MLHagan's page

124 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 124 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

wraithstrike wrote:

The spell itself does not have a designation.

So according to you it is only the caster that determines if a spell is arcane or divine? the who/how the spell is being cast, correct? so any spell a wizard cast is arcane right? so using mystic past life a wizard can select any spell because whatever spell they choose will be cast as an arcane spell including divine power. Spells themselfs have no type right?

don't worry about the source, witch can cast divine power as arcane so wizard can get it from there. if that isn't to your likeing then they can get it from the Mystic Theurge spell casting class because they can do it to.


Cpt. Caboodle wrote:
MLHagan wrote:
a list of spells that have a divine version within the spell itself and yet do not appear on a divine spell casters spell list.
What does that mean? Divine version within the spell itself? What are you talking about?

this is what i am talking about

CRB p213 wrote:


If the Components line includes F/DF or M/DF, the arcane version of the spell has a focus component or a material component (the abbreviation before the slash)and the divine version has a divine focus component (the abbreviation after the slash).

On to the next one.

wraithstrike wrote:


Oh, it is not out of the way. That just leads to another questions. So you what version of the spell does it qualify as, and where is the rule that determines what it qualifies as?

a cleric casting fireball from their domain is using divine power to cast that spell. fireball is an arcane spell however because a cleric is casting it they are doing so as a divine variant. this is simular to a mystic theurge useing arcane spell slots to prepair spells from there divine spell casting class.

as for refrenceing the rules on such, i am still waiting for you to do what you have asked of others.

MLHagan wrote:


I have referenced and quoted actual rules from the CRB, APG, GMG, UM and ARG.

What reference’s or rules have been sighted supporting the claim that?

wraithstrike wrote:


The spell itself does not have a designation.

Please provide the source material for this claim, book, page number, that sort of thing so others can fallow and find it for themselves.


Here is another question while we are at it. Why would the alchemist class specify not needing a DF for “Divine spells” when an oracle only specifies spells in general? Why wouldn’t the alchemist class just say that the don’t need a divine focus and leave out the part about divine spells? Why go through the extra effort of specifically stating divine spells especially considering that alchemist don’t have a caster type, nor would there list if that indeed is the only thing that determines if a spell is arcane or divine?

”APG p43” wrote:


Extracts cannot be made from spells that have focus requirements (alchemist extracts that duplicate divine spells never have a divine focus requirement).

They could have said “alchemist extracts never have a divine focus requirement” and left it at that.

”APG p43” wrote:


Oracles do not need to provide a divine focus to cast spells that list divine focus (DF) as part of the components.

After all, they felt no need to specify spell type with an oracle, right? And Oracles can gain spells from arcane spell lists as bonus spells, so...


Here is a list of spells that have a divine version within the spell itself and yet do not appear on a divine spell casters spell list.

Clairaudience/Clairvoyance - Clenched Fist - Confusion - Confusion, Lesser - Demand - Disintegrate - Feeblemind - Fox's Cunning - Fox's Cunning, Mass - Gaseous Form - Hold Person, Mass - Horrid Wilting - Pellet Blast - Polymorph Any Object - Prying Eyes - Prying Eyes, Greater - Scorching Ash Form - Seducer's Eyes - Spell Turning

If spells are determined as being arcane or divine only by what spell list they appear on then how could there be so many spells with a divine versions that never meet that requirement?


Talonhawke wrote:

Wraithstrike your right its time to end this.

Anyone who happens by with the power to lock and make this thread disappear please do. It is filled not only with useless and misleading information but it contians little to no relevant information.

Looking for some "good" information? here is a list of spells from the GMG listed on the Arcane spell list and are also not listed on the Divine spell list a few pages later.


Acid Arrow - Acid Fog - Alter Self - Analyze Dweomer - Animate Rope - Arcane Eye - Arcane Lock - Arcane Mark - Arcane Sight - Arcane Sight, Greater - Beast Shape I - Beast Shape II - Beast Shape III - Beast Shape IV - Binding - Black Tentacles - Blink - Blur - Burning Hands - Chain Lightning - Charm Monster - Charm Monster, Mass - Charm Person - Chill Touch - Circle of Death - Clone - Cloudkill - Color Spray - Command Undead - Cone of Cold - Contact Other Plane - Contingency - Control Undead - Crushing Despair - Crushing Hand - Dancing Lights - Darkvision - Daze - Daze Monster - Deep Slumber - Delayed Blast Fireball - Detect Scrying - Detect Secret Doors - Dimension Door - Disguise Self - Disintegrate - Displacement - Disrupt Undead - Dominate Monster - Dominate Person - Dream - Elemental Body I - Elemental Body II - Elemental Body III - Elemental Body IV - Enervation - Enlarge Person - Enlarge Person, Mass - Erase - Expeditious Retreat - Explosive Runes - Eyebite - Fabricate - False Life - False Vision - Fear - Feeblemind - Fire Shield - Fireball - Flame Arrow - Flesh to Stone - Floating Disk - Fly - Forcecage - Forceful Hand - Form of the Dragon I - Form of the Dragon II - Form of the Dragon III - Freedom - Freezing Sphere - Geas, Lesser - Ghost Sound - Giant Form I - Giant Form II - Glitterdust - Globe of Invulnerability - Globe of Invulnerability, Lesser - Grasping Hand - Grease - Guards and Wards - Hallucinatory Terrain - Halt Undead - Haste - Heroism - Heroism, Greater - Hideous Laughter - Hold Portal - Horrid Wilting - Hypnotic Pattern - Hypnotism - Identify - Illusory Script - Illusory Wall - Imprisonment - Incendiary Cloud - Insanity - Instant Summons - Interposing Hand - Invisibility Sphere - Invisibility, Greater - Invisibility, Mass - Irresistible Dance - Keen Edge - Knock - Legend Lore - Levitate - Lightning Bolt - Limited Wish - Locate Creature - Mage Armor - Mage Hand - Mage's Disjunction - Mage's Faithful Hound - Mage's Lucubration - Mage's Magnificent Mansion - Mage's Private Sanctum - Mage's Sword - Magic Aura - Magic Circle against Good - Magic Jar - Magic Missile - Magic Mouth - Magic Weapon - Major Creation - Major Image - Maze - Message - Meteor Swarm - Mind Blank - Mind Fog - Minor Creation - Minor Image - Mirage Arcana - Mirror Image - Misdirection - Mislead - Mnemonic Enhancer - Moment of Prescience - Mount - Nightmare - Nondetection - Open/Close - Overland Flight - Passwall - Permanency - Permanent Image - Persistent Image - Phantasmal Killer - Phantom Steed - Phantom Trap - Phase Door - Planar Binding - Planar Binding, Greater - Planar Binding, Lesser - Plant Shape I - Plant Shape II - Plant Shape III - Polar Ray - Polymorph - Power Word Blind - Power Word Kill - Power Word Stun - Prestidigitation - Prismatic Sphere - Prismatic Spray - Prismatic Wall - Programmed Image - Project Image - Protection from Arrows - Protection from Spells - Prying Eyes - Prying Eyes, Greater - Pyrotechnics - Rage - Rainbow Pattern - Ray of Enfeeblement - Ray of Exhaustion - Ray of Frost - Reduce Person - Reduce Person, Mass - Resilient Sphere - Rope Trick - Scare - Scintillating Pattern - Scorching Ray - Screen - Secret Chest - Secret Page - Secure Shelter - See Invisibility - Seeming - Sepia Snake Sigil - Sequester - Shades - Shadow Conjuration - Shadow Conjuration, Greater - Shadow Evocation - Shadow Evocation, Greater - Shadow Walk - Shield - Shocking Grasp - Shout - Shout, Greater - Shrink Item - Silent Image - Simulacrum - Sleep - Slow - Solid Fog - Spectral Hand - Statue - Stinking Cloud - Stone to Flesh - Suggestion - Suggestion, Mass - Telekinesis - Telekinetic Sphere - Telepathic Bond - Teleport - Teleport Object - Teleport, Greater - Teleportation Circle - Temporal Stasis - Time Stop - Tiny Hut - Touch of Fatigue - Touch of Idiocy - Transformation - Trap the Soul - True Strike - Unseen Servant - Vampiric Touch - Veil - Ventriloquism - Vision - Wail of the Banshee - Wall of Force - Wall of Ice - Wall of Iron - Waves of Exhaustion - Waves of Fatigue - Web - Weird - Whispering Wind - Wish

And do you know what they all have in common aside from being listed as arcane spell? None of these have a DF component. Coincidence? It should be noted that some of these spells also appear on divine caster spell lists and yet are still noted as arcane spells in the GMG, and yea the above list is over 250 spells long.


