Mystic "X"'s page

1085: Omission Possible

Any day we get a FAQ is a good day, but does this mean I have to move tacos to Friday?

If you're the sort that works Monday to Friday, I'd say leave tacos where they are. Friday's good enough on its own, and Tuesday needs all the help it can get.

Mystic "X" wrote:

It's true that the spell level is never actually -1, but during the process, the spell level is treated as -1, which rewords the question to "can a spell level be treated as a number not between 0 and 9?". The scimitar, in your example, is being treated as another valid weapon type, but the -1 spell level is potentially invalid.

It is being treated that way for a specific purpose, that being a calculation of the final level of the spell.

Are there any rules that apply to that calculation that provide us with further information on the values of spell level? In fact there are, the final level can't be lower than the initial level.

That's it.

Since the spell level actually isn't -1, none of the main rules regarding spell levels apply. Again, the spell level isn't actually -1.

I disagree that the specific purpose changes the limitations on the values, or that the main rules don't apply. It's still a value for a Spell Level, even if it's a transient value.

I do agree that there are no additional rules or clarifications regarding how the calculation is performed, which is why I think the question is a valid question.

I think that the question of whether or not a floor exists absolutely matters to the OP's question. That the calculation only happens during the act of adding a metamagic feat doesn't change the fact that the existence of a floor creates two very different equations for calculating the spell's final level.

Using the original example, with no floor:
(0 - 1) + 1 = 0 (which would have the effect of unlimited metamagiced uses of the spell)
With a floor:
Max(0-1, 0) + 1 = 1 (which negates the effect of Magical Lineage for 0-level) spells.

I'm personally of the belief that a floor is intentional, but I didn't write the rules. I'd rule for the floor, personally, but that doesn't help answer for PFS.

All I know is I can't wait for a competent captain to take over this ship.

1074 - Turning Back

SPF 10,000,000,000?

The thread title really describes the question, but just to clarify, if a character charges at a creature, provoking AoOs from the attacked creature (because it has reach) and other creatures (from moving through their squares), does the -2 AC penalty apply?
For reference, in the PRD, the penalty is listed in the Attacking on a Charge section (which should come after the charge's movement)

Movement During a Charge: You must move before your attack, not after

and

Attacking on a Charge: After moving, you may make a single melee attack. You get a +2 bonus on the attack roll and take a –2 penalty to your AC until the start of your next turn.

That implies (to me) that the penalty doesn't apply until after the charge attack is made, but I'd like clarification.

Thanks in advance.