| 7 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
PRD:
The wizard may cast a spell with a target of “You” on his familiar (as a touch spell) instead of on himself.
A wizard may cast spells on his familiar even if the spells do not normally affect creatures of the familiar's type (magical beast).
Share Spells (Ex): The druid may cast a spell with a target of “You” on her animal companion (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on herself. A druid may cast spells on her animal companion even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the companion's type (animal). Spells cast in this way must come from a class that grants an animal companion. This ability does not allow the animal to share abilities that are not spells, even if they function like spells.
Share Spells (Ex) : The summoner may cast a spell with a target of “You” on his eidolon (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on himself. A summoner may cast spells on his eidolon even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the eidolon’s type (outsider). Spells cast in this way must come from the summoner spell list. This ability does not allow the eidolon to share abilities that are not spells, even if they function like spells.
SRD 3.5
At the master’s option, he may have any spell (but not any spell-like ability) he casts on himself also affect his familiar. The familiar must be within 5 feet at the time of casting to receive the benefit.
If the spell or effect has a duration other than instantaneous, it stops affecting the familiar if it moves farther than 5 feet away and will not affect the familiar again even if it returns to the master before the duration expires. Additionally, the master may cast a spell with a target of "You" on his familiar (as a touch range spell) instead of on himself.
A master and his familiar can share spells even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the familiar’s type (magical beast).
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The question is can a "pet" have a spell cast on it that normally does not affect its creature type, even if the spell does not have a target of "you" in the spell descriptor. As an example could a druid cast enlarge person on his animal companion?
As written, no.
Thats a very definative answer, care to expand on why?
IIRC, Enlarge person has a specific target of medium or small humanoid, not "self" or "you." It has alwyas been my understanding that share spells only works with spells like mage armor that have a target of "self."As written, no.Thats a very definative answer, care to expand on why?
Except the part about 'you' and the part about spells that are not appropriate for its type are seperate sentances with not clear link between them.
"Share Spells (Ex) : The summoner may cast a spell with a target of “You” on his eidolon (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on himself. A summoner may cast spells on his eidolon even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the eidolon’s type (outsider). "
Notice how the sentance does not say, "Spells cast in this way may be cast on the eidolon even if the spell normally does not affect creatures of the eidolon's type"
Whereas later sentances specifically link themselves to the ones that came before. It is not as cut and dry as you proclaim it to be.
|
Notice how the sentance does not say, "Spells cast in this way may be cast on the eidolon even if the spell normally does not affect creatures of the eidolon's type"Whereas later sentances specifically link themselves to the ones that came before. It is not as cut and dry as you proclaim it to be.
I think the connection between the spell target and the type is implied. If the second sentance did not refer to the first, you could cast spells on your familiar that you could not cast on yourself, which is a bit of a stretch. Otherwise the ability would state that you can cast any spell on your familiar.
I think the connection between the spell target and the type is implied. If the second sentance did not refer to the first, you could cast spells on your familiar that you could not cast on yourself, which is a bit of a stretch. Otherwise the ability would state that you can cast any spell on your familiar.
Notice how the sentance does not say, "Spells cast in this way may be cast on the eidolon even if the spell normally does not affect creatures of the eidolon's type"Whereas later sentances specifically link themselves to the ones that came before. It is not as cut and dry as you proclaim it to be.
But the summoner for instance has no or almost no spells that have both a range of 'you' and a target type that dont apply to an outsider. Not sure how many are on the other lists. But again, Implied is a tough sell in terms of rules. Its not clear, so clarification is a good idea no?
My reading is that they are separate. I believe the intent is that any spell you could cast on yourself, you can cast on your familiar/eidolon/etc.
This actually came up at my table, too. Wizard wanted to reduce his cat. I disallowed it initially, then read that line a few times and changed my mind.
|
The question is can a "pet" have a spell cast on it that normally does not affect its creature type, even if the spell does not have a target of "you" in the spell descriptor. As an example could a druid cast enlarge person on his animal companion?
They are two different benefits. It is my ruling that Yes, they can. Share Spells provides two things between the caster and their companion.