Talonhawke wrote:

I think he meant 3rd level wizard cleric 1 or vice versa.

The point is if the spell is always one or the other or both then at wizard level 3 then i can cast bulls str which by your defination is both arcane and divine. There fore i qualify for MT.

O? if thats the case then lets not forget that spells can have both arcane and divine versions and have answered that concern already on many occasions.

MLHagan wrote:


Back to the topic of spells having a type independent of spell caster,
Lets not forget the components M/DF and or F/DF

”CRB p213” wrote:


If the Components line includes F/DF or M/DF, the arcane version of the spell has a focus component or a material component (the abbreviation before the slash) and the divine version has a divine focus component (the abbreviation after the slash).

M/DF and F/DF signify arcane or divine versions of a spell itself.

I have referenced and quoted actual rules from the CRB, APG, GMG, UM and ARG.

What reference’s or rules have been sighted supporting the claim that?

wraithstrike wrote:


The spell itself does not have a designation.

Please provide the source material for this claim, book, page number, that sort of thing so others can fallow and find it for themselves.

just because a spell itself has 2 versions does not mean that casting the spell qualifies as both versions. there is a londry list of spells that appear on both the arcane and divine spell lists in the GMG such as detect magic, meaning that these spells as spells themselfs can be either arcane or divine, or in effect they contain both types within themselfs.

now thats out of the way lets get back to the claim that

MLHagan wrote:


Back to the topic of spells having a type independent of spell caster,
Lets not forget the components M/DF and or F/DF

”CRB p213” wrote:


I have referenced and quoted actual rules from the CRB, APG, GMG, UM and ARG.

What reference’s or rules have been sighted supporting the claim that?

wraithstrike wrote:


The spell itself does not have a designation.

Please provide the source material for this claim, book, page number, that sort of thing so others can fallow and find it for themselves.


Wraithstrike Minion #1 wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

ML if spells can count as both arcane and divine for the purpose of spell types then what is stopping early entry into the mystic theurge prestige class?

Quote:

Requirements

To qualify to become a mystic theurge, a character must fulfill all the following criteria.
Skills: Knowledge (arcana) 3 ranks, Knowledge (religion) 3 ranks.

Spells: Able to cast 2nd-level divine spells and 2nd-level arcane spells.

Quote:

Bull's Strength

School transmutation; Level cleric 2, druid 2, paladin 2, sorcerer/wizard 2

Now as a wizard 2/cleric 1 or vice-versa I have access to a spell that is both divine and arcane according to your interpretation of the rule.

So I can be a wizard 2/cleric 1/MT 1. That however is not possible by the rules as the way they are, and any thread in any forum to include Enworld, Giants in the playground, and WotC's boards, and Paizo shows that is not accurate.

I would also like to see a rule that says a spell is specifically arcane or divine, no matter which class is casting it, or at least a rule that says a spell originally starts off as with a specific designation. I am sure you can not find such a rule however. I am beginning to think you are trolling. If you are not trolling then arguing with people who have been playing the game for years, and obviously know the rules a lot better than you do seems silly at best.

Since you seem to not have noticed (or purposefully ignored) the actual question on the mystic theurge. I'll repost it for my lord.

A 2nd level wizard can not cast 2nd level spells, so are you talking about using scrolls? Because activating a scroll is the same as activating a wand (for the most part) and does not count as casting the spell.


It should be noted that some spells like Raise Dead (a 5th level cleric spell) is cast at 6th level by the arcane witch. Another good reference point would be the spell Reincarnate (a 4th level druid spell) is cast as a 5th level spell by the arcane witch.

This is consistent with Mystic theurges Combined Spells class ability of costing a spell slot one level higher from crossing the arcane/divine boundary.

”CRB p388” wrote:


Combined Spells (Su): A mystic theurge can prepare and cast spells from one of his spellcasting classes using the available slots from any of his other spellcasting classes. Spells prepared or cast in this way take up a slot one level higher than they originally occupied.


Wraithstrike Minion #1 wrote:
Mystic Theurge?
”CRB p387-388” wrote:


