Nigrescence's page

A recently published (February 2015) Paizo book, called Pathfinder Strategy Guide has specifically written and illustrated rules on page 128 regarding threatened areas and attacks of opportunity with a reach weapon.

These written and illustrated rules conflict with the FAQ entry regarding threatened areas and attacks of opportunity with a reach weapon. The FAQ was meant to address some questions about the Pathfinder Rules Reference Cards.

The FAQ entry was added in December of 2014. However, the Pathfinder Strategy Guide was published in February of 2015, which is more recent than the FAQ.

This seems to be an explicit contradiction in two official Paizo documents. The Pathfinder Strategy Guide is the most recent. If the Pathfinder Strategy Guide treatment of reach is to be considered the official stance on reach and threatened areas, the FAQ must be updated to maintain consistency and clarity of Paizo resources. If it does not, and the current FAQ entry reflects the official stance on reach and threatened areas, the FAQ must be updated to address and clarify this contradiction (as well as updating any further printings of said book).

The FAQ entry was meant to clarify the cards, but now we have a different, more recent, publication from Paizo which contradicts the cards as well as the current FAQ entry on reach and threatened areas.

Please click FAQ on this post to get this contradiction addressed in the FAQ. I don't have any particular opinion on which is to be used, but think there should be clarity in this case. This case is extra confusing because we have an older published FAQ decision in contradiction to a newer published Paizo book. This is not a thread to debate which is preferential. This is to address a contradiction in official stances which I do not currently see specifically addressed in the FAQ.

Thanks, and happy rolling.

They generally have full BAB progression, combat-relevant abilities, often will get bonus combat feats or special ways to use weapons, and other unique things that define them as a class. They dominate the battlefield and are the main power source to ending an encounter. They are the backbone of any adventuring group and are invaluable. For all of their bluster and bluffing, a caster wouldn't be caught dead without some martial support. Or, actually, they would definitely be dead without it.

Additionally, they are generally still extremely effective in an anti-magic field, which needless to say completely nullifies casters. That is seriously powerful.

Additionally, a caster must take the time to cast a spell, which makes them vulnerable, and there is often no guarantee that their spell will have any effect, or will be severely reduced, thereby wasting their turn as well as a limited resource. Whereas a martial can do their thing all day long (though some martial special abilities are indeed a limited resource).

Now, I'm not saying that martials don't need some tweaks. As examples I think things like Vital Strike could be more useful and worth taking in general (like making it compatible with Spring Attack, even if it is a feat tax that says your Vital Strike can be used as the attack when making a Spring Attack), and slings got the shaft, which was only remedied with... TWO... feat taxes to make them begin to be viable. So yes, there is some merit to complaining about the state of martials.

Yes, casters do get more powerful as their levels rise, but so do martials. And most of the truly horrible gnashing of teeth and wailing stuff people complain about happens at only the highest levels, and only begins to be a potential problem around character level eleven... worst case scenario. It's a rise in power up to fifth level spells at which point the casters have a well-developed ability to have some staying power and power to stay on point with the martials. But until then it can be quite rough for casters to keep up. Hell, it's a whole lot of trouble before you get access to third level spells, and it's only at that point that the door to equality is cracked open.

But overall, martials are inherently more powerful, and a decent DM can keep the worst kind of casting abusers from the silly one-combat-per-day twinked out no-regard-for-balance absurdity. If you let a caster expect only one combat or encounter each adventuring day and ensure that they never ever have to deal with anything other than that, you WILL see problems. Sure. But that's when something needs to be changed about how the DM operates, NOT the game itself.

Don't theorycraft all characters at level twenty and then suggest that it reflects the majority of the game for all players and adventure modules, when that couldn't be further from the truth. Most characters, assuming you start from level one, will spend the majority of their play time below level ten, because most characters probably never get much farther than level ten.

So embrace the power that martials have over casters, and the dependence casters have on martials, learn how to recognize and confront improper encounter balance in a DM's planned day, and remember that the most powerful magic of all is friendship.

I may have missed it in the forums, but I've searched for a few days and didn't see it in the threads I saw. My question is somewhat particular, and I would like to know the answer.

I noticed that it doesn't insist the sneak attack would have to come from the threatening weapon that provides the flank.

Let's say the rogue wields two daggers and is flanking. Could the rogue choose to throw one of the daggers as a ranged attack and still benefit from SA for flanking, since they still have a melee weapon that threatens and was threatening with a melee weapon before the attack was made?