1. They may cast spells with a target of 'Self' on their companion normally.
2. They may cast spells on their companion even if it normally would not work based on creature type.
Others may argue if they wish. This is the ruling of Nethys.
Your God of Knowledge,
Nethys
asknethys@karuikage.net
The question is can a "pet" have a spell cast on it that normally does not affect its creature type, even if the spell does not have a target of "you" in the spell descriptor. As an example could a druid cast enlarge person on his animal companion?They are two different benefits. It is my ruling that Yes, they can. Share Spells provides two things between the caster and their companion.
1. They may cast spells with a target of 'Self' on their companion normally.
2. They may cast spells on their companion even if it normally would not work based on creature type.Others may argue if they wish. This is the ruling of Nethys.
Your God of Knowledge,
Nethys
asknethys@karuikage.net
off-topic: Is that your sig, how did you get a sig?
The player in me wants this to be true, but I also DM, and I have a very bad feeling about it, on the other hand.
The question is can a "pet" have a spell cast on it that normally does not affect its creature type, even if the spell does not have a target of "you" in the spell descriptor. As an example could a druid cast enlarge person on his animal companion?They are two different benefits. It is my ruling that Yes, they can. Share Spells provides two things between the caster and their companion.
1. They may cast spells with a target of 'Self' on their companion normally.
2. They may cast spells on their companion even if it normally would not work based on creature type.Others may argue if they wish. This is the ruling of Nethys.
Your God of Knowledge,
Nethys
asknethys@karuikage.netoff-topic: Is that your sig, how did you get a sig?
The player in me wants this to be true, but I also DM, and I have a very bad feeling about it, on the other hand.
bump
|
They should make an editing distinction to clarify this sort of thing. Indentations are easier, I think bullets are better.
Because the difference between:
Share Spells (Ex) : The summoner may cast a spell with a target of “You” on his eidolon (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on himself. A summoner may cast spells on his eidolon even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the eidolon’s type (outsider). Spells cast in this way must come from the summoner spell list. This ability does not allow the eidolon to share abilities that are not spells, even if they function like spells.
and
Share Spells (Ex) :
- The summoner may cast a spell with a target of “You” on his eidolon (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on himself.
- A summoner may cast spells on his eidolon even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the eidolon’s type (outsider).
- Spells cast in this way must come from the summoner spell list.
- This ability does not allow the eidolon to share abilities that are not spells, even if they function like spells.
is quite different and not very hard to do is it? This would end a lot of fights before they begin.
Your Pirate of Editing Advice,
PirateDevon
pirate.devon@gmail.com
; - )
Edit: Perhaps it would be better to say that it is a format issue not and editing issue but since I am sure the editing includes the formatting I didn't think it worth distinguishing...although I do now...for some reason...anyway, game on.
it's me again
I seem to remember this exact issue from another thread, and I think it was even with wraithstrike! But, for everyone else, here is my 2cp:
The distinction in 3.5 was rather clear: you could share a spell that was cast ON YOU. Additionally, you could cast a spell with the descriptor "you" on the familiar.
PFRPG makes less of a distinction, but consider: sharing spells like Enlarge and Reduce would have worked in 3.5. The PF rules are more vague, but I argue that the language change did not substantitively change the result.
Thus, you should be able to cast spells with descriptors like "humanoid" on animal companions/familiars/eidolons. The spells you cast on them ignore their "type".
Yes, that can make for some wonky spell possibilities, but the REAL impact is rather small, limited to spells like Alter Self, Enlarge Person, and Reduce Person.
Future books by Paizo mean more spells. Anyone of those may cause an issue.
|
It seems to me that the two sentences are separate statements:
You may cast spells with a target of you on your familiar/companion/eidolon
You may cast spells that have a creature type restriction (that don't normally effect the creatures type) on your familiar/companion/eidolon.
But that is just may own reading of it YMMV.
love,
malkav
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
From what I can tell, it must be two separate statements. Spells that have a target of "You" don't have a limitation of creature type. In the listing of spells, the place where it determines what sort of creature can be effected is the target line. For example, Charm Person (Target: one humanoid creature) vs. Alter Self (Target: You).
This is a bad example of what you may want to cast on your companion, but it shows how the first sentence and the second sentence cannot be talking about the same thing. A spell with the Target of "You" does not also have a target of "humanoid creature".
