I just noticed something (too late for the playtest, of course -- *bonk*):
"A sorcerer knows a number of cantrips. He can cast these spells at will as a spell-like ability."
"A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus."
So do cantrips have components or not? I presume they do (since it states so in the spell-description), but the rules on spell-like abilities contradict this.
Similarly, do sorcerer & wizard cantrips suffer from arcane spell failure (because they're arcane spells, sort of) or not (because they're spell-like abilities, sort of)?
My assumption is that the description of cantrips is a vestige of the SRD, while the sorcerer text about cantrips is Pathfinder's new approach.
Therefore there is a paradox.
The text will probably be edited in the final version to match the spell-like concept of cantrips.
Outside of that, no, if cantrips are spell-like abilities, they don't require components or foci.
For arcane spell failure, it's up to the DM i guess. Although there is no spell casting, they need some concentration to manifest, so you can consider they can be interrupted.
Outside of that, no, if cantrips are spell-like abilities, they don't require components or foci.
For arcane spell failure, it's up to the DM i guess. Although there is no spell casting, they need some concentration to manifest, so you can consider they can be interrupted.
Well, if a spell has no somatic components, there's no arcane spell failure.
Personally, I think that they should act like spells. I think the use term "spell-like ability" was used with unintended consequences, but only Jason can say for sure.
As written, they currently have no components. This may or may not have been intentional. (The caster level of the spell like ability has also been omitted.)
The components listed in the spell description are still relevant, however, if the spell is prepared and cast as normal. For instance, if a caster wants to prepare and extended light or a maximized acid splash in a higher level slot. (I don't know why you would, but it is allowed.
The components listed in the spell description are still relevant, however, if the spell is prepared and cast as normal. For instance, if a caster wants to prepare and extended light or a maximized acid splash in a higher level slot. (I don't know why you would, but it is allowed.
Hmmm...good point. I didn't think about that.
Duh. Me neither :(
/hides
Re:
(The caster level of the spell like ability has also been omitted.)
I suggested that the caster level for the at-will cantrips be set at 1st level to avoid some of the scaling with level issues associated with at-will cantrips. This allows higher level casters to still 'show off' if they commit a spell slot and get access to their regular caster level. (A 10th-level druid might prepare create water in a 1st level slot, for instance. The cantrip would be stuck at making a couple quarts of water, but the prepared spell would be good for fighting forest fires.)
Re:(The caster level of the spell like ability has also been omitted.)I suggested that the caster level for the at-will cantrips be set at 1st level to avoid some of the scaling with level issues associated with at-will cantrips. This allows higher level casters to still 'show off' if they commit a spell slot and get access to their regular caster level. (A 10th-level druid might prepare create water in a 1st level slot, for instance. The cantrip would be stuck at making a couple quarts of water, but the prepared spell would be good for fighting forest fires.)
I agree that cantrips should not have effects that are dependent on level; most of them don't, but there are still a few that do. I'd also add that I'd prefer most cantrips to operate "one at a time" so that casters aren't tempted to cast Dancing Lights or Guidance every six seconds.