It's not optimal, probably, but can it be done? Let's say he's a thrown weapon specialist and wants to SA in combat regularly without having to feint every other turn he attacks (if feint succeeds). Or doesn't want to feat tax to improved feint. Or wants to have this option for a Full Attack with thrown weapons, in melee.

Let's say the throwing specialist rogue is Large, and so threatens in ten feet with their daggers. They are flanking, and have the enemy at reach, so not adjacent to them. Would they get the sneak attack for the ranged dagger throw since they are flanking in melee even if the sneaked attack is ranged?

Additionally, if the rogue is wielding one dagger, and so threatens and flanks the creature, can the rogue use a ray of frost or other ranged touch spell to get a sneak attack? Of course provoking or defensive casting applies, but they are still flanking and threatening with a melee weapon. What if they are Large and cast at ten foot reach (much safer)?

In essence, my question is does the sneak attack have to come from the threatening weapon, or is it good enough that they are threatening?

If there's a specific rule or errata that clarifies this, I'd appreciate being pointed there. I tried to cover all the corner cases about this particular rule.
Thanks in advance.

So, I have some time before I might have to use a new character, and I decided to take another look at the Summoner. I'm choosing to go with a Summoner who's wimpy and focuses on skills and/or spells, while the Eidolon does the heavy lifting and combat (this also means that I can focus more money on the Eidolon's gear). Of course, the Summoner has enough uses of the Summon Monster SLA that if the Eidolon is taken out, he can fall back on that (or just run away).

I don't want my Eidolon to be weak or be taken out, though, so this is what I've come up with for the moment. I'm looking for advice on perhaps different Evolutions to take. The Eidolon is going for as large of a reach as possible, and the Pull is so that I drag enemies closer to him so that they either have to fight him or they provoke one of his many attacks of opportunity to flee.

I considered dropping the Dex +2 Evolution to boost his flying or to add the Rend evolution for some really nice extra damage. I'm leaning toward adding Rend since he's got such nicely powered up claws. It might be worth losing the Dex +2.

Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions?

The Eidolon Bipedal Base
STR 34
DEX 16
CON 18
INT 8
WIS 10
CHA 11
HP: 87 (8d10 + 8x4)
BAB: +8 (CMB 21, CMD 34)
FORT: +13 (+6 Base, +4 CON, +3 Resistance)
REF: +8 (+2 Base, +3 DEX, +3 Resistance)
WILL: +9 (+6 Base, +3 Resistance)
SPEED: 30' Move, 30' Fly (Average Maneuverability)
AC: 33 (10 +16 NA, +3 DEX, +4 Armor, +1 Insight, -1 Size)
ATTACKS: Power Attack Adds -3 to Hit +6 to Damage
4x +2 Claws +22 (2d6+14) (Pull Target 5' Closer if CMB Succeeds on Hit)
The Claws have 10' Reach, and one set of claws has 15' Reach.
The Eidolon has an Amulet of Mighty Fists +2, to get +2 Claws.
SKILLS (Only Combat): Fly +9, Acrobatics +10, Perception +11
FEATS: 1- Combat Reflexes, 3- Power Attack, 5- Improved Natural Attack: Claw, 7- Weapon Focus: Claw
EVOLUTIONS: Evolution Points 14 +2 Favored Class Bonus
4 - Large
2 - Flight
2 - Ability Increase (DEX +2)
2 - Limbs (Arms)
1 - Claws (Arms)
1 - Improved Damage (Claws)
1 - Improved Natural Armor
1 - Improved Natural Armor
1 - Pull (Claws)
1 - Reach (Primary Set of Claws)

Biped Base Free
2 - Limbs (Legs)
2 - Limbs (Arms)
1 - Claws (Arms)

One character concept I had in mind was a Halfling Bard (Arcane Duelist) who specialized in slinging. His main performances for Bardic Performance would be either whistling (combined with a whistle strapped to his sling to act as a drone, like you'd have when playing bagpipes or the hurdy gurdy) or dancing (with the sling).