From what I can tell, it must be two separate statements. Spells that have a target of "You" don't have a limitation of creature type. In the listing of spells, the place where it determines what sort of creature can be effected is the target line. For example, Charm Person (Target: one humanoid creature) vs. Alter Self (Target: You).
This is a bad example of what you may want to cast on your companion, but it shows how the first sentence and the second sentence cannot be talking about the same thing. A spell with the Target of "You" does not also have a target of "humanoid creature".
Good point. As far as I know all spells with you affect any creature type.
Bump. Is there anyway we can get an official answer on this? Or if this was answered somewhere officially can someone point me to it?
I am in a similar boat and this thread is the only one a search came up that is even close to my question.
Specifically I think our sorcerer is abusing shapechange by becoming a creature with heal as a spell like ability, and his familiar doing the same. That is six heals *ack* I struggled with two stone giants with reach under polymorph, but this is worse.
If a ruling is somewhere else can someone please point me to it?
|
|
Specifically I think our sorcerer is abusing shapechange by becoming a creature with heal as a spell like ability, and his familiar doing the same. That is six heals *ack* I struggled with two stone giants with reach under polymorph, but this is worse.If a ruling is somewhere else can someone please point me to it?
This isn't an issue with share spells, but rather a misunderstanding of how polymorph (shape change) abilities work. They are quite tricky. When you polymorph into something, you only get the natural attacks and speed of your new form and any modifiers (other than ability scores) based on the difference in sizes. (For example a medium creature who polymorphs into a small creature gets +1 AC, +1 to hit, -1 CMB, and +4 stealth.) Any additional abilities are gained only if the new form posesses them AND the particular polymorph spell you use grants you the ability to use them. For example: if you use Beast Shape IV to become a Unicorn, you get +6 size bonus to strength, -2 penalty to dex, +2 size bonus to con, +6 natural armor bonus (along with AC, hit, CMB, and stealth modifiers based on your original size), a speed of 60, darkvision 60 ft, low-light vision, scent, a gore attack, and two hoof attacks. That's it. You don't get immunity to charm, compulsion, and poison, and you don't get any of its spell-like abilities.
Really familiarize yourself with the polymorph rules starting on page 211 of the Core Rulebook. He shouldn't be getting a heal SLA from polymorph unless it's an EXTREMELY powerful polymorph spell.
My understanding is that if you cast a spell on yourself that has a range of personal or touch, then your familiar gets equal benefit of that spell. So if you cast Enlarge Personon yourself the familiar enlarges too.
Even though the familiar is not normally able to benefit from this spell it can in this instance.
My understanding is that if you cast a spell on yourself that has a range of personal or touch, then your familiar gets equal benefit of that spell. So if you cast Enlarge Personon yourself the familiar enlarges too.
Even though the familiar is not normally able to benefit from this spell it can in this instance.
It used to work that way, I think, but now it takes two castings of the spell, one on you and one on the familiar. The wording in the PRD is specific.
Share Spells: The wizard may cast a spell with a target of “You” on his familiar (as a touch spell) instead of on himself. A wizard may cast spells on his familiar even if the spells do not normally affect creatures of the familiar's type (magical beast).
{my bold}
My understanding is that if you cast a spell on yourself that has a range of personal or touch, then your familiar gets equal benefit of that spell. So if you cast Enlarge Personon yourself the familiar enlarges too.
Even though the familiar is not normally able to benefit from this spell it can in this instance.
It used to work that way, I think, but now it takes two castings of the spell, one on you and one on the familiar. The wording in the PRD is specific.
Share Spells: The wizard may cast a spell with a target of “You” on his familiar (as a touch spell) instead of on himself. A wizard may cast spells on his familiar even if the spells do not normally affect creatures of the familiar's type (magical beast).{my bold}
Oh... Well spoon! I disapprove.
Thanks all.
I can see the fix in PF (we are finishing Savage Tide in 3.5). Shapechange does allow SU, and EX. However I can use the instead of quote, which I will be a lot easier to adapt.
It has taken us years to get to Enemies of my Enemy (#11 of 12), but I think the end is in sight :)