Mystic theurges place no boundaries on their magical abilities and find no irreconcilable paradox in devotion to the arcane as well as the divine.
~~~
Combined Spells (Su): A mystic theurge can prepare and cast spells from one of his spellcasting classes using the available slots from any of his other spellcasting classes.

whats the confusion? Mystic Theurges can use Arcane spell slots to power or cast divine spells and vise versa. Which kind of points out what I have been saying all along.

Back to the topic of spells having a type independent of spell caster,
Lets not forget the components M/DF and or F/DF

”CRB p213” wrote:


If the Components line includes F/DF or M/DF, the arcane version of the spell has a focus component or a material component (the abbreviation before the slash) and the divine version has a divine focus component (the abbreviation after the slash).

M/DF and F/DF signify arcane or divine versions of a spell itself.

I have referenced and quoted actual rules from the CRB, APG, GMG, UM and ARG.

What reference’s or rules have been sighted supporting the claim that?

wraithstrike wrote:


The spell itself does not have a designation.

Please provide the source material for this claim, book, page number, that sort of thing so others can fallow and find it for themselves.


wraithstrike wrote:


Your logic is flawed because a witch casting a spell does not make it arcane. The spell itself does not have a designation. It's desination is decided by who cast it. There was a quote that said arcane caster cast divine spells, which is supported by the scroll rules.

and that concept completely ignors the arcane and divine spell lists in the gmg, the discription of arcane and divine spells in ultimate magic and then there is also the question of how a spell can be divine for an alchemist making a divine extract (remember that the long list of spells in question appear on both arcane and divine spell casters lists).

there is not rule stateing
"The spell itself does not have a designation."

its a nice house rule but as far as i know its not part of RAW


If someone uses a 13mm wrench to turn an imperial bolt with a half in head, does that make the bolt a metric bolt? No of course not.

So why would a Witch using arcane power to cast Death Ward change the spell itself from divine to arcane? Sure it is being cast as an arcane spell but the imperial bolt was being turned as a metric one with the 13mm wrench, right?

stringburka wrote:

It is true that you can choose to interpret it that way. But by trying to use loopholes you force developers toward a legalese style of rules design which makes it harder for the rest of us to understand the intent of the rules.

Because let's be clear - the intent of this ability is completely clear. This is a well-worded ability in that nearly all players will understand exactly what it is supposed to do.

When game developers are forced to write in a legalese style to hinder a few munchkins that try to "break" the game in any way possible, it becomes harder for the rest of us - who care more about how the game is supposed to be played than proving that "this can be misread in such a way that it's broken" - to understand the intent.

RAW for mystic past life does not specify spell class for the source of the spells to add, it does however specifiy spell type (arcane or divine, thus the question of intent. It seams to me that an arcane spell caster can not choose a divine spell (as stated in the rule) reguardless of what class it may come from and vise versa.

it is seen that with alchemist spell type is indapendant from that class, arcane and divine spells as spell themselfs are also discribed in UM as well as having a 10 page block in the GMG listing them as such and independant from a given spell casting class.

so what critera is used to determine the new spells that are not covered on the list from the GMG?


I understand that alchemists are not arcane or divine casters.

I also understand the reasoning behind the rule that alchemist do not require a divine focus for divine spells.

I am noting that such spells are defined as divine spells themselves without reference or being in regards to a divine spell caster or divine casting spell list.

That is my point.

It also appears that having a divine focus as a requirement or component for a spell is or can be a fairly good indicator that the spell itself is a divine spell by itself or in its own regards.

So are we in agreement with this?


eakratz wrote:


Here is a rough draft of a samsaran replacement character I wrote up for my GM for Council of Thieves, if this is the sort of thing you are thinking of.

** spoiler omitted **...

Kind of, this is a great starting point for back story and a new character.

Think of it this way, raise dead can be like treating your character like Kenny from south park, don’t worry about dyeing this episode because you will come back the same for next week.

Reincarnate is more like how star trek treats red shirts off screen, don’t worry about dying because you’re going to be playing the same part next week as a new race. Lord Voldemort from harry potter, yea you’re going to come back to the same life in a new form.

Samarian incarnation is more like Gandalf from lord of the rings, he died and came back changing a bit in the process but still looking the same. An easier analogy would probably be Dax from Deep Space 9, same race, a lot of the memories but really a new life that has learned from the old one.

The idea of developing characters over several lifetimes is a really fun idea. Say you have a player that always plays fighters but for once they decide to break out and play a cleric instead, they go a few levels and realize that’s just not for them so they multi class over to paladin. Turns out they play a great paladin and everything is fine and dandy but they get killed off around level 10. Rather than rolling up a completely new paladin this would allow that player to keep the rich history that they have already built upon and create a new life as a straight paladin rather than a multiclass paladin. A nice clean way to tie everything together from a DM stand point rather than hiding behind the pile of dead bards so to speak.

So this is more of a storyline and continuity type spell rather than different kind of fireball or something like that. And for those that start out as a Samsaran, this is a way to build upon the underlying racial concept as they progress through the levels. Rather than relying on raise deads and reincarnates they can get down with their Samsaran self’s and really embrace the wheel of life concept.


wraithstrike wrote:


Like we keep saying they are not casters so their magic is not arcane or divine.

Game, Set, Match ? :)

not quite,

APG p27 wrote:


alchemist extracts that duplicate divine spells...

which ones duplicate divine spells? and how do we determine that if and when the spells in question appear on both divine and arcane spell caster spell lists?

Game, Set & Match?


Drejk wrote:
Their reincarnation is a plot device not an actual ability so it has no actual mechanical value.

Yea, thats the way i was taking it as well, but its a really cool concept so how could we expand upon that? we could use reincarnation though that would be like a druid that keeps coming back as a diffrent race, or we could use raise dead but that keep us coming back as the same race and class without any deveation. thus the idea for Samsaran incarnation, it goes with the underlying concept of the race butwhat sort of drawback or counterbalance should it have if not an XP hit to keep it from being abused?


Yea, normally I would agree about the XP loss however in the case of reincarnate and raise dead you are keeping your existing character, mental stats, class, feats and that sort of thing. This is intended more as a way to salvage XP and add a way to maintain some storyline continuity when rolling up a new character without opening up an exploit.

Anyways, what spell level do you see this as, and what alternative safeguards can we put in place other than reduced XP recovery considering what this spell does?

PS. Love the concept and feel of the Samsaran race, but that includes the idea of each life being as different as a child to its parent concept. I also like the idea of Greater Samsaran incarnation but then it becomes a question of why not simply roll up a Samsaran from the get go, after all is we do the math in the ARG we find that Samsaran’s have a PR of 10 which is inline with other base races (though the auto reincarnate aspect wasn’t addressed either in my calcs or in mechanical description/racial traits within the ARG). Here is the math I got for figuring the PR,

Samsarans
Type - Humanoid (Samsarans) - 0 RP
Size - Medium - 0 RP
Base Speed – Normal Speed – 0 RP
Ability Score Modifiers - Specialized (+2 Int, +2 Wis, -2 Con) - 0 RP
Racial Traits
Low-Light Vision - 1 RP
Samsaran Magic - 2 RP
Lifebound - 2 RP
Shards of the Past - 4 RP
Languages – Linguist – 1 RP

I could be off, and would love any input, but that seams to be fairly close in any case.


wraithstrike wrote:


I will be nice and give you a freebie. click here

I think this is what you are talking about.

wraithstrike wrote:


In short the class determines if a spell is arcane or divine…

So what about an alchemist? They are neither an arcane or divine caster, so what determines what their extracts are for spells like Delay Poison or Discern Lies?

wraithstrike wrote:


PS:Your above post proves nothing. We never said there were no divine spells. We said that there can be a divine or arcane version of a spell, and that it is normally referred to as arcane or divine depending upon the version of the spell which depends on which class is casting it. <---That is the basis to a large extent of my Mystic Theurge and scroll questions, so I really don't know why you went and listed all of those spells unless you misunderstood what everyone has been saying.

Those are spells that are either on both arcane and divine spell casting class lists or on neither as noted. So in the case of the alchemist that is neither arcane nor divine what is the determining factor making the spells in question arcane or divine?

wraithstrike wrote:


The scroll rules say that to use a scroll naturally(without UMD) the caster type must match the scroll type. That is basic knowledge. It is also basic knowledge that caster can only create a scroll corresponding to his caster type.

I understand this, so a cleric with the fire domain can create a divine scroll of fireball, that does not mean that fireball is a divine spell, only that it can be cast by a divine spell caster and or made a scroll be a divine spell caster. Looking at the damage type of a fireball and remembering that,

”UM p130 wrote:


When looking at the Maximum Damage tables, also keep in mind that arcane spells usually use d6s for damage and divine spells usually use d8s

and

”GMG p114 wrote:


Components: Unless there’s a particularly good reason, almost all spells should require both verbal and somatic components, and most divine spells should require a divine focus. Spells with no verbal component are particularly rare.

the spell fireball appears to be much more arcane in nature or type as a spell itself.


Here is a spell that I think goes inline with the Samsaran Race.

Samsaran Incarnation
School Conjuration; Level Cleric/Oracle 5, Druid 5
Casting Time 1 Hour
Components V, S, M, DF (blood from a Samsaran, special (xp cost/loss paid by recipient))
Range touch
Target dead creature touched, see text
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw none, see text; Spell Resistance yes (harmless)

This spell is similar to Reincarnate and/or Raise Dead except for as noted below.

Samsaran incarnation returns a slain humanoid creature to a new life as a Samsaran provided that its death occurred no more than 1 week before the casting of the spell and the subject's soul is free and willing to return. If the subject's soul is not willing to return, the spell does not work therefore, a subject that wants to return receives no saving throw.

Samsaran Incarnation does not return a creature to its pervious life, instead it is the creation of a new life for the target of this spell. Roll up a new first level character of the Samsaran race and as the same class as the previous life, receive 75% of the memories (experience points) from the previous life at the time of death. Note, this will most likely mean that the new Samsaran is 1 level lower than they where in their previous life, this is not a negative level so it can not be recovered via Restoration or other normal magical means. If the previous life was a multi class character choose one of the classes to base this new life upon. Level up the new Samsaran based on the experience points received and allocating at least half (round up) of the new levels to the same class as the first level class of this new life.

The new creature appears to be a Samsaran analog of their former life similar to Ancestral Regression. No new equipment or material item is granted to this new character from the casting of this spell however they can “inherit” the belongings of their previous life provided they have access to those items, though this spell does not prevent any legal or ownership disputes that may arise.

Only a small portion of the creature’s body is required for this spell but the portion receiving the spell must have been part of the creature's body at the time of death. If no part of the creature’s body is available to use for this spell then Samsaran Incarnation can be cast directly on the creature’s spirit or soul however this spell does not help locate, get to or recover that soul though other magic could help. This spell provides no benefit beyond one week from the time of death of the creature to be targeted even if cast upon the creature’s soul, the spell simply fails.


Now that its been a few days hopefully we can keep the personal attacks to a minimum.

”APG p27” wrote:


Extracts cannot be made from spells that have focus requirements (alchemist extracts that duplicate divine spells never have a divine focus requirement).
”APG p28” wrote:


An alchemist can study a wizard’s spellbook to learn any formula that is equivalent to a spell the spellbook contains. A wizard, however, cannot learn spells from a formula book. An alchemist does not need to decipher arcane writings before copying them.

Here is a short list of spells on the alchemist list that are on both arcane a divine spell caster spell list and have a DF component without an alt.

Delay Poison - Stalwart Resolve - Delay Poison, Communal - Death Ward - Discern Lies

Don’t like that list, then how about this list of spells that are also on both arcane and divine spell caster lists that are also on the alchemist list.