Level 10
Halfling - Alternate Racials: Warslinger
Stats (20 point buy, factoring in racials, level 4 and 8 stat points into DEX and CHA respectively):
STR 10 (12 -2 Racial)
DEX 18 (15 +2 Racial, +1 level 4 stat boost)
CON 12 (12)
INT 12 (12)
WIS 10 (10)
CHA 18 (15 +2 Racial, +1 level 8 stat boost)

Feats: 1- Point-Blank Shot, 3- Rapid Shot, 5- Weapon Focus (Sling), 7- Deadly Aim, 9- Improved Initiative

Just a +1 Sling for the weapon, probably with some special properties that he can't get through the Arcane Duelist's ability, or a higher enhancement bonus for increased hit chance and some damage.
At level 10, he'd use medium armor, probably a Mithral Breastplate +1 or more.
He'd use a Buckler +1 or a Light Shield +1.

Those are just the basics. Does anyone have suggestions on stat allocation or feats to make him better in combat? I didn't list the skills because he'd get a ton of them and they're not too important for what I'm asking. The favored class bonus would go into skills every level, and my guy will still be skill-starved.

Also, what do you think of this attempt to make slinging viable in combat? This Bard can get iterative attacks thanks to the Warslinger alternate racial, and can even use Rapid Shot to get an extra one. With his spells, he can easily buff himself up to offset the Rapid Shot, and can also sing to boost his weapon's enhancement bonus or special abilities.

So, I've been looking at the Clockwork Creature template for more variety in constructs.

We have golems, a very few specific constructs, and animated objects. I'm contemplating taking the Craft Construct feat and want to have something more variable that I can take in-between being able to craft a Flesh Golem and being able to craft a Stone Golem, for instance. The Clockwork Creature template seems perfect for this, but it's not PF material.

Searching the threads for a comment on creating animated objects through Craft Construct produced a suggestion by James Jacobs that the cost for animating an object through Craft Construct be 2,000 GP per CR, as a rough solution to the question.

My question is, would applying the Clockwork Creature template as is be suitable for Pathfinder, or what changes would you make to it to adapt it to Pathfinder?

I think the template is fine, except the cost to craft via Craft Construct should probably be increased to 2,000 GP per CR of the resulting creature to fit balance and as suggested by James Jacobs as a rough solution to animated objects created in this same manner.

Though I do wonder if changing it so that you only need to be 2 levels higher than the CR of the resulting creature's CR instead of 4 levels higher would be a balanced change.

As it currently sits, you can turn a CR 4 creature into a clockwork creature, becoming a CR 6 creature. To make such a creature, you would need to be at least 6+4 levels, or 10 levels.

With my suggestion, you can turn a CR 6 creature into a clockwork creature, becoming CR 8. To make such a creature, you would need to be at least 8+2 levels, or 10 levels.

With the price increase (by the template as written, 800 GP) to 2,000 GP per CR, would this result be balanced for Pathfinder? It comes out about even with golems, from what I checked out. You just get some more variety and perhaps some special skills/abilities/properties, which all golems have, anyway.

So, I started thinking about fun things to do with ring crafting, and I got an idea to make a ring fit for a Wizard who has had enough experience traveling that he makes himself a ring fit to handle such an endeavor.

Before I post what I figured, let me preface this by stating that any ability with a question mark next to it is one I think may be questionable as far as adding to the item. So, it's a tentative desire/suggestion, and not a bold insistence on having it added to the ring. Even the ones without a question mark are still not definitive items, but they're ones I'm less uncertain about being acceptable or fitting.

If you have any other ideas on what to add, feel free to post them, or critique the things I've thrown together.

I accounted for all of the factors in following the chart. The ones that say they were added all have the 1.5x modifier applied to them. If I miscalculated, feel free to let me know, but I highly doubt that I did. If you feel an ability should have a different price than by the book, go ahead and say why you think so.

All effects are continuous.

14000 - Ring of Invisibility (Wizards Only - 30% cheaper and applied the same to all further enchantments - It is a Wizard ring after all.)
2625 - Ring of Sustenance ADDED to Invisibility Ring
2310 - Ring of Feather Falling ADDED to Invisibility Ring
1050 - Ring of Endure Elements ADDED to Invisibility Ring
1575 - Ring of Detect Magic ADDED to Invisibility Ring
2625 - Ring of Perception +5 (Competence) ADDED to Invisibility Ring
2100 - ? Ring of Mage Armor ADDED to Invisibility Ring
4200 - ? Ring of Shield ADDED to Invisibility Ring
2100 - ? Ring of Protection +1 ADDED to Invisibility Ring
2100 - ? Ring of Natural Armor +1 ADDED to Invisibility Ring
1500 - Magic Aura Continuous Effect On Ring (Non-Magical) (Not Wizard Only due to Not Applicable since the effect is on the item.)

