So cracking open my copy of Advances Races Guide, I saw that the Samsarans get to add their spellcasting mod in bonus spells from other classes list.
You add a number of spells equal to 1 + your spellcasting class’s key ability score bonus (Wisdom for clerics, and so on). The spells must be the same type (arcane or divine) as the spellcasting class you’re adding them to.
Which is cool if you're adding druid spells to a cleric list, but is even better if you're adding paladin/ranger spells to a cleric list.
For my multiclass cleric/monk the following standouts:
Strong jaw at level 3 from the Ranger
Holy Sword at level 4 from the paladin (+7 equivalent weapon at level 7, yes please!)
Lead Blades is a level 1 Ranger spell, and Bless Weapon ditto from the paladin.
But I'm sure you could come up with quite an arry of good combinations to use.
prototype00
Sorcerers and wizards get access to healing by nicking bard spells.
But yes, I think by far the most powerful options are where you are casting paladin spells earlier and better than the paladin.
Eaglesoul is a personal favourite of mine.
Also:
Holy Sword (a.k.a. I bypass all DR and make the fighter look weak at level 7/8)
Blessing of the Salamander (fast healing 5 being the clincher)
Bestow grace and bestow grace of the champion (oracles get paladin goodness)
Litany of Vengeance (just wrong...so wrong...on druids)
Druids getting magic vestment/oracles and clerics getting barkskin
Wildshaped druids with righteous might and divine power (gets ridiculous, trust me)
Ooh, Eaglesoul is good pick too (though it does show up on the cleric's spell-list as well, two levels later).
prototype00
Ooh, Eaglesoul is good pick too (though it does show up on the cleric's spell-list as well, two levels later).
prototype00
Yes, well, picture a wildshaped druid with Eaglesoul, righteous might AND divine power all at once. Not to mention his wild armor now has magic vestment on top of his own barkskin.
Or, you know, a LG cleric at level 7 with holy sword and eaglesoul on top of his regular cleric buffs.
Sorcerers got alot more *versatile*, but I think in terms of raw power the prize went to the divine casters (heralding the return of CODzilla, except now COD is Cleric/Oracle/Druid)
I'm pretty sure cleric/oracle can't get early access to Eaglesoul, it's already on their list and they would just get it as a level 6.
Spells from the bard/inquisitors list aren't too early of an entry but I think taking stuff from paladin/ranger lists might be a *little* too powerful for already awesome classes, but it is balanced by of the requirement that you take Allfood from the ranger list at level 2.
I really can't see anybody passing that spell up under any circumstances.
i agree that you shouldn't get 'early access' to spells that are already on your list...
you can't 'add them to your spell list' if they are already there.
there still is alot of useful stuff, both from 'equivalent full casters' and 'lesser' casters (inq/pal/ranger)
you can't 'add them to your spell list' if they are already there.
I was actually under the impression that you'd end up having it twice on your modified spell list, and could cast it as a spell of either level.
So do you have to trade ALL other racial traits for this ability? It's a really cool ability but you lose the ability increases which is tough. Quote from the book below.
"The following racial trait may be selected instead of existing samsaran racial traits."
No. The Alternate Racial Traits replace existing racial traits, but not all existing racial traits. Besides, Mystic Past Life specifies "This racial trait replaces Shards of the Past."
Re-reading this, I don't think it allows you to cast spells earlier than you normally could. It just simply adds the spell to you spell list, not spells known.
For example, let's say for whatever reason, I am making a Samsaran Wizard that wants to cast Animate Objects. Grabbing it from the Witch list, it's a level 6 spell. I can grab this spell because it is arcane. Furthermore, even though I cannot cast it (being 1st level), I can still grab it for my spell list. However, I still cannot cast it at level 1 because I am not a high enough level to cast level six spells. I have to wait until I am level eleven before I have the choice of writing it in my spellbook.
This also means that paladins and rangers can't cast before they are normally able to.
