A little gem about 0 level spells.


Rules Questions

201 to 250 of 259 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:
EDIT: And do try to remain level-headed and non-insulting in this thread. We built the game for folks to have fun with, not as a matrix upon which to build and maintain flame wars.

And I *am* having fun. :)

It was known from the start this isn't how the rules are intended. There just happens to be a contradiction between RAI and RAW. Even the OP admits this.

Lehmuska wrote:
Anyway, I should be wrong about this. Cantrips shouldn't work like this. However, until there's sufficent evidence against them working like this, they do.

What I'm aiming here is to have people interpret rules more in a standardified way, not have the misconception of "metamagic increases spell level".

That just isn't correct.


James Jacobs wrote:
The rules as intended and as they should be interpreted are that you only get to cast 0 level spells at will. Once they're prepared with higher level spell slots, they follow all the rules for how higher level spell slots work.

But that's the core of this argument. I'm arguing that spell slots follow the same rules all the time, and the unlimited metamagic cantrips is a feature of cantrips being zero level spells, not cast from zero level slots. Obviously it's not how it was intended, but as this thread shows, an argument can be made that it works regardless.

A bit of errata would be nice to bury this argument for good.


So what about higher-level-than-zeroth spells prepared in a zero-level slot (e.g. by use of the trait alongside a no-adjustment metamagic feat)?

Liberty's Edge

Jabor wrote:
So what about higher-level-than-zeroth spells prepared in a zero-level slot (e.g. by use of the trait alongside a no-adjustment metamagic feat)?

There are no Zero Level slots.


Xuttah wrote:
Jabor wrote:
So what about higher-level-than-zeroth spells prepared in a zero-level slot (e.g. by use of the trait alongside a no-adjustment metamagic feat)?
There are no Zero Level slots.

Not completely accurate.

PRD wrote:
A wizard who prepares spells from his opposition schools must use two spell slots of that level to prepare the spell.
PRD wrote:
A wizard can prepare a cantrip from a prohibited school, but it uses up two of his available slots...

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

pres man wrote:
Xuttah wrote:
Jabor wrote:
So what about higher-level-than-zeroth spells prepared in a zero-level slot (e.g. by use of the trait alongside a no-adjustment metamagic feat)?
There are no Zero Level slots.

Not completely accurate.

PRD wrote:
A wizard who prepares spells from his opposition schools must use two spell slots of that level to prepare the spell.
PRD wrote:
A wizard can prepare a cantrip from a prohibited school, but it uses up two of his available slots...

I caught that too, and wasn't sure what to make of it. I think RAI it takes up two 'memorization' slots. so if my abjurer with 3 cantrips memorized (banned evocation) wants a ray of frost he's only going to have Ray of Frost and one other.

Though apparently if you can drop a spell a level through metamagic hijinks it becomes zero level. Infinite magic missiles here I come :-)

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

I'm not trying to have it both ways actually.

As I tried to explain in my reply to Epic Meepo, I take it as a trait of cantrips that they don't expend any slots.

To use your own quote: This does not change the level of the spell so an extended dancing lights that is cast using a higher level slot is still a 0 level spell. It is prepared as a first level spell, cast as a first level spell (with the DC for concentration being 17, instead of 15), requires an 11 in the casting stat like a first level spell, but is still a zero level spell, so it doesn't expend the slot it's sitting in.

Now lets make a feat:

Spoiler:
Lessen spell (Metamagic)
A lessened spell has a lower level than normal (but not less than zero). All effects dependent on spell level are determined by the effective final level of the spell. Dice of damage are reduced by one step

Now since my new feat still 'doesn't change the level of the spell' we'll cast a lessened magic missile. The wizard memorizes it as a zero level spell (displacing a cantrip) but it does consume a spell slot since it isn't a zero level spell. Obiviously my feat is 3.x friendly, but for Pathfinder it would need to read (but not less than one)

Now, obiviously James has come along and put an end to how it is intended. That said, I don't lose any sleep over it, and in my home games, will let cantrips work this way.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

James Jacobs wrote:

The rules as intended and as they should be interpreted are that you only get to cast 0 level spells at will. Once they're prepared with higher level spell slots, they follow all the rules for how higher level spell slots work.

