| 44 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Normally you can't cast, but this spell has a casting time of 1 standard action:
School abjuration; Level cleric/oracle 2, inquisitor 2
CASTING
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
EFFECT
Range you
Target personal
Duration 1 round/level
DESCRIPTION
You temporarily overcome one harmful condition. This does not end the effect causing the condition; it just suspends that condition’s effect for the duration of the spell. You can surmount any one of the following conditions: blinded, confused, dazed, dazzled, deafened, fatigued, frightened, paralyzed, shaken, or sickened.
Its also V,S...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The target is personal, and it's specifically meant to suspend the mentioned conditions.
Unless it was possible to cast it, it would have no use, so I believe yes.
The duration is 1 round/ level meaning its supposed to be cast as a precautionary measure in the forthcoming rounds. I cant understand the logic behind the "deeming the spell useless so it must be cast during paralyzed confused and dazed". If this was true, then this is too good for a 2nd level spell even if it is only personal.
Normally you can't cast, but this spell has a casting time of 1 standard action:
** spoiler omitted **
Hamor, thank you for making my day entertaining.
So, you are really asking if a character can take an action when they are effected by a condition that prevents them from taking an action. Realllllly Haaarmor, Reaaaally?
The only time in the confused state one could cast said spell is if the act normally chance occurred.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I have to say that unless you CAN use the spell while so afflicted, it does make it ALMOST useless.
And the term "overcome" is used rather than "prevent". It does appear to be used to *overcome* said afflictions, not prevent them. How can you *overcome* dazed or paralysed if you can't cast this spell while dazed or paralysed?
This needs to be FAQed.
So the spell should say "prevent" not "overcome" then to avoid confusion.
|
I think moon glum is on the right track. It seems pretty clear that it's intended to be cast after the condition is in place, and then overcomes that condition for a short period of time. To successfully cast it for a given condition, you have to be able to provide the components. Given that those are V,S, then you'd have to be able to speak and move, unless you had an ability or other rules resource that overcame that, such as the metamagic feats indicated.
Sorry to necro, but I've come across this spell and want to see what the actual intent of it is. Prevention, or suppression of these effects? Was there an FAQ or errata since?
Nope. It still makes no sense and should be clarified. My take is that someone goofed the components, pretty much every spell says V, S I think they just forgot to change it. It could also be an immediate action which would also make sense as it would occur as you begin to feel the effects but before they fully take effect, saving you from paralysis. The duration is how long it suppresses it not how long it prevents it and it only suppresses one so the arguments above about it being overpowered or acting as a preventative are a bit ridiculous.
Is there any way to get an actual Paizo ruling on this?
|
|
The target is personal, and it's specifically meant to suspend the mentioned conditions.
Unless it was possible to cast it, it would have no use, so I believe yes.
You can cast it in advance to protect yourself from one of those conditions for 1 round/level.
I have to say that unless you CAN use the spell while so afflicted, it does make it ALMOST useless.
And the term "overcome" is used rather than "prevent". It does appear to be used to *overcome* said afflictions, not prevent them. How can you *overcome* dazed or paralysed if you can't cast this spell while dazed or paralysed?
This needs to be FAQed.
Prevent = I cast blindness on you, you don't need to roll a saving throw at all as the effect is prevented.
Overcome = I cast blindness on you. You roll your ST. If you fail, you are affected by the blindness but it is overcome by the spell for the spell duration.
So the spell should say "prevent" not "overcome" then to avoid confusion.
That would make it way more powerful. It is the equivalent of delay poison, not of immunity to poison.
This would work great also, if it is not "personal"
Although the OP's question still remains, I understand that a warpriest could use a fervor to cast this spell. That would make it a swift action, which I think overcomes the paradox. Is that correct?
^Not unless you have some way to upgrade your Swift Actions to Immediate Actions (which is probably the reason for somebody posting above about using Quicken Spell); I can't think of any such upgrade off the top of my head.
