Potential Shocking Grasp as a Level 0 spell?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 129 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Dark Archive

10 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Okay so I was scouring the boards and run across some Magus info and someone had posted something about taking Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage together for a level 0 Shocking Grasp....so is this legal and does go on the grounds of an unlimited cantrip because of this since you are in fact preparing it as a level 0??? Cheese or misunderstood???


As anything you have to work with your DM and group to determine what is or is not allowed at a specific table but I would not expect to get much traction on this one.

RAI this is certainly outside of what I expect the game designers had in mind. Most things have the round down minimum one clause in Pathfinder and I would say Magical Lineage is the same way.

Otherwise you could take the Heighten spell feat with magical lineage and make every spell one level lower then normal by setting the Heighten feature to +0 so it is zero levels higher but with the trait actually one level lower then normal.

Scarab Sages

Technically it's legal.

Would I allow it at my table? Absolutely not. I mean, with this you could get unlimited Charm Person, Color Spray, Sleep, or any other number of at-will first level spells. Seems like a minor oversight to me, even if it is legal.


Yeah, that's a bit ridiculous-seeming to myself, as well. I like the at-will for 0-level rule, but it has led to quite a few questions in my own experience. Generally, I think 0-levels should be useful on occasion, and maybe with cunning usage they can be very helpful, but in general, they should be weak and not deal damage. Shocking grasp as a 0? No way. Even if technically legal, I'd houserule it out.


I don't see how thIs is legal RAW or RAI. Both traits specifically say "when using the chosen spell with a metamagic feat". Heighten spell does not allow you to lower the spell lvl of a spell, only to raise it for the purposes of save DC or other effects dependent on spell lvl. So with both traits you could heighten a 1st lvl spell to 3rd lvl and still only use a first lvl slot but I don't see RAW or RAI that supports the traits allowing you to decrease a spells effective lvl without first adding metamagic feats and then decreasing the lvl. However, you still can not decrease the lvl below the original lvl of the spell.


I would think that since Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage provide the exact same benefit, they don't stack. This follows the written developers intention for the Trait system.

Also, I believe one of the developers even stated on these boards that you could not reduce a lvl 1 or higher spell to a 0-level cantrip. It might even be in a FAQ somewhere, but I'm occupied at the moment and don't have the extra time to look it up.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

In my opinion, no. All cantrips are 0 level spells, but not all 0 level spells are cantrips.


How about a unlimited cure light wounds with reach? Yeah they will nerf this soon I bet. But yeah as written right now totally legit.

These guys need to think about the stuff they publish and how it all interacts, soon the errata documents for pathfinder will start to compete with 4E.

But yeah have fun with it while it lasts.


Ravennus wrote:

I would think that since Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage provide the exact same benefit, they don't stack. This follows the written developers intention for the Trait system.

Also, I believe one of the developers even stated on these boards that you could not reduce a lvl 1 or higher spell to a 0-level cantrip. It might even be in a FAQ somewhere, but I'm occupied at the moment and don't have the extra time to look it up.

They do in fact stack. It's on a post somewhere here on the board. The argument was that they don't provide any kind of bonus, named or otherwise, and also come from two different categories of trait, magic(magical lineage) and regional(wayang spellhunter). I don't see any problem with that IMO. As a DM if you had a player that dedicated himself that fully to one spell it would be easy as pie to balance. Resistances, immunities, spell turning, etc are all easy options to challenge a character like that. So both at once... No prob IMO.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm part of the "a reduced spell level 1st level spell is not a Cantrip" school of thinking. You can memorize to a 0 level slot, but that doesn't give you unlimited uses. The slot gets used for the day when you cast.


Tallkid wrote:
Ravennus wrote:

I would think that since Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage provide the exact same benefit, they don't stack. This follows the written developers intention for the Trait system.

Also, I believe one of the developers even stated on these boards that you could not reduce a lvl 1 or higher spell to a 0-level cantrip. It might even be in a FAQ somewhere, but I'm occupied at the moment and don't have the extra time to look it up.