Total Cost: 36185

I'll start by discussing the Mage Armor and Shield abilities of the item, which are probably the most controversial. I would completely understand someone saying such a thing, but hear me out first. I know the magic item estimation chart covers AC bonuses itself, but it covers AC bonuses that scale with money input (and bonuses that STACK with other bonuses). Additionally, that pricing pattern allows for people to add armor special abilities to items like Bracers of Armor instead of just AC bonuses.

The item here has only flat bonuses, and ones that don't stack (except for the Protection +1 and Natural Armor +1 bonuses, which follow the chart specifically). Since Mage Armor lasts a really long time anyway, I think it can work as an item. It would mean almost nothing to a Fighter who uses heavy armor, since it wouldn't stack with his armor, but it's a way for a Wizard (or similar caster) to spend money to have a constant Mage Armor up, instead of just casting it once every day (or twice or more at lower levels) with an extend rod.

If there's really a strong opposition to having it continually effect Mage Armor and Shield, the item could instead use the chart to add Luck, Insight, Sacred, Dodge, Morale, Shield, and Competence bonuses to AC, as well as regular Armor bonuses (but I think going that far is a bit silly since it is practically just for the sake of cheese, which is not the point of this item, and something I'd rather avoid - it's not like this item HAS to provide AC boosts, it can do so many other fun things instead).

Additionally, I applied the Wizard class restriction to the item, not only to reduce the price but more importantly to not make it viable for another class (of course, other full arcanist classes could be used instead, like the Sorcerer or Witch, especially if they themselves make the item). It's also for the flavor of the item. It's a Wizard's tool.

Without being Wizard only, this item would value at about 51050 GP (comparable to a Ring of Shooting Stars or Ring of Spell Storing in price - this ring just has a bunch of little effects).

My prediction is that nobody will like suggesting the abilities with question marks next to them, and I'm perfectly happy to have the item be without those abilities (and in return perhaps different abilities).

As for suggesting different abilities to give the item, remember that the theme is of a wanderer or traveler who made or commissioned this item to assist in their travels and exploration (and, if it helps, they add each effect now and then instead of ALL at once).

Let's say a wizard starts play at 10th level, and obviously he wants more spells in his spellbook/s than the few he gets just from leveling.

In Chapter 9, page 219 of the Core book, it says, "In most cases, wizards charge a fee for the privilege of copying spells from their spellbooks. This fee is usually equal to half the cost to write the spell into a spellbook... Rare and unique spells might cost significantly more."

My questions are (assuming the standard wealth by level chart, and a standard Pathfinder game world):

What method do you think should be used for charging a mid/high-level wizard to start play with extra spells (those not granted through leveling) in his spellbook/s?

Do you think that, at character creation with only starting wealth from the wealth by level list, charging full price for scrolls and scribing costs for every spell added beyond what he gains from leveling is fair?

Would you allow a wizard building his spellbook at character creation to have copied a reasonably common or standard spell at the lower cost of copying from another wizard's spellbooks instead of assuming that they must have bought the scroll and copied from the scroll for all spells?

Additionally, if a wizard invests in item creation feats, and has the appropriate skill rank levels, spells available, and wealth to spend in materials, should he be allowed to start play with appropriate items as if he had crafted them himself (e.g. extra scrolls that are already in his spellbook/s, wands of spells already in his spellbook/s, wondrous items of a CL whose DC he can sufficiently match either on a 1 or through taking 10 and thus be guaranteed success, etc.)? Particularly if the item creation feats were gained at levels below the one with which he starts play, and he could have had the appropriate skill rank levels, spells available, and wealth available to have crafted them at that level were he to have been playing it before character creation.

For what it's worth, I recently built two characters at the same level, one of which was a wizard. I had to assume that even with the wizard's investment in item creation feats, he started play as if he bought everything, and build the inventory appropriately.
The wizard ended up investing nearly half of his wealth on scrolls plus spellbook scribing costs (before I removed quite a few spells to reduce that cost), and spent the rest of it on things he couldn't or wouldn't craft (or did not spend it at all).