Faq'd. Spellcasters' mountain of toys doesn't nearly overshadow the martials' lump of coal enough yet.
Oh, I found a way for warpriests to cast this while paralyzed.
It requires you to have already cast Blessing of Fervor, which is a good spell so not a hard condition to meet.
Choose the bonus "Cast a single spell of 2nd level or lower as if it were an enlarged, extended, silent, or still spell." at the start of your turn for the silent spell.
Then fervor swift-cast Surmount Affliction, this removes the somatic and verbal components leaving the spell component-less, making the cast a valid action you can do while being paralyzed.
Oh, I found a way for warpriests to cast this while paralyzed.
It requires you to have already cast Blessing of Fervor, which is a good spell so not a hard condition to meet.
Choose the bonus "Cast a single spell of 2nd level or lower as if it were an enlarged, extended, silent, or still spell." at the start of your turn for the silent spell.
Then fervor swift-cast Surmount Affliction, this removes the somatic and verbal components leaving the spell component-less, making the cast a valid action you can do while being paralyzed.
Nope. Still doesn't work. Allows you to cast silent OR still, not silent AND still. So you've only eliminated one of the roadblocks.
Nevermind the fact that making it a quickened spell turns it into a 6th level spell for this purpose, so no longer qualifies for blessing of fervor.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, I found a way for warpriests to cast this while paralyzed.
It requires you to have already cast Blessing of Fervor, which is a good spell so not a hard condition to meet.
Choose the bonus "Cast a single spell of 2nd level or lower as if it were an enlarged, extended, silent, or still spell." at the start of your turn for the silent spell.
Then fervor swift-cast Surmount Affliction, this removes the somatic and verbal components leaving the spell component-less, making the cast a valid action you can do while being paralyzed.
Nope. Still doesn't work. Allows you to cast silent OR still, not silent AND still. So you've only eliminated one of the roadblocks.
Nevermind the fact that making it a quickened spell turns it into a 6th level spell for this purpose, so no longer qualifies for blessing of fervor.
The warpriest class ability fervor already removes the somatic components when using it to swift cast, so the spell Blessing of Fervor is only needed to remove the vocal component.
Also I don't see why one would need the quickened metamagic? The whole point of the warpriest fervor ability is that you can swift cast spells on yourself, that is what the class does.
EDIT: To avoid confusion, there is the warpirest class ability called Fervor, allowing the warpriest to swift cast spells when the target is only the warpriest. There is also the spell Blessing of Fervor that is on the warpriest spell list but is in no way related to the Fervor class ability.
Oh, I found a way for warpriests to cast this while paralyzed.
It requires you to have already cast Blessing of Fervor, which is a good spell so not a hard condition to meet.
Choose the bonus "Cast a single spell of 2nd level or lower as if it were an enlarged, extended, silent, or still spell." at the start of your turn for the silent spell.
Then fervor swift-cast Surmount Affliction, this removes the somatic and verbal components leaving the spell component-less, making the cast a valid action you can do while being paralyzed.
Nope. Still doesn't work. Allows you to cast silent OR still, not silent AND still. So you've only eliminated one of the roadblocks.
Nevermind the fact that making it a quickened spell turns it into a 6th level spell for this purpose, so no longer qualifies for blessing of fervor.
The warpriest class ability fervor already removes the somatic components when using it to swift cast, so the spell blessing of fervor is only needed to remove the vocal component.
Also I don't see why one would need the quickened metamagic? The whole point of the warpriest fervor ability is that you can swift cast spells on yourself, that is what the class does.
Ah, my mistake. When you said fervor cast, I thought you were talking about blessing of fervor enhanced cast, and not the warpriest fervor ability.
Ah yes, two things with almost exactly the same name but not really related.
I already got my group confused the first time by giving them blessing of Fervor, from all the times I've been using Fervor on myself they were disappointed that there was nothing with swift casting to gain for them from the spell.