Absorb Toxicity - Absorbing Inhalation - Acute Senses - Age Resistance - Age Resistance, Greater - Age Resistance, Lesser - Ancestral Regression - Animal Aspect - Animal Aspect, Greater - Ant Haul - Ant Haul, Communal - Anticipate Peril - Arcane Sight - Barkskin - Battle Trance -Bear's Endurance - Bestow Weapon Proficiency - Blend - Blistering Invective - Blood Blaze - Blood Scent - Bloodhound - Bull's Strength - Burrow - Burst of Speed - Cat's Grace - Certain Grip - Comprehend Languages - Countless Eyes - Cure Critical Wounds - Cure Light Wounds - Cure Moderate Wounds - Cure Serious Wounds – Darkvision - Darkvision, Communal - Darkvision, Greater - Delay Disease - Detect Thoughts - Detect Undead - Disguise Self - Dust Form - Eagle's Splendor - Earth Glide - Echolocation - Endure Elements - Endure Elements, Communal - Expeditious Retreat - Fire Sneeze - Freedom of Movement - Ghostly Disguise - Half-blood Extraction - Heal - Heroic Fortune - Heroism – Invisibility - Invisibility, Greater - Jump - Longshot - Neutralize Poison - Nondetection - Owl's Wisdom - Paragon Surge - Perceive Cues - Petulengro's Validation - Planar Adaptation - Planetary Adaptation - Protection from Energy - Recharge Innate Magic - Remove Blindness/Deafness - Remove Curse - Remove Disease - Resinous Skin - Resist Energy - Resist Energy, Communal - See Invisibility - Seek Thoughts - Sending - Sickening Strikes - Spider Climb - Spider Climb, Communal - Stone Fist - Stoneskin - Stoneskin, Communal - Tongues - Tongues, Communal - Touch of Slime - Touch of the Sea - True Seeing - True Strike - Undetectable Alignment - Urban Grace - Vermin Shape I - Vermin Shape II - Vocal Alteration - Water Breathing - Waters of Lamashtu - Youthful Appearance

Don’t like those spells either? How about the spells that are only on the alchemist list?

Absorbing Touch - Alchemical Allocation - Amplify Elixir - Bomber's Eye - Caging Bomb - Admixture - Delayed Consumption - Elude Time - Languid Bomb Admixture - Lightning - Lash Bomb Admixture - Mutagenic Touch - Orchid's Drop - Resurgent Transformation - Shadow Bomb Admixture - Targeted Bomb Admixture - Transmute Potion to Poison - Twin Form - Universal Formula - Viper Bomb Admixture

Which are divine and which are arcane? Because the alchemist isn’t either however they do have brew potion and do create extracts of divine and arcane spells. And how can we tell what type a spell is?

Once upon a time way back in Basic their where only divine clerics and arcane wizards and the terms where interchangeable. With the release of 1st ed and new classes arcane and divine described 2 different groups of spell casters. All the way upto the release of 3.0 this line was fairly well established. 3.0 brought with it the OGL and in the past few years that line has grown more and more blurred, however the rules are still being written with the arcane and divine spell types in mind.

”UM p130” wrote:


When looking at the Maximum Damage tables, also keep in mind that arcane spells usually use d6s for damage and divine spells usually use d8s, and these tables assume d6s; when looking at the damage caps for divine spells, count each d8 as 2d6. Thus, searing light is a 3rd-level single target cleric spell that deals up to 5d8 points of damage; treating each d8 as 2d6, that counts as 10d6, which is on target for a 3rd-level cleric spell. (Note that the 1d6 per level and maximum 10d6 points of damage against undead are still correct for a spell of this level, and the slightly higher damage against light-vulnerable undead is offset by the reduced damage against constructs).

Also note the max damage charts referred too in UM p130, tables 2-5 & 2-6

There are the charts in the GMG starting on page 125 and 130 refering to arcane and divine spells (not the spell casting class but the spells themselves). In the UC there is the caviler and spell breaker that refer to spell type. Sure there is the issue with Mystic Past Life that has already been talked about in this thread but there is also the issue with a cleric that has the arcane subdomain and its interactions with an alchemist potions and extracts.

”APG p86” wrote:


Arcane Beacon (Su): As a standard action you can become a beacon of arcane energy until the end of your next turn. The aura emanates 15 feet from you. All arcane spells cast within the aura either gain a +1 bonus to their caster level or increase their saving throw DC by +1. The caster chooses the benefit when she casts the spell. You can use this ability for a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Wisdom modifier.


Aioran wrote:
MLHagan wrote:

There is also the fluff, flavor and intent that interests me, I yield to the hack and slash video game mentality that has overrun this thread.

</3

This is what happens when I say I play 3.5.

No worries, this sort of thing makes the FATE system that much more appealing.

P.S. a divine focus does not need to be magical, it just needs to be something of significance that reminds your charature of there deity. a piece of burnt toast that looks like it has the face of your deity so to speek. I had a sorcerer that walked around talking cunsulting a small rock because he worshiped Bess, got hit in the head with a rock and had a dream about his god because of the rock, so he claimed it as a devine gift from his god. It was just a rock but the roll playing flavor it added was great. Kind of like the batman villian 2 face with his coin.

people can play how they want to play, mystic past life showed some real potential for flavor, but at this rate its not worth the trouble.


Gorbacz wrote:
MLHagan wrote:
Gauss wrote:

Aioran: Give it up, I think he knows this. He is just trolling.

- Gauss

who's trolling, i am the one who started this thread wasn't i?
So if I start a thread that is titled, hypothetically, "4E BLOWS GOATS AND MIKE MEARLS IS A GOAT TOO" and the opening post will be an essay on the topic matter, that won't be trolling? Jolly!

It may not seem like it but I was actually asking the question in all honesty. There are arcane and divine spell lists, there are multiple references to divine spells without regards to spell caster. well the list goes on suggesting that spells themselves start out as arcane, divine or both and then change as they are added to given list.

There is also the fluff, flavor and intent that interests me, I yield to the hack and slash video game mentality that has overrun this thread.


Gauss wrote:

Aioran: Give it up, I think he knows this. He is just trolling.

- Gauss

who's trolling, i am the one who started this thread wasn't i?


Aioran wrote:
MLHagan wrote:
Let’s go with James Jacobs ruling and feel free to use Mystic Past Life to select any other spell casting class, then pick whatever spells you would like from that class, as soon as they are added to your spell list they are of the correct type because the type is determined by whatever list the spell is on.
Except that it checks the type of the spell when you pick it, it's not added and then checked. It does not fulfil it's own requirements.

Nope, acording to James Jacobs it is

James Jacobs wrote:


a self-satisfying requirement. As you may have noticed, our rules writing can be overly pedantic and overly wordy at times...
ARG p198 wrote:


The spells must be the same type (arcane or divine) as the spellcasting class you’re adding them to.

whatever spell you add to your spell list will be the same type as your spell list.

you want Wish and Mirical on the same caster even an oracle or sorcer by level 19? not a problem.

this is what people have been fighting so hard for, to the point of predation.

Edit
The full post is Here

Feel free to check it out yourself.


Cool, sounds like it’s fairly over whelming that people are more interested in securing fun new loop hole rather than the “Fluff, Flavor or Intent” of this new addition. Why think when we can smash, and all that.

Let’s go with James Jacobs ruling and feel free to use Mystic Past Life to select any other spell casting class, then pick whatever spells you would like from that class, as soon as they are added to your spell list they are of the correct type because the type is determined by whatever list the spell is on.

As broken as that may be, no need to think any more, so enjoy.

James Jacobs wrote:


MLHagan wrote:


I have another question, Mystic Past Life doesn’t add spells as bonus spells it adds spells “to the spell list of your current spellcasting class”. If spells are determined to be arcane or divine by the spell list that they are on, wouldn’t this be a self satisfying requirement? Meaning any spell added to my spell list would inherently be of the proper type like the rest of the spells on that list?

Again, thank you for your time and your help sorting this for me.

As for the second question, that could indeed be a self-satisfying requirement. As you may have noticed, our rules writing can be overly pedantic and overly wordy at times...


Gauss wrote:

Wraithstrike, I posted that on my third post in this thread (near the top of page 2) :)

MLHagan: Until you acknowledge and understand the basic rules (IE: those in the CRB) any and all additional rules (ie: ARG, GMG etc) will cause you problems. I am continuing to post on this thread only in response to others but I have decided that I will not continue to expend resources on you personally.

- Gauss

so this is now preditory is it?

I think i got the CRB down, though i haven't added any rules to it that are not printed in it.


wraithstrike wrote:


All you have to do is take it post by post. :)

I have asked you 3 questions you have yet to answer, 2 of them repeatedly.

What makes a spell valid for one list is whether or not it can be cast by a certain class. We already know that arcane classes can only cast arcane versions of spells, and divine classes can only cast divine versions of spells.

As an example confusion lesser that is scribed into a scroll by a bard can not be cast by a cleric because it is an arcane spell coming from the bard.

the lists in the GMG are not in relation ship to class or spell caster like scrolls are in the CRB, instead they have been broken down by Arcane and Divine.

so again, what make a spell by itself valid for one list and not the other?

and because we seam to be in the mood to quote James Jacobs right now

James Jacobs wrote:


MLHagan wrote:


I have another question, Mystic Past Life doesn’t add spells as bonus spells it adds spells “to the spell list of your current spellcasting class”. If spells are determined to be arcane or divine by the spell list that they are on, wouldn’t this be a self satisfying requirement? Meaning any spell added to my spell list would inherently be of the proper type like the rest of the spells on that list?

Again, thank you for your time and your help sorting this for me.

As for the second question, that could indeed be a self-satisfying requirement. As you may have noticed, our rules writing can be overly pedantic and overly wordy at times...

So with Mystic Past Life, pick any class you want, pick any spells from that class that you want and by picking them you have fullfilled the requirments set forth by the racial trait.

I don't think that was the intent of the writer though.


Gauss wrote:

Kybryn:

First response

Second response

MLHagans response which JJ did not respond to

- Gauss

no thats out of the way would you care to weigh in on the fallowing?

MLHagan wrote:

Sorry, the conversation is getting all over the board right now and hard for me to fallow so I am going to reign it back in a bit.

Let’s make it nice and simple, in the GMG
starting on page 125 there is a list of Arcane spells that is unrelated to spell casters, there is also a list
starting on page 130 of Divine spells that is also unrelated to spell casters.

What makes spells valid for one list and not the other?


Sorry, the conversation is getting all over the board right now and hard for me to fallow so I am going to reign it back in a bit.

Let’s make it nice and simple, in the GMG
starting on page 125 there is a list of Arcane spells that is unrelated to spell casters, there is also a list
starting on page 130 of Divine spells that is also unrelated to spell casters.

What makes spells valid for one list and not the other?


wraithstrike wrote:


By divine spells, they mean the divine version of the spell. That is why I brought up the scroll issue earlier which you seem to not want to comment on, and the mystic theurge issue.

sorry, there have been a lot of comments, can reply to them all at the same time and alot are getting shuffled under the board.

so the question of scrolls, if spells are only determined by the caster then how could there be diffrent list of divine and arcane spells for use as scrolls. mind you that these list are not in reguards to any class that created them, and any class can use them as well with Use Magical Divice, so how is it that some spell are on the arcane list only and other spells are on the divine list only?

and what about refrence to DF in spells? people seam to be trying to turn that around and avoid it as much as possable.

i am sorry, my mind is a bit rattled right now, what did you want to know?


Aioran wrote:
So does that mean we can agree that arcane casters, who cast arcane and only arcane spells as is written in their class entries, do not need a DF when casting a spell that lists a DF in their components section?

Do you mean like a witch (an arcane spell caster) casting the spell Divine Power?

Divine Power being described as a divine spell in the ARG p198, and again in the GMG p132. Being described in the CRB p273 as having the components of V, S, DF and described as “Calling upon the divine power of your patron”? A witch with a patron of strength so they could have access to Divine Power in the first place? A witch that could probably use their familiar as their divine focus, the familiar being connected to their patron and all. A witch that gains their power from communion with the unknown. A witch that is full capable of crafting their own divine focus the same way that some divine spell casters with no support structure do?

Really? This is what you are worried about?

With or without a divine focus do you see how divine power pits in with the class? Spells like Raise Dead also fit in with the class even though they are being cast as arcane spells because a witch is connected to a patron.

Do you understand that a wizard using Mystic Past Life to gain access to the witch list then choosing a divine spell that relies on a patron or deity in its mechanics could cause a break down? Isn’t it possible that the rule in Mystic Past Life was intentional to prevent wizards from running around with cure light wounds, raise dead, reincarnation and the like? Isn’t arcane and divine magic described as

”CRB p218” wrote:


Arcane spells
Compared to divine spells, arcane spells are more likely to produce dramatic results.
”CRB p220” wrote:


Divine Spells
Unlike arcane spells, divine spells draw power from a divine source.
~~~
Divine spells tend to focus on healing and protection and are less flashy, destructive, and disruptive than arcane spells.