They do in fact stack. It's on a post somewhere here on the board. The argument was that they don't provide any kind of bonus, named or otherwise, and also come from two different categories of trait, magic(magical lineage) and regional(wayang spellhunter). I don't see any problem with that IMO. As a DM if you had a player that dedicated himself that fully to one spell it would be easy as pie to balance. Resistances, immunities, spell turning, etc are all easy options to challenge a character like that. So both at once... No prob IMO.

HENCE why I qualified my statement with "follows the written developers intention for the Trait system".

Yes, since it's not technically a "trait bonus", they stack. But seriously..."they’re intended to give player characters a slight edge, not a secret backdoor way to focus all of a character’s traits on one type of bonus and thus gain an unseemly advantage"... I think that makes the developer intent very clear.


I read that you cannot have traits from the same source, and traits selected cannot affect the same thing..ie you can't have two traits from different sources to raise your Fort save, and you can't have two traits reducing spell levels.

From the APG:
"Many traits grant a new type of bonus: a “trait” bonus. Trait bonuses do not stack—they're intended to give player characters a slight edge, not a secret backdoor way to focus all of a character's traits on one type of bonus and thus gain an unseemly advantage. It's certainly possible, for example, that somewhere down the line, a “Courageous” trait might be on the list of dwarf race traits, but just because this trait is on both the dwarf race traits list and the basic combat traits list doesn't mean you're any more brave if you choose both versions than if you choose only one."

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

This becomes dangerous even without combining them. Say you just took Magical Lineage:

Magical Lineage Trait:
Benefit: 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 say I apply that to Shocking Grasp. I then get the metamagic feat Merciful Spell:

Merciful Spell Feat:
Benefit: You can alter spells that inflict damage to inflict nonlethal damage instead. Spells that inflict damage of a particular type (such as fire) inflict nonlethal damage of that same type.

Level Increase: None (a merciful spell does not use up a higher-level spell slot than the spell’s actual level.)

RAW, a nonlethal Shocking Grasp becomes a 0th level spell. Now, I agree that it shouldn't make it "unlimited" as a cantrip is, but there's nothing that I know of RAW that says anything about tracking/using spell slots if the spell isn't level 1 or higher...

I do think it's an oversight, personally (and maybe worthy of being a FAQ candidate)... but if it's not... *dreams up a Staff Magus who doesn't like to kill people but who is really good at knocking attackers out...*


This isn't new. Not in the slightest.

There are very smart people that visit these boards. They came up with the combinations you mention the minute the material was printed. The developers have already said that this was not their intention and that you can't reduce a spell to an unlimited cantrip.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I just tend to follow the "if it looks like cheese, smells like cheese and tastes like cheese, then it's probably cheese" guideline.


If it is the developers intention to have something work one way or not work that way then why do they not fix it?

This is a game with rules, rules that a good portion of the playing community like to rules lawyer to death and exploit every loop hole imaginable, take a bit stop regurgitating fluff to fill the books and spend some time on the mechanics of the game.

I want a game that is balanced, and not prone to abuse by players. If I am spending time as a DM fixing the system something is wrong, this is what we pay for.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
I just tend to follow the "if it looks like cheese, smells like cheese and tastes like cheese, then it's probably cheese" guideline.

You forgot melts like cheese. Seriously I worked at a place that had a salad bar the cheese on the salad bar wouldn't melt in a 450 degree oven. That is so not cheese.


Some people pay for and like the fluff as well the rules content. No team of devs will ever be able to put out new content and have it be flawless and still have any degree of excitement that cannot be exploited by very smart players. The hundreds of thousands of players looking at a game are always going to find things to bend the spirit of the game. And for some of those groups that bending is just fine for them. No harm as long as everyone at the table is having fun.

The game has a DM with a human brain for a reason. If you want solid rules that are perfect and will never vary that is what a computer game is for in my opinion.


I think KrythePhreak was talking about a post I made in the Petition for Ashiel as a Rules Consultant thread.