Allowing all cantrips to be cast at will despite that spell slot you used to prepare the spell is an interesting house rule, though.

EDIT: And do try to remain level-headed and non-insulting in this thread. We built the game for folks to have fun with, not as a matrix upon which to build and maintain flame wars.

Thank you for the clarification James. So I guess, no, the int 10 orc can't metamagic without an ability booster.

And I hope no one took umbrage at my posts, I was just enjoying the argument and it gave my sorcerers a new trick. Win all around.


Deussu wrote:


Wait, suddenly, according to the quote*, metamagic changes the spell's level cumulatively? But since metamagic doesn't change the spell's level**, it's a cumulative 0? It... doesn't really change the issue, but it shows, that even the Core Rulebook doesn't have the faintest clue what its supposed to do in this situation. :)

Also, misinterpreting that metamagic would increase the spell's level is a far worse misinterpretation. By doing so you are making every metamagic feat function as Heighten Spell in addition to its normal functions. Be sure to let my Widened Grease have the DC increased by 3, as it will be a 4-level spell. Or the Empowered Fireball, a 5-level spell.

Again, I don't see how this is such a problem to grasp.

Casting a metamagic enhanced cantrip uses up a slot of the appropriate level. It does not use up the cantrip, since the cantrip can be cast any number of times per day.

However, you cannot cast the cantrip with metamagic if you do not have the slots to do it. And regardless of the metamagic applied, saves against it will always be against a 0-level spell.

The rules seem perfectly clear as they are to me.


Lehmuska wrote:
Edit: DigMarx, Is it cool to insult people on the internet?

Didn't intend insult. I apologize if you or anyone else took it that way. Lawyer it up, bro. I reiterate: Thank God for DMs with common sense.

Zo

(EDIT)
It seems as though some of us want our rulebooks (especially something that is as hyped and apparently popular as PFRPG) to be both a bible and a code of laws, so to speak. I argue that it can't be both at the same time to full effect. For me, and the groups I play with, it remains a GAME to be enjoyed. Rules and flavor balance nicely. No one worries if, in Faerun, a falling object accelerates at 9.8 m/s^2. I hope the rest of you are still having fun slaying ogres and outwitting monomaniacal dragons.

No offense, all due respect, I'm just sayin...


You are wrong AND rude, a metamgick'ed 0 level spell will always consume a spell slot of the appropriate level. A normal 0 level spell will not be consumed in it's normal use. That 0 level spell no longer even takes up a 0 level 'spell slot', just as a 1st level spell metamagick'ed to a 2nd level spell is then considered a 2nd level spell, and takes up a 2nd level spell slot. Sorry this is not a loophole you just need to read more carefully.


Yeah, it's probably too good to allow any spell slot above 0th level to be used over and over again for any purpose. I can foresee problems, particularly with at-will quickened evocation-based ranged touch attacks.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

James Jacobs wrote:

The rules as intended and as they should be interpreted are that you only get to cast 0 level spells at will. Once they're prepared with higher level spell slots, they follow all the rules for how higher level spell slots work.

We built the game for folks to have fun with, not as a matrix upon which to build and maintain flame wars.

I appreciate your insight, but unfortunately until such time as there is errata (to correct it in the book) or a FAQ (that explicitly says that you are required to consider the FAQ as errata) that suggests how to rule this in a game there will still be discussions such as this one that never stop.

Sadly, in a forum setting (where there is NO GM) you end up with "RAW" as the only way to discuss things on a level plane. In this mode you need the official interpretations to be "official" unlike WotC where the FAQ held no weight because it was explicitly not considered "errata" for the game.

Would you consider publishing FAQ and making it the official way a DM should interpret the rules? Please, because these discussions are what I hated most about on online WotC forums.