So basically it sounds like some want to give any arcane spell caster free access to divine magic without any affiliation to a higher power and limit the divine casters to only what they already have. Is that right? Because that’s basically what this is breaking down to, let’s pretend that the written rule for mystic past life is referring to spell casting class and not individual spells and pretend that individual spells don’t have any type regardless of how many references are shown that they do, just so we can protect a loop hole that would allow arcane casters more power than was intended.

Aioran wrote:


Though, I have yet to see a rules citation saying that spells are objectively typed. The closest is the explanation on MPL and the section quoted from the GM guide.

MPL being an explanation, not a rule, and the section from the GM guide obviously being a guide line.

A 10 page block out of one of the core books specifically listing spells as either divine or arcane compared to no reference what so ever saying that spells themselves are neither arcane or divine until attached to a spell caster.

The Game Mastery Guide may be labeled as a guide, it does open up with ” Welcome, Game Masters, to a collection of advice and inspiration, tools and rules…

For some no proff is possible.


here is a bit of information that might help us along on figuring out what spells are divine and what spells are arcane

”GMG p114” wrote:


Components: Unless there’s a particularly good reason, almost all spells should require both verbal and somatic components, and most divine spells should require a divine focus.

Mind you this is in reguards to spells themselfs and not a particular class of spell caster.


wraithstrike wrote:
MLHagan wrote:
excilent point, it already can be cast as an arcane spell and yet the spell itself is still concidered divine according to mystic past life.

I did not ask you for the mystic life rules. I asked for the rule saying a spell on its own had a certain desination that is seperate from a class. In short state a rule that says a spell is considered to be divine in and of itself, and how that determination is made.

well i can't tell you yet how the determination is made thus the name of this thread "What makes a divine spell divine?" Not the best name, i should have called it "what makes a spell a divine spell"

as for the question of how do we know that a spell can be arcane or divine in its own right totaly seperate from any given caster?

our in your words just so there is no confusion,

"I asked for the rule saying a spell on its own had a certain desination that is seperate from a class."

you are in luck, I just came across this a few minuites ago, in the game master guide on pages 125-130 there is a full list of arcane spells (at the time of release of the GMG anyways). pages 130-134 is the list of divine spells.

mind you these are rather long lists, and there is some cross over as suspected. but the list are of the spells only, no relationship to a given class, they are arcane or divine as spells in there own right.

not a complete picture for how to determine if a spell is divine or arcane but its clear that they are arcane or divine in themselfs.


Aioran wrote:


You really want arcane casters to have divine focuses, don't you?

It’s not a question of what I want, it’s a question of the rules.

”APG p28” wrote:


Extracts cannot be made from spells that have focus requirements (alchemist extracts that duplicate divine spells never have a divine focus requirement).

Edit: Stop the presses, "alchemist extracts that duplicate divine spells" yet another refrence to a spell type even from a class that has no caster type? are we going to ignor this as well because it does not fit in with our dogma?

”APG p43” wrote:


Oracles do not need to provide a divine focus to cast spells that list divine focus (DF) as part of the components.

Turns out that there is no such exemption of divine focus for inquisitor either, so it looks like they are going to have to get one somewhere too.

But this has been a nice exercise in smoke and mirrors, let’s not get side tracked by it though.

Some spells come in 2 versions, arcane and divine, denoted by M/DF and F/DF, other spells do not even though they too can be cast by either divine or arcane spall casters.

A spell itself with F/DF or M/DF is arcane and divine, as spell without either of those is not.

Sure in general spell casters override a spell type with their own caster type however that is not always the case referring to the alchemist producing magical potions. When an alchemist brews a spell resistance potion is it divine or arcane? Spell Resistance has a DF even though the alchemist does not need to provide it just like an oracle casting it does not either.

Spells do have a type (arcane or divine) even when not referring to a spell caster or class, just like DF is a component that must be satisfied just as much as V, S or M when casting a spell. We can choose to ignore or exclude this however that does not make it part of the rules as printed, just like we can choose to ignore the attacks of opportunity rules as well, these are house rules or homebrew and are only valid in such games.


Greg Wasson wrote:

My personal take on it, if it is on an arcane caster's list and has a material component of m/df or f/df then te arcane caster has a material component or focus required. If it is listed as DF with no slash... the arcane caster has no material component required. I would guess, because of your strange interpretations of rules.. you would somehow take DF to mean everyone has to have a DF material.. arcane and divination.

divine is a magic type, divination is a school of magic.

anyways, if a witch does not need to provide a divine focus for casting Raise Dead does that mean that a cleric does not need to provide the material componite?

thats preaty much what your saying, isn't it?
M/DF is the same as M, DF

Aioran wrote:


Unfortunately, only clerics, paladins, rangers, and druids have divine focuses.

other classes can buy them, take them by force or even steal them.

if they don't have one of there own then use some one elses, i suggest

"Holly and Mistletoe: Druids commonly use these plants as divine focuses when casting spells."

though i suggest purchasing a holy symbol of your deity to use as your divine focus instead.

but if divine focus were not an issue for arcane spell casters then why would divine focus be specificly noted in

"Spell Component Pouch: A spellcaster with a spell component pouch is assumed to have all the material components and focuses needed for spellcasting, except for those components that have a specific cost, divine focuses, and focuses that wouldn’t fit in a pouch."

but i think that this covers it better

CRB p184 wrote:


Cast a Spell

Most spells require 1 standard action to cast. You can cast such a spell either before or after you take a move action.