The other character, however, simply bought things that seemed to match their needs at that level, and seemed to have more value in the items in comparison than the wizard.

The problem for me is that not only did the wizard consume a feat (which for a wizard is a valuable and limited resource, as it means he cannot put something like Spell Penetration in that feat slot) to have item creation abilities above the Scribe Scroll feat that he gets for free at 1st level, but he had absolutely no advantage to having that feat at character creation, while the other character had full advantage of all feats chosen.

I understand that item creation feats will help during play even if they don't at character creation, but they do consume a feat, and they are of much less personal benefit to a character if they choose to craft items for anyone but themselves (since you can only craft one thing at a time, and items become more expensive and take longer to craft, meaning your output is reduced for the most part).

Hopefully these questions have been stated well, and I look forward to hearing all of your personal opinions on the matter (including your own house rulings on the subjects if you have made any - or an official response if there is one to be made).

I'm currently building a Summoner for an upcoming campaign (we're continuing where we left off in terms of level, just with new characters and in the future), and I could use some help. In particular, I don't know what feat I should select for my Eidolon's third feat. Yes, there are lots of good ones out there, I'm just stuck. Even if I don't play this guy, I want to solidify the build for the future, and just because I put some time into it (and I think it's a genuinely good build).

I'm also submitting the build in general to be analyzed. For example, my character and how he's built. Can he be improved? I don't think so, at least not at the level we are and with the money we have to spend. As I mention below, level 8 is a nice boost to both me and my Eidolon.
The general plan is that I'll be riding my Eidolon as an ill-suited mount (so -5 to Ride checks, unless I'm missing something else). He's not a mount, so using him as one makes him an ill-suited mount, yes? Once he becomes large at next level, I'm going to have a sort of harness that holds a platform at his shoulders and treating it as a Military Saddle (Exotic) crafted for my Eidolon (it's for flavor purposes, enough that I'll spend on it - plus I can say that since it has to act as a saddle, it has walls on the sides, enough that I can duck down for cover behind).

Of course, I'm not completely attached to that concept. I can always just stand on the ground and be within his ridiculously large reach range, or even move up to be near him.

I'm also not concerned about not having Precise Shot for my archer. Yeah, you heard me. The build I'm going for will at next level be able to take advantage of the Eidolon's large reach and push evolution (and maybe a pull evolution) and reach evolution (which is how he'll get that ridiculous reach) so that most of the targets in his reach will not qualify for being in melee for the purposes of the -4 penalty. I read those rules very closely. Please also be sure that you've recently read them if you're going to critique that idea of mine, and remember that even large/huge creatures can take a 5-foot step.

I'd just like to say before I start, everything I've selected ties in to the character background and makes sense. This isn't for pure optimization (although I tried to do a decent job). I can easily drop Heirloom or use any other bow (hence why I selected the alternate racial to be able to use any longbow if I can't or don't want to use my heirloom weapon).
Also, this character gets MUCH better at level 8, when I can start doing what I plan to do, which is to give my eidolon crazy reach and provide a super threatened area. Or he'll get the ability to push/pull 5ft away/towards him on a successful attack if I think that will be more useful to constantly have than reach - extra reach can always be granted via a spell, either through enlarging or evolving, possibly both. I can do other things, too. He also gets a nice boost to STR and CON.

Now, on to it!

Half-Elf: Summoner (Remove Multitalented and add Arcane Training, Remove Adaptibility and add Ancestral Arms Longbow)
Level: 7 Summoner (7/4 EP from FC bonus)
Languages: Common, Elven, Celestial
Traits: Elven Reflexes, Heirloom Weapon (Mighty +2 Darkwood Composite Longbow) - We are creating characters at a higher level (7), and it says at character creation. I understand that things must be legal from level 1 up for feats and whatnot, but this is how it's written. If I CANNOT do this alone, then I replace Elven Reflexes with the trait giving me 900 gold on start, obviously I don't get it at +1, but it's within the value when non-magical. My choice is legal by RAW, however.
Feats: 1 - Point Blank Shot, 3 - Weapon Focus (Longbow), 5 - Arcane Strike, 7 - Rapid Shot
Skills: Spellcraft 1, Use Magic Device 1, Linguistics 1, Knowledge (Arcana) 1, Handle Animal 1, Ride 1, Fly 1
STR 14 - 14
DEX 16 - 19
CON 14 - 14
INT 7 - 7
WIS 9 - 9
CHA 14 - 14
Left is point buy stats, right is adding in level stat buy and racials (20 point buy).