Liberty's Edge

James Risner wrote:


Would you consider publishing FAQ and making it the official way a DM should interpret the rules? Please, because these discussions are what I hated most about on online WotC forums.

IMO Common Sense and Rule 0 handle this very well. Do what the group thinks is fair/logical/in the spirit of the game, then apply the rule consistantly.

A little of our own independant thought and good judgement is all the official interpretaion that we should need.

A good guideline when RAW and RAI come into conflict is to err on the side of RAI.


Xuttah wrote:
A good guideline when RAW and RAI come into conflict is to err on the side of RAI.

That's true for legal issues, but intent can be relative without an impartial arbiter. Certain DMs view the rules as restrictions on players while certain players view the rules as an enabler for a powerful combination of abilities. From those perspectives, intent can be very different.

Liberty's Edge

meabolex wrote:


That's true for legal issues, but intent can be relative without an impartial arbiter. Certain DMs view the rules as restrictions on players while certain players view the rules as an enabler for a powerful combination of abilities. From those perspectives, intent can be very different.

The DM is supposed to be that impartial arbiter. :)

Sadly, there are those players who get more joy out of finding loopholes and rules exploits that grant unintended or unfair advantage than they do participating is the game for mutual enjoyment.

This kind of gamer not understand that the only way to measure "winning" D&D is whether everyone they're playing with is having fun. No matter how armour clad rules are, it's never going to be tight enough to prevent RAW exploits.

The only thing that is airtight is a good DM who's not afraid to stand up and make a fair ruling that's in the interest of everyone at the table, and isn't afraid to impose Rule 0 as a last resort.

Dark Archive

Matthew Morris wrote:
Though apparently if you can drop a spell a level through metamagic hijinks it becomes zero level. Infinite magic missiles here I come :-)

Back before I had any idea how sick, broken it would be, I toyed with the idea of 'Minimagics,' Metamagic feats that reduced the effectiveness of a spell, but made it a lower level spell.

Focus Spell would turn an area effect spell into a single-target ranged touch attack and reduce the level by one, for instance. A 2nd level Focused Fireball would do normal damage, but affect only a single target. Range would be unaffected, so that a Cone spell focused in this manner would have a very short range, compared to other area effect spells.

Other variations would be casting a spell slower, or decreasing range, or adding components, but I later decided that it was insane (touch attack Meteor Swarm as a 5th level spell!), and that, if the idea wasn't to be totally scrapped, maybe it should represent a series of techniques that allowed a wizard to mitigate the effects of metamagic level adjustments by accepting additional restrictions in other areas. (So the Focused Fireball would remain a 3rd level spell, at minimum, but would be able to offset one level of Metamagic, such as from a Still Spell, and remain 3rd level.) Ultimately, it would make more sense as class features of a PrC such as the Mathgamhnan Metamage, than as a series of feats.


Xuttah wrote:
meabolex wrote:


That's true for legal issues, but intent can be relative without an impartial arbiter. Certain DMs view the rules as restrictions on players while certain players view the rules as an enabler for a powerful combination of abilities. From those perspectives, intent can be very different.

The DM is supposed to be that impartial arbiter. :)

Sadly, there are those players who get more joy out of finding loopholes and rules exploits that grant unintended or unfair advantage than they do participating is the game for mutual enjoyment.

This kind of gamer not understand that the only way to measure "winning" D&D is whether everyone they're playing with is having fun. No matter how armour clad rules are, it's never going to be tight enough to prevent RAW exploits.

The only thing that is airtight is a good DM who's not afraid to stand up and make a fair ruling that's in the interest of everyone at the table, and isn't afraid to impose Rule 0 as a last resort.

I'm quoting your entire post because you've just said exactly what I think in regard to this situation, in a much more eloquent fashion than I would (or have). I tip my hat, sir.

Zo

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.
Carnivorous_Bean wrote:

Again, I don't see how this is such a problem to grasp.