Note: You retain your Dexterity bonus to AC while casting.

Spell Components: To cast a spell with a verbal (V) component, your character must speak in a firm voice. If you’re gagged or in the area of a silence spell, you can’t cast such a spell. A spellcaster who has been deafened has a 20% chance to spoil any spell he tries to cast if that spell has a verbal component.

To cast a spell with a somatic (S) component, you must gesture freely with at least one hand. You can’t cast a spell of this type while bound, grappling, or with both your hands full or occupied.

To cast a spell with a material (M), focus (F), or divine focus(DF) component, you have to have the proper materials, as described by the spell. Unless these components are elaborate, preparing them is a free action. For material components and focuses whose costs are not listed in the spell description, you can assume that you have them if you have your spell component pouch.

now where is it specifing that arcane casters don't need them?

Greg Wasson wrote:


You have a great theory for conjecture of a different ruleset...put it in homebrew.

along side arcane spell casters don't need divne focus right?

personaly i would rather stick to the rules as stated in this thread rather than confusing the question with made up/homebrew rules.


wraithstrike wrote:


Good point with with the "DF" reference, but you still have yet to provide a rules quote saying a spell has a specific designation, and the class does not matter.

What i have said and continue to say is that mystic past life is placing a restrictions on what kind of spells (and not class list or class list)that can be choosen from. and i have provided the rules for mystic past life many times.

Buri wrote:
Greg Wasson wrote:

"Divine power is a divine spell", was also an example to the rule...not the rule. CURRENTLY, divine power is only on lists of divine casters. There may be a rule out there allowing an arcane caster to cast it or not. But if now or in the future an arcane caster does cast it...it becomes arcane.

Greg.

Witch > Strength Patron

Quote:
Strength: 2nd—divine favor, 4th—bull's strength, 6th—greater magic weapon, 8th—divine power, 10th—righteous might, 12th—bull's strength (mass), 14th—giant form I, 16th—giant form II, 18th—shapechange.

excilent point, it already can be cast as an arcane spell and yet the spell itself is still concidered divine according to mystic past life.

Aioran wrote:
MLHagan wrote:

confusion, lesser is in the core rule book, it is listed as a bard spell only when that book was released, it has the componites of V, S, DF

no F/DF or M/DF so there is no alternative for the divine focus.

Not true. It's a bard spell but was also part of the Madness Domain, hence the DF requirement.

EDIT: Strength patron gets some nice stuff ;o

Reguardles, it is a spell that can be cast as arcane and yet still requires a divine focus.

Spells can also have arcane and divine versions reguarless of caster as noted by F/DF and M/DF. Spells like Ant Haul even when being cast by an arcane spell caster still retain there divine version within the spell.

Quote:


If the Components line includes F/DF or M/DF, the arcane version of the spell has a focus component or a material component (the abbreviation before the slash) and the divine version has a divine focus component (the abbreviation after the slash).

Other spells do not have an arcane version and remain divine themselves even though they are being cast as arcane spells.

If you only look at a spell in relationship to who is casting the spell, it becomes difficult to the spell itself.

Here is a longer list of spells that appear on arcane spell casters spell list that retain a Divine Focus component, meaning that there is no F/ (focus) or M/ (material) alternative listed for these spells.

Aspect of the Nightingale - Barkskin - Binding Earth - Binding Earth, Mass - Bite the Hand - Bite the Hand, Mass - Blast Barrier - Blight - Calm Emotions - Confusion, Lesser - Cursed Earth - Death Ward - Debilitating Portent - Delay Disease - Delay Poison - Delay Poison, Communal - Discern Lies - Discern Location - Dismissal - Eagle Aerie - Feeblemind - Freedom of Movement - Hellfire Ray - Heroes' Feast - Heroic Fortune - Heroic Fortune, Mass - Insect Plague - Mad Monkeys - Magic Fang - Magic Fang, Greater - Magic Siege Engine - Magic Weapon - Mark of Justice - Nature's Exile - Pellet Blast - Pernicious Poison - Poison - Protection from Energy - Protection from Energy, Communal - Prying Eyes - Prying Eyes, Greater - Raging Rubble - Raise Dead - Rampart - Rapid Repair - Regenerate - Reincarnate - Repel Vermin - Resist Energy - Resist Energy, Communal - Resurrection - Sanctify Corpse - Seducer's Eyes - Seek Thoughts - Shield of the Dawnflower - Shifting Sand - Speak with Dead - Stalwart Resolve - Stone Call - Stone Shield - Summon Derghodaemon - Unravel Destiny - Water Walk - Web Shelter - Winds of Vengeance - World Wave - Zone of Truth

This is more than a couple of exceptions to another rule, these spells retain a divine connection regardless of what class is casting them. Sure, they may be cast by arcane spell casters as arcane spells, however that does not make the spells themselves arcane in nature.

This is not a question of fluff or flavor, this is in regards to required spell components for casting the spell.

So it appears that spells can be divine in their own right regardless of who is casting them or how they are being cast. The question now becomes, what else makes a spell itself divine? And of course there is the fallow up question of what makes a spell itself arcane?

Also are we ready to consider spell name and description in the distinction yet?


AnnoyingOrange wrote:
MLHagan wrote:
turely an exciting time, we are potential on the edge of a whole new understanding of how these sorts of things work.

I just think you are wrong.

confusion, lesser is also a spell of the madness domain, and thus a cleric is capable of casting it. Since it was historically (3.x) a cleric spell with a DF component it got to keep it, if they gave it serious thought they probably would have removed it.

Reincarnate probably should not be there for witches but it was only a druid spell before so not really a consideration.

if we are adding domain spells that leads us back to fireball as well.

reincarnate is a divine spell that can be cast as arcane by the witch class but if you don't like that example of a divine spell being cast as arcane that still requires a divine focus how about Cursed Earth, Winds of Vengeance or World Wave, these are all wizard spell as well as divine spells that do not have an alternative to the DF requirement or componite. Looks like some arcane casters are going to have to take a few from the divine casters.


wraithstrike wrote:


The divine focus is not needed if the spell is being cast by an arcane caster either.
Quote:


Divine Focus (DF): A divine focus component is an item of spiritual significance. The divine focus for a cleric or a paladin is a holy symbol appropriate to the character's faith. The divine focus for a druid or a ranger is a sprig of holly, or some other sacred plant.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

If the Components line includes F/DF or M/DF, the arcane version of the spell has a focus component or a material component (the abbreviation before the slash) and the divine version has a divine focus component (the abbreviation after the slash).

You also have to remember the core spells were not written with later books in mind.

Note that there is no DF for arcane casters so even if an arcane class can cast a spell that was initially intended to be divine they don't have to worry about the DF.

lets not be confusing the rules

confusion, lesser is in the core rule book, it is listed as a bard spell only when that book was released, it has the componites of V, S, DF

no F/DF or M/DF so there is no alternative for the divine focus.

where is the rule saying that arcane spell casters don't need to fullfill the DF componite of a spell such as is writen for the oracle class?

even if arcane spell casters can ignor the DF requirement the point that spells with a divine focus requirment exsist even if that spell dose not include divine casters makeing that spell divine in nature.

in effect it shows that spells can be divine without refrence to divine spell casting class. this means that the belife that spell type is only determined once a given spell caster is involved is false.

Greg Wasson wrote:

"Divine power is a divine spell", was also an example to the rule...not the rule. CURRENTLY, divine power is only on lists of divine casters. There may be a rule out there allowing an arcane caster to cast it or not. But if now or in the future an arcane caster does cast it...it becomes arcane.

