my own.

With that said I suppose now is a good a time as any. Thank you all for participating in this thread. The data you have provided will prove invaluable.

This topic comes up every now and then. It's usually pretty contentious. A similar case is that of the skald and spell kenning. There's lots of arguing both ways, but you won't get a real answer from the devs on it. You'll have to talk with a gm and understand that they are going to decide if it works or not.

Yes it would seem that way. I can't recall which dev it was but one of them once said "Making an archetype is more of an art form than a science"

Ezzard wrote:

If I take the Spell Sage Archetype can I then scribe scrolls from the Bard/Cleric/Druid spells lists?

Spell Sage

Scribe Scroll

Fixed links. Read the "How to format your text" button below you input field for details.

Ezzard wrote:

Replying to my own OP in hopes of fixing these links. I would have loved to just edit the OP but the option to do so no longer seems to exist.

You get 1 hour to edit a post.

Ezzard wrote:

Alright I found the problem. If you copy the link from the forums it puts a space in the following places in the link

I can't for the life of me figure out why.

The space is included deliberately to break automatic linking. [A security feature of the forum.]

Ezzard wrote:

I have corrected exactly two people who have shared incorrect information.

In the time I have been waiting for Java Man to respond to my rebuttable I have also found a thread dating back to 2014 in which you were involved. I was actually about to share a link to it.

Can a wizard make arcane scrolls of divine

Fixed links.

Now to the question:
The sage is a prepared caster and so would have to memorize a spell to scribe it. Were he a true spontaneous caster, the spell would have to be one of his spells known and he would also need a slot to scribe it.
Since neither situations applies, he cannot scribe it.

Directly.

He can cast it into a storage mechanism, like a ring of spell storing, and then perhaps use that as the source of the spell for scribing.

He can also scribe it if another caster supplies the spell.

/cevah

Ah a ring of spell storing. I had not considered that as a work around.

I may allow this is the future under RAF but there are other problems that come up. Like determining the cost of said scrolls, but I'll save that for a deferent thread in a different section.

Thank you for fixing the links btw. That was madding.

Ezzard wrote:

Java Man wrote:

Others will likely disagree with me, but I say no. You can cast the spell "as if you had know and had prepared it", not "it counts as a spell known and prepared."

Alright so here is my argument against that. I'll start by posting the actual text from the spell sage class feature "Spell Study"

"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."

This line does not convey that you don't know the spells from the non-wizard spell lists. It only conveys that when you cast those spells they count as wizard spells. In other words when a spell sage casts Cure light wounds it's an arcane spell not a divine spell. I'm sure there are other relevant mechanical anomalies caused by this feature but I've yet to realize them.

In conclusion you still know all the spells on the Bard/Cleric/Druid spell lists. If you did not you would not be able to cast them RAW. Spontaneous or prepared.

With that out of the way you have Scribe scroll witch reads
"You can create a scroll of any spell that you know."
This seems clear cut to me that you could craft a scroll of any spell off the Bard/Cleric/Druid/Wizard spell list. As you have access to all of them.

I see nothing here that alters my perception and interpretation of the rules in this case. Conveniently we aren't at the same table so we don't have to agree.

Oh, as an aside, asking a question and then arguing with folks kind enough to take a moment and share information kinda annoys me, so you'll likely not see me here after this.

Argument is the life blood of a rules discussion forum. I will never cease to be amazed at people who are offended by that.

If Spell Sage can be used to create scrolls it opens up a worse abuse. This would also mean that a spell sage automatically knows any wizard spell that is on any of those lists. This means the spell sage can scribe them into his spell book and memorize them at a later date. I don’t know any GM who would allow such an obvious abuse. Since scribe scroll is not available to a PC in society play that means the OP has to deal with his GM

Weather or not this is truly an abuse is debatable. However I've read several older forums that have already argued the matter so I won't press it here.

I am curious to know why you brought up Society play, when I made no mention of caring about it's unique regulations and restrictions on RAW. It is something that occurs often when I ask questions regarding rules of the game. So I am I curious if something in my initial question gave way to make you assume that.

Jeff Morse wrote:

"as if it were a wizard spell he knew and had prepared"

I guess it would work by this sentence, BUT whom can use said scroll would be the bigger question.

Well the spell sage could. There are two possibilities.

-Since you cast them as wizard spells you may also have to craft your scrolls as wizard spells. This seems like a stretch but I'm uncertain given that all the spells do become wizard spells.

- Just use UMD.

Lastly you could just give them away. If you have a Bard/Cleric/Druid in the party give it to them. Keeps them from having to burn a feat for Scribe scroll.

Reply edit since the hour limit has passed. I'd like to add the following to the original comment.

*- Just use UMD. <If the scroll is a bard of wizard scroll. Since I am still uncertain on what kind of scroll made by a spell sage would be (as stated above)>

Ezzard, you haven't corrected anyone's mistakes, you are simply wrong and trying to force your argument with stubbornness and an overbearing attitude.

1) Requirements to scribe a scroll: "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)."

I have corrected exactly two people who have shared incorrect information.

https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rk9x?Can-a-wizard-make-arcane-scrolls-of-divi ne

I am still reading to see if your stance changed but so far I have one of your posts where you say the following.

"RAW, I think, will allow him to make the items, but then using them will require a UMD check."

This is odd as it's the same stance I've taken here yet you've stated that "I'm wrong"

Interesting.

P.S. the link I shared comes up with a space that should not be there. If you use it please take time to note where the space is and correct it. For me it's normally toward the end of the link but it's shown up at the start of the address as well.

Wait, I've seen this movie before.