Casting a metamagic enhanced cantrip uses up a slot of the appropriate level. It does not use up the cantrip, since the cantrip can be cast any number of times per day.

However, you cannot cast the cantrip with metamagic if you do not have the slots to do it. And regardless of the metamagic applied, saves against it will always be against a 0-level spell.

The rules seem perfectly clear as they are to me.

I agree with you 100%. Of course you need to have fill an appropriate spell slot for a metamagic'd cantrip (a 1-level spell slot for a silent ghost sound).

caith wrote:
You are wrong AND rude, a metamgick'ed 0 level spell will always consume a spell slot of the appropriate level. A normal 0 level spell will not be consumed in it's normal use. That 0 level spell no longer even takes up a 0 level 'spell slot', just as a 1st level spell metamagick'ed to a 2nd level spell is then considered a 2nd level spell, and takes up a 2nd level spell slot. Sorry this is not a loophole you just need to read more carefully.

Only Heighten Spell metamagic feat increases the spell level. All other metamagic feats just increase the slot used, not the spell.

James Risner wrote:
Would you consider publishing FAQ and making it the official way a DM should interpret the rules? Please, because these discussions are what I hated most about on online WotC forums.

I consider this an interesting debate, as it shows the distinction on how people read and interpret written material.


While that is true wisdom Xuttah, sadly it's beyond the scope of a rules forum |: Otherwise, 100% of the questions asked would result in the answer of "ask your DM".

In the case of 0th level spells being used infinitely with metamagic, someone came up with a fun idea that seemed to work given the written rules. Whether or not it was unintended or unfair was not the issue. . . it was whether or not is was possible given the rules. Given the written rules, plausible but ambiguous. Given design intent, no, it's not possible.

Sovereign Court

Set wrote:

Back before I had any idea how sick, broken it would be, I toyed with the idea of 'Minimagics,' Metamagic feats that reduced the effectiveness of a spell, but made it a lower level spell.

Focus Spell would turn an area effect spell into a single-target ranged touch attack and reduce the level by one, for instance. A 2nd level Focused Fireball would do normal damage, but affect only a single target. Range would be unaffected, so that a Cone spell focused in this manner would have a very short range, compared to other area effect spells.

Other variations would be casting a spell slower, or decreasing range, or adding components, but I later decided that it was insane (touch attack Meteor Swarm as a 5th level spell!), and that, if the idea wasn't to be totally scrapped, maybe it should represent a series of techniques that allowed a wizard to mitigate the effects of metamagic level adjustments by accepting additional restrictions in other areas. (So the Focused Fireball would remain a 3rd level spell, at minimum, but would be able to offset one level of Metamagic, such as from a Still Spell, and remain 3rd level.) Ultimately, it would make more sense as class features of a PrC such as the Mathgamhnan Metamage, than as a series of feats.

Why aren't you a game designer? And in case you are, why aren't you the game designer?


James Jacobs wrote:

The rules as intended and as they should be interpreted are that you only get to cast 0 level spells at will. Once they're prepared with higher level spell slots, they follow all the rules for how higher level spell slots work.

Allowing all cantrips to be cast at will despite that spell slot you used to prepare the spell is an interesting house rule, though.

EDIT: And do try to remain level-headed and non-insulting in this thread. We built the game for folks to have fun with, not as a matrix upon which to build and maintain flame wars.

Thanks for coming over and clarifying it all, appreciate it. I do think this thread has caused an interesting debate and I don't think that anyone has got out of hand, it has even raised some good future house rules or combinations for others to look into and see if they are happy to use.


Lehmuska wrote:
A bit of errata would be nice to bury this argument for good.

This thread definitely doesn't deserve over 200 posts. Everyone reads the rules differently then each other: thus there is no read as written: it's impossible. On top of that, some people will try to stretch their version of the rules much, much farther than was intended -- and that's what's happening here.

I'm surprised people are perpetuating this.