Greg.

lets not forget that the example given specified a single spell and not a spell casting class or a class spell list as the source to the additional spells for mystic past life.

it appears spells can be divine without a relationship to a divine spell casting class. mystic past life does not require the source and destination spell casting classes to be of the same type, only the spell being chosen must match the spell type of the class that it is being added to.

this could be a new concept for us to understand and not added additional rules or requirements not stated in the rule itself.

it also could means that some spells that we thought we could get are actualy not valid options. if this is ture than a samsaran wizard selecting the witch class to choose their spells from would not be able to selecet reincarnate even though its on an arcane spell list because it is a divine spell specificly, and its a divine spell specificly because it has a requirment of a DF without haveing a substitute option of F/ or M/ attached to the DF.

turely an exciting time, we are potential on the edge of a whole new understanding of how these sorts of things work.


Aioran wrote:
MLHagan wrote:
Aioran wrote:


Correction: They have a formulae list.
no spell casting and no spell list, my goodness, then there really must be no way for such spells to be either divine or arcane now could there? good thing they don't have to provide a divine focus for their non divine spell right? shame arcane spell casters can't overlook the same thing.
Correct, correct, divine focuses are a component of some divine casters and not not a component of some divine and non-divine casters.

confusion, lesser - its a bard 1st level spell (CRB) and requires a divine focus

seducer's eyes - its a bard, sorcer and wizard spell (FOB) and requires a divine focus

both of these spells are listed for arcane casters and yet they both require a divine focus that can not be ignored. if spells where only determined to be divine or arcane by the caster why would these spells require a divine focus which the listed casters don't naturaly have?


wraithstrike wrote:
MLHagan wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

Yeah they can be cast as arcane or divine depending on the class.

If you are saying the spells themselves and not the class is the factor then provide a rules quote.

again, advanced race guide, page 198, right hand side, first paragraph

The spells must be the same type (arcane or divine) as the spellcasting class you’re adding them to. For example, you could add divine power to your druid class spell list, but not to your wizard class spell list because divine power is a divine spell.

note that it is asking about a spell and not a class as a source for that spell. it goes on in the example to say that,

divine power is a divine spell.

again, no refrence to what class is casting it or any class where it came from, just that the spell itself is divine.

That is because the spell was written for divine classes. Authors also sometimes make mistakes. That is one of them. He should never have assumed the divine power will never be available to an arcane spell casting class. You still have not quoted a rule, but only a blurb that gives a bad example.

What he should have said was that since divine power is not on any arcane class's spell list it can not be added as an arcane spell. That would be the more accurate statement.

i refrenced the rules for mystic past life, for a full account it has been post several times in this thread including the Original Post.

no where in mystic past life does it specific anything about what class you are choosing the spell from only spells themselfs.

if spells are only arcane or divine depending upon the caster then explain a divine focus requirement within the spell itself. these requirments remain with the spell reguarless of the caster though some casters are capable of ignoring it such as an oracle which "Oracles do not need to provide a divine focus to cast spells that list divine focus (DF) as part of the components." but thats ok, oracles are divine casters anyways.


Aioran wrote:


Correction: They have a formulae list.

no spell casting and no spell list, my goodness, then there really must be no way for such spells to be either divine or arcane now could there? good thing they don't have to provide a divine focus for their non divine spell right? shame arcane spell casters can't overlook the same thing.


wraithstrike wrote:

Yeah they can be cast as arcane or divine depending on the class.

If you are saying the spells themselves and not the class is the factor then provide a rules quote.

again, advanced race guide, page 198, right hand side, first paragraph

The spells must be the same type (arcane or divine) as the spellcasting class you’re adding them to. For example, you could add divine power to your druid class spell list, but not to your wizard class spell list because divine power is a divine spell.

note that it is asking about a spell and not a class as a source for that spell. it goes on in the example to say that,

divine power is a divine spell.

again, no refrence to what class is casting it or any class where it came from, just that the spell itself is divine.


Gauss wrote:


So the rules: The rules state that spells cast by arcane classes are arcane and that spells cast by divine classes are divine. The fluff does NOT change that rule. The names of the spell does not change that rule. The fluff of the spells does not change that rule.

Just because a spell has 'divine' in the spell name means exactly two things: Jack and Squat. (I always wanted to say that! heheh)

- Gauss

so according to you it is the spell caster and only the spell caster that determines is a spell is arcane or divine correct? this is what you have siad multiple times and have yet to provide and rule refrences to back up that.

you have accepted that alchemist do not cast spells and are neither arcane or divine casters. they have a spell list, do the spells on there list have no affeliation or type (arcane or divine)?

if spells are neither divine or arcane prior to being selected be a spell casting class then how do you explain some spells requiring a divine focus? after all and according to you it is not divine before it is selected by a class. this is not fluf or flavor, it is mechanics, which seams to be the only thing that you are willing to concider. how many arcane spell casters walk around with a divine focus?

what about spells that do not require a divine focus but require a material componite? last i checked most divine spell casters don't walk around with full spell componite pouches after all.

then there are the spells that can use either divine focus or material componite, how do you explain these?

remember that the componiets required to cast a spell do not change if it is cast as a divine spell or arcane spell.


wraithstrike wrote:

ML if spells can count as both arcane and divine for the purpose of spell types then what is stopping early entry into the mystic theurge prestige class?

you misunderstand, spells like detect magic can be cast as either arcane or divine spells, as with cure light wounds and the like. just because a spell itself can be either or is both dose not mean that a given spell caster can cast them as both. wizards cast there spells using arcane magic and clerics using divine magic. thats not to say that a spell can't be arcane or divine but that most spells fall somewhere in between.

humans can be new borns or on there death bed, there is also a hole lot at vering degrees inbetween.

wraithstrike wrote:


Fluff is also not rules. The cleave feat and how it does not allow you to cleave multiple mirror images is an example of that.

By the fluff you are only making one attack that extends from target to target, but by the mechanics you are making several attacks which must hit the intended target.

without fluff we are sitting at a table with a math problem, player 1 with an a4 race and an x3 class.... its not an rpg without the flavor. an arcane wizard with no god casing divine power doesn't fit into the fluff and is just mechanics, and i think that is the point of the restriction set in mystic past life.

Fluff is mutable. Mechanics are not without changing how the game works. The horselord archetype also has fluff and mechanics that disagree. The fluff says you can choose basically any mount you want, but the actual rules have specific restrictions that greatly limit you.


Gauss wrote:

*sighs* you so missed the point

They cannot be colored differently before they are handed to different classes. They are given properly to each class. Class is divine? uses divine spells. Class is Arcane? uses arcane spells.

Mystic Past Life is NOT able to rips off another classes spells across the Divine/Arcane divide. They must be the same: Divine-Divine or Arcane-Arcane. (IE: could not repaint the golf balls because the Developers decreed it.)

Ancient Lorekeeper (Elven Arcana) is the ONLY class I am aware of that allows you to rip off a Wizard's spells across the Divine/Arcane divide. But because of the rules (and lack of exception stating otherwise) the 'stolen' arcane spells become divine spells for the Ancient Lorekeeper. (IE: repainted the golf balls because the Developers decreed it.)

Now, if you still don't get it I am sorry.

- Gauss

no i get that you where trying to say that all golf balls start out white, or all spells start out without an inclination towards divine or arcane as it where. but it doesn't say that anywhere in the rules and is forcable over looks the spell discrptions and names refering to arcane or divine acordingly.

pathfinder isn't just a game of mechanics, there is alot of flavor and roll playing that goes with it, so much so that people moved over to the system when WOTC introduced 4th ed and the lack of flavor/roll playing that came along with that system.

spells like guidance or bestow grace are more than just there mechanical implacations, thier divine refrence within the spell description remains even if cast as an arcane spell. in effect we can peal back the aftermarket paint to reveal the true colors underneath if we look beyond what effect they have on the math.


Gauss wrote:


Look, I have told you the rules. Others have told you the rules. I have even written you a story in order to try to help you understand. For tonight at least, I am done. Perhaps I will try again tommorow. Then again, I have other things I will need to be doing so perhaps not.

- Gauss

nice story, glad to see that you accept that some golfballs or spells can be colored arcane or divine before they are handed to the diffrent schools. spells like guidance which refer to its divine nature in the spell discription "This spell imbues the subject with a touch of divine guidance".

just because spell casters can change the type of a spell to match the casting capability of thier class does not exclude a spell from having its own prior to that point. sure, all spells a witch casts are cast as arcane spells, but what to say that they didn't have their own type prior to a given spellcasting class getting ahold of them? show me a rule that specifies that they don't and we can go from there.


Talonhawke wrote:
Actually from what i understand and alchemist is a non-arcane non-divine "caster" I say this because it came up early this year about alchemist taking Imp familier and one of the Devs saying that they don't meet the prereq since they need an Arcane Caster level.