Someone comes along asking a question, and gets answers which aren't the one the querent wanted. They then post their opinion, and get increasingly angry as people fail to see their wisdom and agree. Eventually some random person does agree with them and this raises them to supernatural smugness, so the argument rages another hundred posts.

Variations: offered another means of doing the same thing the querent takes it and the thread dies a bit quicker. Or, the querent just ragequits.

Just because I correct your mistakes doesn't mean "I'm angry"

And yes. I chose to wait and see if anyone else came to the same conclusion I did. When you post your opinion on an argument while asking about a topic you risk spoiling the pot. To avoid a line of "Yes men" I wait patiently to see what responses I get.

But by all means continue to flood the thread with your presumptions of what's happening. Instead of contributing any meaningful argument to the topic at hand. For example you could attempt to explain why my correction to your initial post was wrong. You'd be hard pressed to do so as it does not take 8 hours to craft a scroll. It's either 2 or 24+. Nor does it require the casting of a spell. But I will patiently await your rebuttable.

"as if it were a wizard spell he knew and had prepared"

I guess it would work by this sentence, BUT whom can use said scroll would be the bigger question.

Well the spell sage could. There are two possibilities.

-Since you cast them as wizard spells you may also have to craft your scrolls as wizard spells. This seems like a stretch but I'm uncertain given that all the spells do become wizard spells.

- Just use UMD.

Lastly you could just give them away. If you have a Bard/Cleric/Druid in the party give it to them. Keeps them from having to burn a feat for Scribe scroll.

Others will likely disagree with me, but I say no. You can cast the spell "as if you had know and had prepared it", not "it counts as a spell known and prepared."

Alright so here is my argument against that. I'll start by posting the actual text from the spell sage class feature "Spell Study"

"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."

This line does not convey that you don't know the spells from the non-wizard spell lists. It only conveys that when you cast those spells they count as wizard spells. In other words when a spell sage casts Cure light wounds it's an arcane spell not a divine spell. I'm sure there are other relevant mechanical anomalies caused by this feature but I've yet to realize them.

In conclusion you still know all the spells on the Bard/Cleric/Druid spell lists. If you did not you would not be able to cast them RAW. Spontaneous or prepared.

With that out of the way you have Scribe scroll witch reads
"You can create a scroll of any spell that you know."
This seems clear cut to me that you could craft a scroll of any spell off the Bard/Cleric/Druid/Wizard spell list. As you have access to all of them.

If I take the Spell Sage Archetype can I then scribe scrolls from the Bard/Cleric/Druid spells lists?

Spell Sage- https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/wizard/archetypes/paizo-wizar d-archetypes/spell-sage/

Scribe Scroll-https://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/item-creation-feats/scribe-scroll-ite m-creation/

Replying to my own OP in hopes of fixing these links. I would have loved to just edit the OP but the option to do so no longer seems to exist.

https://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/item-creation-feats/scribe-scroll-item-creat ion/

https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/wizard/archetypes/paizo-wizar d-archetypes/spell-sage/

Alright I found the problem. If you copy the link from the forums it puts a space in the following places in the link

"wizar d"

and "creat ion"

I can't for the life of me figure out why.

Unless one of those people who disagree with Java Man actually show up their existence is strictly theoretical. As you don't actually cast a spell at any round during item creation, you just expend a prepared spell or spell slot over the 8 hour period, count me on the side of 'it doesn't work'.

Where are you getting this 8 hour time limit for item creation? I'm going to go ahead and post the rules for scribe scroll since I seem to be having trouble using the link I provided yesterday.

"You can create magic scrolls.

Prerequisite: Caster level 1st.

Benefit: You can create a scroll of any spell that you know. Scribing a scroll takes ***2 hours*** if its base price is 250 gp or less, otherwise scribing a scroll takes 1 day for each 1,000 gp in its base price. To scribe a scroll, you must use up raw materials costing half of this base price.

See magic item creation rules for more information."

-Emphasis mine.

P.S.
You don't cast a spell to make a scroll. You just make one off the spells known to your character.

I'm inclined to say no. My reason, because the Spell Sage does not gain any ability to use said scrolls.

The ability to spontaneously cast any spell on the Bard/Cleric/Druid spell is still plenty useful, even with the limitations.

This isn't going to be an argument for "It does work" but I feel the need to correct your first line here. The Spell sage is still a wizard ergo they still gain scribe scroll at level 1. Going beyond that any character with a UMD can use the scrolls outside of their class. So I'm really not sure what you mean when you say they don't have the ability to use scrolls.

I thought about it more. If a Spell Sage could create and use scrolls of other classes spells, then they could easily bypass the limited uses per day that their Spell Study ability has. So no, I don't think crafting scrolls for other classes spells was an intended feature of Spell Study.

I'm going to be blunt. I'm not interested in what anyone thinks of it's intended purpose(unless you can get a dev to clear it up). Also the entire reason a wizard can make scrolls is to bypass spell slot limitations. So saying they shouldn't be able to do it because it would allow them to bypass a limitation is absurd. Considering the features you lose it would be an equal trade.

Others will likely disagree with me, but I say no. You can cast the spell "as if you had know and had prepared it", not "it counts as a spell known and prepared."

Unfortunate. I was hoping for a straight yes or no. If you suspect others will disagree with you then it's still up in the air.

Never the less thank you your comment.

If I take the Spell Sage Archetype can I then scribe scrolls from the Bard/Cleric/Druid spells lists?

Spell Sage- https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/wizard/archetypes/paizo-wizar d-archetypes/spell-sage/

Scribe Scroll-https://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/item-creation-feats/scribe-scroll-ite m-creation/