Errata is not needed for this concern -- It's plain as day what the intent is. If people want to change it, or read it as something else, then I ain't gonna stop them. However, it's obvious and I can't think anyone would ever rule it the opposite way, unless they were trying to make meta-magic more powerful.

More power to them.

Liberty's Edge

meabolex wrote:

While that is true wisdom Xuttah, sadly it's beyond the scope of a rules forum |: Otherwise, 100% of the questions asked would result in the answer of "ask your DM".

In the case of 0th level spells being used infinitely with metamagic, someone came up with a fun idea that seemed to work given the written rules. Whether or not it was unintended or unfair was not the issue. . . it was whether or not is was possible given the rules. Given the written rules, plausible but ambiguous. Given design intent, no, it's not possible.

It's true that you cannot legislate common sense. James has already answered the question, but some people will not be satisfied with the answer unless it's in an official "patch". It's like getting a Supreme Court ruling for whether you should put a coat on when it's cold. Common Sense says you should, but the law is silent on the matter. ;)

Liberty's Edge

DigMarx wrote:


I'm quoting your entire post because you've just said exactly what I think in regard to this situation, in a much more eloquent fashion than I would (or have). I tip my hat, sir.

Zo

Me? Eloquent? Naw. I was just saying what needed to be said. We need to think for ourselves in these matters and stop depending on being spoon fed the answers. People need to stop obeying the letter of the law and follow the intended spirit. Stands true for IRL too IMHO.

The Exchange

Xuttah wrote:

It's true that you cannot legislate common sense. James has already answered the question, but some people will not be satisfied with the answer unless it's in an official "patch". It's like getting a Supreme Court ruling for whether you should put a coat on when it's cold. Common Sense says you should, but the law is silent on the matter. ;)

I was 50-50 whether it was an intentional bit of 'fun' put into the rules by Jason - especially when I spotted the text for Orisons talking about not using them for spontaneous cures. I'm glad that James has dropped in for an official answer, and like others I'll be houseruling it instead to see how it goes.

I just wish that people wouldn't be so absolute in their statements (on either side). It just fans the flames that James spoke of.

Sovereign Court

It gradually evolved into a house rule, a neat trick usable in some combinations. Personally I'm on a crusade against these naysayers who persistantly keep saying metamagic increases the spell's level. How many more times must it be repeated for people to acknowledge it is not so? It's not even a loophole or anything, quite the contrary!

Oh and speaking of common sense, no one is denying the intention of the rule anymore. Official word has been given on it. Still this is yet another good reason to hire more proof-readers. ;)


Xuttah wrote:

Sadly, there are those players who get more joy out of finding loopholes and rules exploits that grant unintended or unfair advantage than they do participating is the game for mutual enjoyment.

I don't remember anyone showing how a significant advantage could be gained from this. The speculation was fun, so the rush to quell it surprised me.

James Jacobs wrote:
The rules as intended and as they should be interpreted are that you only get to cast 0 level spells at will. Once they're prepared with higher level spell slots, they follow all the rules for how higher level spell slots work.

OK, it makes sense that expenditure pertains to the slot rather than the spell level, even though the text associates free casting with spell level. The fact that DC is also tied to spell level made it seem more plausible.

James Jacobs wrote:
Allowing all cantrips to be cast at will despite that spell slot you used to prepare the spell is an interesting house rule, though.

"House rule" implies that you know you are changing the rules. I don't think that the intention or the correct interpretation was quite as obvious as this post suggests. Some admission of that would have been welcome. Quite a few posts asserted so confidently that no one could possibly interpret the rule this way, even though it squared with a plain reading of the text and wasn't obviously unbalanced.


As a previous poster noted in the traits "7 Magical Lineage: One of your parents was a gifted spellcaster who not only used metamagic often, but developed many magical items and perhaps even a new spell or two—and you have inherited a fragment of this greatness. Pick one spell when you choose this trait. When you apply metamagic feats to this spell, treat its actual level as 1 lower for determining the spell’s final adjusted level."