As for 'heralding the return of CODzilla'... have you actually played this in a game? Or is this more alarmist conjecture?
Re-reading this, I don't think it allows you to cast spells earlier than you normally could. It just simply adds the spell to you spell list, not spells known.
You are completely misunderstanding what people are saying. Nobody says you can cast all these spells at level 1. The trick is that different casting classes have spells at different levels. For example, Summoners cast haste as a level 2 spell, while other classes cast it as a level 3 spell. You can also get high level spells intended for casters with slower progression. For example, the 4th level Paladin spell holy sword is intended for use by Level 13+ Paladins, but can be acquired by a level 7 Cleric using this ability. The only question is if you can take a spell you already have, but at a different level (for example, a Wizard taking the Summoner's level 2 haste).
As for 'heralding the return of CODzilla'... have you actually played this in a game? Or is this more alarmist conjecture?
One does not need to have "actually played this" to present arguments about whether it is powerful or not. Playtesting (by which I mean having used it in a game, not same game testing or anything) is one of the most absurdly overestimated forms of analysis around. While I do not necessarily agree that this is the return of CODzilla (at least in the absurdly strong 3.5 form I associate with the term), there is no need to reject people's arguments because the situations they present didn't happen in the context of a game session. If something is going to be rejected it should be rejected on the merits of the argument presented, not on whether or not it happened at a table.
Re-reading this, I don't think it allows you to cast spells earlier than you normally could. It just simply adds the spell to you spell list, not spells known.
Correct. However, please note that there are a couple of quite charming spells in the Paladin list (which contains only 4 spell levels), and which can become rather... powerful if taken by a cleric, since they retain their spell level. As the OP stated, Holy Sword (Pal 4) at Cleric Level 7 is quite potent.
Plus, there are quite a couple of high-end spells at Summoner level 6 (which are around Sorcerer/Wizard 8 or 9)... getting them at Spell level 6 as a wizard (after taking them from the Summoner list) may be a bit... early for comfort.
As for 'heralding the return of CODzilla'... have you actually played this in a game? Or is this more alarmist conjecture?
Short of someone finding away around action economy, I think it's just alarmist conjecture.
Basically clerics went from needing 3 or 4 buffs to be powerful to needing 6 to 8 buffs to be INCREDIBLY powerful.
Who is going to sit there and let you get off that many buffs in a fight? Fight will be over before you get half way through them.
I suppose you could dominate an ambush-style fight this way with pre-buffs, but that was true before.
So really, nothings changed except options.
|
This is an example of a feature that wasn't well thought out when it was written, and will most likely never end up seeing play in any real game anyway, because any GM smart enough to read and review his PCs will simply disallow it.
As for PFS, Samsaran isn't even a legal race to play so I guess it really doesn't do any harm on that front.
There is no good justification for letting a player roll up a specific race, specific class, specific racial ability, JUST so they can try to munchkin spells that SHOULD by all rights be 8-9th level, but aren't.
As for 'heralding the return of CODzilla'... have you actually played this in a game? Or is this more alarmist conjecture?One does not need to have "actually played this" to present arguments about whether it is powerful or not. "Playtesting" (by which I mean having used it in a game, not same game testing or anything) is one of the most absurdly overestimated forms of analysis around. While I do not necessarily agree that this is the return of CODzilla, there is no need to reject people's arguments because the situations they present didn't happen in the context of a game session. If something is going to be rejected it should be rejected on the merits, not on whether or not it happened at a table.
See, that's where I disagree. I feel that a number of things can look great and overpowered on paper, but when you put it through a game with so many variables, it tends to not be as bad as one thought. I'm not talking about games with house rules or games where the GM is specifically out to beat this combination. I'm talking about how it stands when you run it against different types of encounters, each with their own nuances and rules that can change how you fight. Even the quantity of encounters can change how I would play a melee focused cleric or druid because some of those spells mentioned above are round based. I'd probably hold onto those spells until we hit an obvious 'boss fight', instead of going nova on a normal encounter. To me, when something is broken is when these variables and unknowns make little difference in the effectiveness of a build.