Spells: (Cast Per Day: 1st - 5, 2nd - 4, 3rd - 1)
Cantrips: Guidance, Detect Magic, Read Magic, Mage Hand, Message, Light (or Mending)
1st: Mage Armor, Shield, Lesser Rejuvenate Eidolon, Enlarge Person, Reduce Person
2nd: Summon Eidolon, Lesser Evolution Surge, Barkskin, Haste
3rd: Evolution Surge, Greater Magic Fang

Items (23500 GP):
2000 - Handy Haversack
1800 - Efficient Quiver
6150 - Elven Chain +1
2430 - (Heirloom) Mighty +2 Darkwood Composite Longbow +1
5000 - Bracers of Archery, Lesser
4000 - Belt of Incredible Dexterity +2
1000 - Cloak of Resistance +1
150 - Wand of Gravity Bow (10)
20 - Arrows, common (400)
20 - Arrows, blunt (200)
20 - Arrows, whistling (40)
10 - Arrows, flight (100)
900 - Gold Pieces
All of the items that can be equipped are on me, not my Eidolon. I could always make the wand fully charged if partial charge isn't allowed.

Stats with gear:
STR 14
DEX 21
CON 14
INT 7
WIS 9
CHA 14

AC: 22 +2 if in my Eidolon's reach (26 if I can or should cast Shield on myself, and either 25 if just Barkskin is up or 29 if Barkskin is added to this)
Touch: 15
Flat: 17 (21 if I have a Shield still up, and either 20 if just Barkskin is up or 24 if Barkskin is added to this)

Saves: Fort - 5, Ref - 8, Will - 5
+2 to all saves if in my Eidolon's reach

Attacks: Shoot -> +14 to hit for 1d8+5 damage, and two attacks at +12 to hit for 1d8+5 if I activate Rapid Shot

-----

Eidolon (Biped):
Ability Score Increase: STR +1
Feats: Combat Reflexes, Power Attack, ? (I don't know what I should get for his third feat - Improved Natural Weapon for claws seems good, but it would ONLY be good if his form has claws, but since that is a free evolution as a biped it might make sense for the sake of evolution point efficiency to have his main method of attacking remain claws throughout his whole evolutionary line. I would take Standstill if only it wasn't merely adjacent. Shield Proficiency? Shields outclass the spell later on mainly because you don't need to burn an action to put it up, but I wonder if that will be one natural attack too many reduced to hold a shield.)
Bonus 4 Class Skills: Diplomacy, Intimidate, Sleight of Hand, Survival (ALL are subject to change - Possibly replace two for Swim and Climb due to his ridiculous STR, except that he can naturally get movement for those with just a Lesser Evolution Surge, although it would be nice for simple checks and to use it all the time. I should probably give him Acrobatics, actually.)
Skills Invested: I don't even have it settled yet.
Evolutions: 10 + 1 EP (from FC)
1 - Improved Natural Armor
1 - Improved Damage (Claws)
2 - Energy Attacks (Acid)
2 - Ability Increase (STR +2)
2 - Ability Increase (STR +2)
2 - Limbs (Arms)
1 - Claws (Arms)

Stats:
STR 24
DEX 15
CON 13
INT 7
WIS 10
CHA 11

AC: 20 (24 since Mage Armor lasts nearly a whole day even if it takes two casts, 28 if I can cast Shield on him, and 31 if I can also cast Barkskin on him.)
Touch: 12
Flat: 18 (22 if Mage Armor is up, 26 if Shield is for some reason up too, and 29 if Barkskin is still up on him.)

Saves: Fort - 6, Reflex - 4, Will - 5

Attacks: Claws X 4 -> +13 to hit for 1d6+7 damage and 1d6 acid each attack, all at full BAB
This is without Power Attack on, and when he's medium. He gets effectively +8 STR (and a -1 to hit due to size) and +4 CON with no AC change if I cast Evolution Surge to grant Large (It's evolved through the spell, not selected as a baseline change, the RAW seems to allow for the spell to grant the Large evolution through the spell even if I'm not level 8 yet, when I can normally add it to his base form as a permanent evolution. My reasoning is this is a friggin' spell expended, and it's not permanent, and the RAW allows it.)