This is the post I made:

Tels' Post:
Tels wrote:

Hmm.....

Magical Lineage trait
Wayang Spellhunter trait
Merciful Spell feat

5th level Wizard Evoker with 18 Intelligence prepares...

1)Merciful Fireball, Merciful Fireball, Merciful Fireball, Merciful Fireball, Merciful Fireball
2)Merciful Fireball, Merciful Fireball, Merciful Fireball, Merciful Fireball
3)Merciful Fireball, Merciful Fireball, Merciful Fireball

Not very practical, but hilarious! The other thought I had was to pick Scorching Ray, start preparing second level Empowered Scorching Ray, 0-level Merciful Scorching Ray, or 1st level Disruptive Scorching Ray for castys.

If I wanted to get really mean, come 10th level, 0-level Intensified Shocking Grasp for the Magus...

[Edit] Elemental Spell - Acid

Split the damage between Flame and Acid.

Cast Flaccidball?

It was kinda made as a joke, but it is a funny idea for a character. Kinda how Merisiel's method of solving a problem is to stab it until there is no problem, this guy's method is casting Fireball until the problem goes away.

As for Shocking Grasp, the idea was to Intensify Shocking Grasp as a Magus at 10th level (for 10d6 Shock Damage), and mix it with Wayang Spell Hunter and Magical Lineage for an at-will 10d6 Shocking Grasp that the Magus can use with Spellstrike.

Obviously, broken as all hell, especially if the Magus is using a high crit weapon.


Serisan wrote:
I'm part of the "a reduced spell level 1st level spell is not a Cantrip" school of thinking. You can memorize to a 0 level slot, but that doesn't give you unlimited uses. The slot gets used for the day when you cast.

This!

Same with a magical lineage mercyful magic missile.
It is now a level 0 spell. But it is not a cantrip.


I remember someone, maybe James Jacobs, saying that all 0-level spells are unlimited. It came up in reference to whether adepts had cantrips. I think.

But don't worry Im not saying the wayang/ magical lineage trick is legit.


Adamantine Dragon wrote:
I just tend to follow the "if it looks like cheese, smells like cheese and tastes like cheese, then it's probably cheese" guideline.

Agreed, I get a bit tired seeing players on the forum taking no responsibility for balance or enjoyment of the game, up to the point of declaring 'RAW' holier than the bible (if it suits them).


Ravennus wrote:

This isn't new. Not in the slightest.

There are very smart people that visit these boards. They came up with the combinations you mention the minute the material was printed. The developers have already said that this was not their intention and that you can't reduce a spell to an unlimited cantrip.

well, was there any official errata on it yet? because I have seen dozens of builds based on this by now


Ravennus wrote:

This isn't new. Not in the slightest.

There are very smart people that visit these boards. They came up with the combinations you mention the minute the material was printed. The developers have already said that this was not their intention and that you can't reduce a spell to an unlimited cantrip.

I do agree that it is not RAI, I have yet to see a dev weigh in, even unofficially.


The simplest method for fixing this is to put a line that says something like, "This trait cannot reduce the level of the spell below the spells unmodified level." That way, you don't get to prepare spells in lower level slots by tacking on the Merciful Spell feat.

If you ask why not just change Merciful Spell, it's because you could still take both traits and reduce a first level spell with a +1 adjustment to a 0-level spell. It'd be a lot simpler to add a line to those two trait descriptions, than to try and patch every Metamagic Feat.

Sovereign Court

Tels wrote:
The simplest method for fixing this is to put a line that says something like, "This trait cannot reduce the level of the spell below the spells unmodified level." That way, you don't get to prepare spells in lower level slots by tacking on the Merciful Spell feat.

I agree; even preparing a 2nd level spell as 1st level is a bit cheesy. I think it's fairly obvious that wasn't the intention of the traits.

That said, Cantrip Magic Missile would've been nice to have, just like Cantrip Cure Light...