And honestly, at least to me, an argument loses some merit when someone constantly exaggerates a point. Most of the time, these things end up being more overblown than they really are.
As for the previous comment, I had misread something and thought it was rangers and paladin casting before they could. My mistake.
As for 'heralding the return of CODzilla'... have you actually played this in a game? Or is this more alarmist conjecture?Short of someone finding away around action economy, I think it's just alarmist conjecture.
Basically clerics went from needing 3 or 4 buffs to be powerful to needing 6 to 8 buffs to be INCREDIBLY powerful.
Who is going to sit there and let you get off that many buffs in a fight? Fight will be over before you get half way through them.
I suppose you could dominate an ambush-style fight this way with pre-buffs, but that was true before.
So really, nothings changed except options.
Admittedly, some of the spells have a long duration, especially with extend spell. So, if you know you are coming up to a dungeon, then you could cast some of the defensive spells beforehand.
See, that's where I disagree. I feel that a number of things can look great and overpowered on paper, but when you put it through a game with so many variables, it tends to not be as bad as one thought.
You make an entirely reasonable argument. The bits about some of the buffs being round based, the "nova" issue, and other factors that aren't being considered are good arguments on their own, regardless of whether the issue being discussed is conjecture or play experience. I really just had an issue with the "actually played this in game" part being opposed by "alarmist conjecture." One can be alarmist over play experience, and have a reasonable argument because of conjecture. I tend to agree that this isn't going to be a return to the power level of the CoDzilla, though it is certainly a very strong power and more than makes up for the Samaran's other lackluster abilities. I just dislike the idea that play experience should be a deciding factor in debates over how strong something is, and read your statement as a little more extreme than I should have. Apologies for sort of jumping down your throat a bit on it.
It's fine. I myself am hard-headed when I hear cries of OP and brokenness. Years of being on video game forums have taught to denounce the majority of this as either unskilled players (which in DnD is not applicable obviously) or exaggeration. So I apologize for my snark and stubbornness.
This is an example of a feature that wasn't well thought out when it was written, and will most likely never end up seeing play in any real game anyway, because any GM smart enough to read and review his PCs will simply disallow it.
Hah! So any GM who doesn't closely eye-ball every single character concept his players come up with doesn't have REAL games, eh?
That's an excellent use of the No True Scottsman intentional logical fallacy.
Short of someone finding away around action economy, I think it's just alarmist conjecture.
Well, full casters gaining early access due to lower level half caster spells pretty much facilitates Quicken Spell, doesn't it? Not to mention Extend Spell.
|
|
I would say no, bloodlines, mysteries, and patrons are not considered "on the classes spell list". mostly because you only get those spells from an outside source (your class) and they are 'added to your class spell list', indicating they were not originally on it. so i would say no you cannot nick those spells.
btw, love 'no true scottsman'
I would say no, bloodlines, mysteries, and patrons are not considered "on the classes spell list". mostly because you only get those spells from an outside source (your class) and they are 'added to your class spell list', indicating they were not originally on it. so i would say no you cannot nick those spells.
Agreed. I don't know why they think they are... The class lists are located here. If you choose a domain, you pick only a single domain (making your choices for this ability fairly straight forward).
Those are the lists you can choose from, when you choose it you don't change it. Pick them from only that list, and only if it corresponds with your divine/arcane choice.
Also, it only adds it to your spell list, not spells known. You still must learn them through normal means.
There is no rule to govern if you can have a spell on your list twice. However, I don't see how the spell can be added if you already have it. I would RAI rule it's not possible, but I also think it has minor significance.
I also think the ability is balanced. Getting haste a level earlier is not a big deal. Besides, the race itself is lackluster and to get this ability you really give away the only good ability they had in the first place.
So go nuts.