Thank you, thats a good piece of information and understandalbe because its noted in the APG that alchemist don't actualy cast spells. odd that so many automaticly accept or expect alchemist to be arcane though. So much so that even James Jacobs refered to the alchemist class as being arcane spellcasters in the past 24 hours. I don't fault him for it, i totaly understand the feal of the class as being such. Its just like the implied restriction that so many are placing on mystic past life. It feals like thats how its supposed to work so why look any further.

again, thank you for that clearification.


How do you know that an alchemist is an arcane caster? Its not written in the advanced players guide as such. Alchemist don’t actually cast spells. If spells are determined by who’s casting them then why would an alchemist’s spell list be considered arcane?

Is it based on where alchemist get there spell selection from? because there are a lot of spells on their list that are not on any arcane spell casters list. Spells like aid, healing warmth, keen senses, restoration, spell resistance, wind walk and the like. The point is that there are spells that don’t have an arcane heritage and yet they are still considered arcane.

Is it the feel of the class, its clearly not divine so by default does that make it arcane?

Anyways, alchemist are not actually spell casters, they are not described as being arcane or divine and yet they are accepted as being arcane.

If alchemist can be accepted as arcane without being a spell caster then why wouldn’t a spell like divine power be accepted as divine without relationship to a spell caster either?


Greg Wasson wrote:


I think you are reading way too much in a lazy edit. Feats, special abilities, class features, all these things and more are exceptions to the rules. Comparing two special features and trying to link them to change the nature of divine and arcane.. maybe would be better off in Suggestions or General discussion.

Rule wise, it is pretty clear.

Greg

not trying to change arcane or divine magic, trying to understand what the intent was. and not trying to link 2 special features, compairing to simular things to eachother.

to me this is simular to wizards compaired to sorcerers, wizards have fewer spells but a wider selection (simular to mystic past life, lower spell count but able to choose from diffrent classes) sorcerers have more spells but a smaller selection (simular to eleven arcana, higher spell count but limited to a smaller list to choose from).

as for the question of what makes a divine spell divine, the more i look into it the more i realise that there are spells that feal more divine than others, spells like divine arrow, bestow grace, searing light, spells that in there discription rely on a divine source or deity to fule the power of the spell. spells that we have over looked in genral veiwing only the face mechanics and not really delving in to the flavor or roll playing side of things.

to me mystic past life could be a really cool step towards pathfinder becoming more roll playing oriented rather than a table top version of a video game that 4th ed has become. or it could be as you put it "a lazy edit". rather than being cought up in preconcived notions and exsisting dogma, i prefer to keep my mind open to the posabilites.

Gauss wrote:

MLHagan:

There is a concept in 3.5/Pathfinder game design. That difference is General versus Specific. General rules are how most things work. Specific rules are how specific things work and usually add some exception to the general. But it MUST be stated they add an exception.

General:
Arcane spells are cast by the following classes: Alchemist,

Yea, people keep calling an alchemist an arcane spell caster, i am not really fallowing that either, alchemist don't cast spells, they make extracts that function like spells. sure these potions or extracts are equivilant to spells but are they spells? can they be examined with detect magic? I don't know, worth looking further into, but there is something there thats not sitting quite right at the moment.

Gauss wrote:


Specific (Mystic Past Life):
A character with Mystic Past Life selects a spellcasting class to take some spells from and add them to his own. Both classes must be either Arcane classes or Divine classes.

Note: Since both classes must be the same there is no problem here.

Yea, and again thats the leap of faith that i am not fallowing, if spells themselfs can be arcane or divine then your above restrictions make no sceanse in reguards to what is writen for mystic past life. after all it does not refer to the source class or spell list, that connection as some have put it is implied. but what if its not supposed to be implied?

so far i haven't heard or seen any rules saying that a given spell can not be arcane or divine by itself. there is one refrence that suggest that they can be.

I understand how truely divine or arcane spells could get lost in the shuffel though, i mean really how would we know that Deafening Song Bolt was intended to be a turely arcane spell all on its own and in its own right if it keeps getting mixed in with other bard spells that get converted upon casting.

basicly its like if i dump all of my golf balls into a vat of red paint without looking at them and before i use them how do i know if some of them where red before i used them? we need to peal back some paint and take a closer look don't we?


Vellas wrote:

With Mystic past life, it is saying you can pick spells from some other spell list to add to yours, but they must be the same type, so as an oracle you couldn't pick any spell from a sorcerer list, because you go and pick a spell from there, but it is an illegal choice.

What I am saying is I read
"You add a number of spells equal to 1 + your spellcasting class’s key ability score bonus (Wisdom for clerics, and so on). The spells must be the same type (arcane or divine) as the spellcasting class you’re adding them to. For example, you could add divine power to your druid class spell list, but not to your wizard class spell list because divine power is a divine spell. "
as meaning that the spell has to meet the requirement to be added to your list, not that it is put on your list and then that it is checked.

Arcane sight was only on arcane spell lists prior to the introduction of the inquisitor class, a divine spell casting class.

At some point in the future Paizo could release a new arcane spell casting class with divine power on its spell list. Would the rule in mystic past life refering to divine power remain valid? After all it refers to a particular spell and not a spell casting class, doesn’t it? Even if divine power was on an arcane spell list according to this it would remain an invalid choice as currently writen, wouldn't it?

it appears as if the developer that wrote this section specificly excluded refrence to the source spell casting class on purpose. they could have just as easly chosen to write

”For example, you could not add divine power to your wizard class spell list because it does not appear on the base spell list of any arcane spellcasting class.”

rather than

”For example, you could add divine power to your druid class spell list, but not to your wizard class spell list because divine power is a divine spell.”

as writen it opens up alot of questions about what we thought we knew in the past, prior to that i had no question about what spells were divine or arcane, just look at what class is casting it and there you go. but this opens up a whole new realm of possablities, will there be other kinds of magic like infernal or demonic magic to counter divine magic and casters at some point in the future? I don't know, but i do know that i don't know so there's that.

I would love to hear from the person that actualy wrote this and find out what there intent was, untill then i have concedded to fallow the masses and selecet from divine or arcane classes accordinly. but the question remains, what makes a divine spell divine? and the possability that it is something more than just what list its on may come to light at some point.

Greg Wasson wrote:


If you are discussing the Samsaran Alternate ability by itself, Velas' answer is correct. NO.. an oracle must select a divine spell from divine lists.

so it sounds like you are saying that its not the caster in question the determiens if a spell is arcane or not. if spells become arcane or divine as soon as a caster selects them or adds them to there list then and spell a samsaran oracle choose's by default is divine.

basicly it sounds like you are saying that its not a problem for an elven oracle to choose a wider selection of spells (9) from the wizard list but it is for a samsarian oracle to choose the max of 5 from the same list.

this is the point when i am not fallowing the logic.


Greg Wasson wrote:

For that particular oracle, their spell list is always divine. So, as soon as a spell is made available for that list, it is divine.

Fireball spell in and off itself is neither divine nor arcane. On the wizard's list, it is arcane. On a Cleric's list it is divine.

The class determines the type. It doesn't matter how you learned it.

Greg

Cool, so lets take that one step further.

Advanced Race Guide page 198 wrote:


Mystic Past Life (Su):
You can add spells from another spellcasting class to the spell list of your current spellcasting class.

Cool, as an oracle I can choose any other spell casting class, I choose wizard. There is no limitation on what other spell casting class I can choose, it only has to be different than the one I am currently in.

Advanced Race Guide page 198 wrote:


You add a number of spells equal to 1 + your spellcasting class’s key ability score bonus (Wisdom for clerics, and so on).

My cha at 1st level is 16 for a +3 bonus, that gives me a total of 4 spells to select from the wizard class and add them to my spell list.

Advanced Race Guide page 198 wrote:


The spells must be the same type (arcane or divine) as the spellcasting class you’re adding them to. For example, you could add divine power to your druid class spell list, but not to your wizard class spell list because divine power is a divine spell.

Not a problem, as soon as I select my fireball its on my oracle list and is now a divine spell.

The requirement of divine or arcane spell is now self fulling because whatever spell I select will atuomaticly become the same as the class that I am selecting it for.

After all the requirement of spell type becomes irrelevant if the caster is the only determining factor in making a spell arcane or divine.

right?

Greg Wasson wrote:


EDIT: 45 years old and I still mispell "their" more oft than not. *sigh* And to think, both my Step-parents were English teachers.

LOL, dyslexic myself, so i wouldn't have noticed anyways.

1 to 50 of 124 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>