So this is how you can get an unlimited amount of silent or stilled cantrips : so long as the metamagic only increased it by 1 spell level you should be okay. Of course this would be to a single specific cantrip.

The silent or stilled cantrip wouold still be a 0 Level spell.

Am I right?

This by just using the rules as written WITHOUT additional interpretation.

Liberty's Edge

minkscooter wrote:


I don't remember anyone showing how a significant advantage could be gained from this. The speculation was fun, so the rush to quell it surprised me.

With strictly core metamagic, it's pretty benign, but add in some splatbooks/3.5 materials and you could end up with:

Quickened, Fell Draining Acid Splash that never runs out.

That's the example that sprang to mind for me immediately. I'm sure there are others if you dig.

Grand Lodge

I've never liked the metamagic concept anyway, in general the level pay off doesn't balance well with what spells you can cast at that level especially with the DC restrictions. Yes granted there are some nice metamagic/spell combinations but in general the payoff isn't worth it IMHO. The only time I really look at metamagic feats for a wizards feat selection is when I'm playing in the Forgotten Realms and playing an Incantatrix.

Back onto the discussion, I would rule that metamagic feats work on spells of 1st level and higher. Cantrips are "like" spells of 0-level but aren't actually 0 level spells. At no point does a metamagic feat refer to it having an effect on a cantrip, only on spells.

*throws in the Alchemist's fire and runs for cover* >:)


Quijenoth wrote:
Back onto the discussion, I would rule that metamagic feats work on spells of 1st level and higher. Cantrips are "like" spells of 0-level but aren't actually 0 level spells. At no point does a metamagic feat refer to it having an effect on a cantrip, only on spells.

Interesting house rule. Cantrips would be something like like Beta's spell-like ability cantrips, except with components?

Quijenoth wrote:
*throws in the Alchemist's fire and runs for cover* >:)

Sorry, doesn't work. I've cast resist energy (fire) to survive the flames here. :P

Paizo Employee Creative Director

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah; this isn't a case of something needing errata. The game isn't broken here; the rules work as they should, but they're subject to interpretation since the writing itself wasn't as 100% precise as it could or should have been. This is a great example of a clarification of the rules that should (and probably will, eventually) get into a rules FAQ for the game. But it's not errata. Errata is stuff like correcting actual errors in the game, and there are certainly those in the rulebook and we're certainly doing our best to track them all down!

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Folks, James is right on here.

If you use a higher level slot, for any reason, be it because it is modified with metamagic, or you just prepared it in a higher slot, it is consumed when cast, just like any other spell. Only when it uses a 0-level slot, it is not consumed.

There is some poor wording there that I am going to correct the next time I am able.

And please folks.. play nice.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Folks, James is right on here.

If you use a higher level slot, for any reason, be it because it is modified with metamagic, or you just prepared it in a higher slot, it is consumed when cast, just like any other spell. Only when it uses a 0-level slot, it is not consumed.

There is some poor wording there that I am going to correct the next time I am able.

And please folks.. play nice.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Thankyou!

You have made my day!
*goes back to making thai green curry*


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Folks, James is right on here.

If you use a higher level slot, for any reason, be it because it is modified with metamagic, or you just prepared it in a higher slot, it is consumed when cast, just like any other spell. Only when it uses a 0-level slot, it is not consumed.

There is some poor wording there that I am going to correct the next time I am able.

And please folks.. play nice.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

So it should have said:

PRD wrote:
Cantrips: Wizards can prepare a number of cantrips, or spells stored in 0-level spell slots, each day, as noted on Table: Wizard under “Spells per Day.” These spells are cast like any other spell, but they are not expended when cast and may be used again. A wizard can prepare a cantrip from a prohibited school, but it uses up two of his available slots (see below).

*Change in bold.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

James Jacobs wrote:
should (and probably will, eventually) get into a rules FAQ for the game.

If you publish a FAQ, please make sure to say somewhere that it is the official interpretation and deviating from the official interpretation would be considered a house rule? I'd like to foreclose the whole "the FAQ isn't errata so it doesn't count" argument that will inevitably surface if the FAQ isn't clearly consider "rules as written" and not "rules as intended."

Jason Bulmahn wrote:
There is some poor wording there that I am going to correct the next time I am able

Thank you, these type of actions is why I am growing to love your (paizo) products.


Ooh ooh.. a reverse metamagic feat! Minimize Spell!

You roll minimum damage for the spell (only works on spells with dice damage).
Lower the slot cost by 1.

0-level 1 point damage magic missiles! Too powerful?


Kaisoku wrote:

Ooh ooh.. a reverse metamagic feat! Minimize Spell!

You roll minimum damage for the spell (only works on spells with dice damage).
Lower the slot cost by 1.

0-level 1 point damage magic missiles! Too powerful?

Reminds me of the "diminshed" versions of spells from Arcana Evolved.


There's a trait that allows for metamagic enhanced spells to be cast at 1 level lower than they'd normally be, I also remember an old feat called Slow spell where you'd do pretty much the same but at the cost of making it a full round action to cast either way an extended Daze cast by either a sorceror or wizard with that specific trait could theoretically cast it as many times as necessary as long as it doesn't take up a 1st level or higher level spell slot if what was said in the opening message is accurate.
By the way Eschew Material was a metamagic feat at one time but I suspect any metamagic enhanced spell would need to have at least a +1 level modifier before that trait would effect it, otherwise an interesting thread.

Will have to reread tomorrow when I'm not half asleep!

Take care and all the best!


pres man wrote:

So it should have said:

PRD wrote:
Cantrips: Wizards can prepare a number of cantrips, or spells stored in 0-level spell slots, each day, as noted on Table: Wizard under “Spells per Day.” These spells are cast like any other spell, but they are not expended when cast and may be used again. A wizard can prepare a cantrip from a prohibited school, but it uses up two of his available slots (see below).
*Change in bold.

If you word it like that, then if you metamagically reduce a spell, is it recastable?

Contributor

Brian E. Harris wrote:
pres man wrote:

So it should have said:

PRD wrote:
Cantrips: Wizards can prepare a number of cantrips, or spells stored in 0-level spell slots, each day, as noted on Table: Wizard under “Spells per Day.” These spells are cast like any other spell, but they are not expended when cast and may be used again. A wizard can prepare a cantrip from a prohibited school, but it uses up two of his available slots (see below).
*Change in bold.
If you word it like that, then if you metamagically reduce a spell, is it recastable?

You can also do it with racial substitution levels. Races of Stone, p. 149, lets gnomish illusionists take Silent Image and Ventriloquism as 0-level spells.

It's especially broken if you add shadow magic cheese later.


hopeless wrote:
There's a trait that allows for metamagic enhanced spells to be cast at 1 level lower than they'd normally be, I also remember an old feat called Slow spell where you'd do pretty much the same but at the cost of making it a full round action to cast either way an extended Daze cast by either a sorceror or wizard with that specific trait could theoretically cast it as many times as necessary as long as it doesn't take up a 1st level or higher level spell slot if what was said in the opening message is accurate.

A 0-level spelled (extended Daze is still a 0-level spell) prepared in a 0-level spell slot (the trait allows you to do), I fail to see how this would violate the spirit or the letter of the rules.

Besides, doesn't the Magical Lineage trait only work for one specific spell? That hardly seems worisome.


Brian E. Harris wrote:
pres man wrote:

So it should have said:

PRD wrote:
Cantrips: Wizards can prepare a number of cantrips, or spells stored in 0-level spell slots, each day, as noted on Table: Wizard under “Spells per Day.” These spells are cast like any other spell, but they are not expended when cast and may be used again. A wizard can prepare a cantrip from a prohibited school, but it uses up two of his available slots (see below).
*Change in bold.
If you word it like that, then if you metamagically reduce a spell, is it recastable?

Is there a feat that lets you do than in PF? And if not, then feats in 3.5 splatbooks have to let in a case-by-case basis anyway, so of course there will have to be some adjustments. That is why the GMs get the big pants.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

pres man wrote:
hopeless wrote:
There's a trait that allows for metamagic enhanced spells to be cast at 1 level lower than they'd normally be, I also remember an old feat called Slow spell where you'd do pretty much the same but at the cost of making it a full round action to cast either way an extended Daze cast by either a sorceror or wizard with that specific trait could theoretically cast it as many times as necessary as long as it doesn't take up a 1st level or higher level spell slot if what was said in the opening message is accurate.

A 0-level spelled (extended Daze is still a 0-level spell) prepared in a 0-level spell slot (the trait allows you to do), I fail to see how this would violate the spirit or the letter of the rules.

Besides, doesn't the Magical Lineage trait only work for one specific spell? That hardly seems worisome.

That's actually an interesting 'Johnny one note' trick. First level take Spell Focus (enchantment) and Extend spell and that trait.

Daze that lasts for 2 rounds, DC 14 or 15 on average. It becomes useless about 3rd level, but can change the balance suddenly in a low level game.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kevin Andrew Murphy wrote:

About the only way to have one of your 0 level spells cast at a higher level without expending it would be to pump it through a metamagic rod.

Of course that's not entirely free as it does cost uses of the rod itself, but otherwise you're totally spot on. I'm sure you didn't imply it but we do have some word weaslers out there.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
pres man wrote:


A 0-level spelled (extended Daze is still a 0-level spell) prepared in a 0-level spell slot (the trait allows you to do), I fail to see how this would violate the spirit or the letter of the rules.

because it's aboslutely utterly wrong. Extend metamagic feat means you prepare the spell at one level higher. For a wizard an Extended Daze is occupying a first level spell slot., for a sorcerer it's a full round casting that expends a first level spell slot Q.E.D. Now if you have a feat, or some other gimcracky that reduces the metamagic cost to zero, then you can pump out extended dazes as long as the feat or gimmick itself remains available. i.e. uses/charges/whatever. Mind you the sorcerer will still take a full round to cast it.


LazarX wrote:
pres man wrote:


A 0-level spelled (extended Daze is still a 0-level spell) prepared in a 0-level spell slot (the trait allows you to do), I fail to see how this would violate the spirit or the letter of the rules.
because it's aboslutely utterly wrong.

Except, it isn't.

LazarX wrote:
Extend metamagic feat means you prepare the spell at one level higher. For a wizard an Extended Daze is occupying a first level spell slot., for a sorcerer it's a full round casting that expends a first level spell slot Q.E.D.

This is true of a normal extended 0-level spell. Of course I wasn't suggesting anything that would contradict that.

LazarX wrote:
Now if you have a feat, or some other gimcracky that reduces the metamagic cost to zero, then you can pump out extended dazes as long as the feat or gimmick itself remains available. i.e. uses/charges/whatever. Mind you the sorcerer will still take a full round to cast it.

Well I'm not sure if I would describe a trait available to characters that is found in the PFG Character Trait Web Enhancement (I have it on my download page, I can't remember if I had to choose to have it or not) as "gimcracky", you differ apparantly. Looking at the trait (Magical Lineage), the restriction is it only works for one spell (you get to choose when taking the trait), but other than that there does not appear to be any limit on the number of uses.

Silver Crusade

Matthew Morris wrote:

That's actually an interesting 'Johnny one note' trick. First level take Spell Focus (enchantment) and Extend spell and that trait.

Daze that lasts for 2 rounds, DC 14 or 15 on average. It becomes useless about 3rd level, but can change the balance suddenly in a low level game.

Not to mention the sorcerer's Fey bloodline (+2 to DC for compulsion spells). I was thinking about doing this with a Pathfinder Society character, but I'm going to go for a cleric with Magical Lineage (Command) + Extend Spell instead; a Command spell that lasts 2 rounds should be useful for quite a while. (See profile for character details.)

201 to 250 of 259 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / A little gem about 0 level spells. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.