Ascalaphus wrote:
Tels wrote:
The simplest method for fixing this is to put a line that says something like, "This trait cannot reduce the level of the spell below the spells unmodified level." That way, you don't get to prepare spells in lower level slots by tacking on the Merciful Spell feat.

I agree; even preparing a 2nd level spell as 1st level is a bit cheesy. I think it's fairly obvious that wasn't the intention of the traits.

That said, Cantrip Magic Missile would've been nice to have, just like Cantrip Cure Light...

Well then, D&D Next is right up your alley then, at least for the 0-level Magic Missile. :P


Unlimited casting only goes for 0th level spells in 0th level slots. So no unlimited widened detect magic and no unlimited magical lineage + merciful shocking grasp.

this has been stated by the devs.


Magical Lineage

Benefit: Pick one spell when you choose this trait. When you apply metamagic feats to this spell, treat the final level adjustment imposed by these feats as one less than normal. If the final level adjustment is zero or less, there is no level adjustment to the spell.

Or something like that. One quick rewrite or post in the FAQ, and these perennial "Unlimited first level spells per day" threads would be no more. Well, they'd still crop up from people who didn't check the FAQ first, but then they'd immediately get spammed like Tels' Merciful fireballs by people giving the url link to the FAQ post.


stringburka wrote:

Unlimited casting only goes for 0th level spells in 0th level slots. So no unlimited widened detect magic and no unlimited magical lineage + merciful shocking grasp.

this has been stated by the devs.

Can you quote this because I've seen a few posts before saying that any spell prepared in a 0-level slot isn't expended when it's cast.


Tels wrote:
stringburka wrote:

Unlimited casting only goes for 0th level spells in 0th level slots. So no unlimited widened detect magic and no unlimited magical lineage + merciful shocking grasp.

this has been stated by the devs.

Can you quote this because I've seen a few posts before saying that any spell prepared in a 0-level slot isn't expended when it's cast.

Yeah I dont understand why people continue to say this. A 0-level spell is a Cantrip. A Cantrip is a 0-Level spell. They are the same thing.

From the SRD:

Cantrips: Wizards can prepare a number of cantrips, or 0-level spells, 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.

Its the same thing. If you lower a spell to 0-level it is a Cantrip and are not expended when cast. THATS RAW.

Now as to your question. Yes both Traits stack. Yes if you had both and memorized an Intensified Shocking Grasp it would be a Cantrip. THATS RAW. RAI it is not. Im sure most DM's would say No. But going stricktly by the rules as they are written it works.


Dragonamedrake wrote:
Tels wrote:
stringburka wrote:

Unlimited casting only goes for 0th level spells in 0th level slots. So no unlimited widened detect magic and no unlimited magical lineage + merciful shocking grasp.

this has been stated by the devs.

Can you quote this because I've seen a few posts before saying that any spell prepared in a 0-level slot isn't expended when it's cast.

Yeah I dont understand why people continue to say this. A 0-level spell is a Cantrip. A Cantrip is a 0-Level spell. They are the same thing.

If every level 0 spell was a cantrip oracles would not have orizons.

Grand Lodge

Umbranus wrote:
Dragonamedrake wrote:


Yeah I dont understand why people continue to say this. A 0-level spell is a Cantrip. A Cantrip is a 0-Level spell. They are the same thing.
If every level 0 spell was a cantrip oracles would not have orizons.

Cantrips are arcane 0 level spells. Orisons are divine 0 level spells. Same rules, different name.

Silver Crusade

Umbranus wrote:
Dragonamedrake wrote:
Tels wrote:
stringburka wrote:

Unlimited casting only goes for 0th level spells in 0th level slots. So no unlimited widened detect magic and no unlimited magical lineage + merciful shocking grasp.

this has been stated by the devs.

Can you quote this because I've seen a few posts before saying that any spell prepared in a 0-level slot isn't expended when it's cast.

Yeah I dont understand why people continue to say this. A 0-level spell is a Cantrip. A Cantrip is a 0-Level spell. They are the same thing.

If every level 0 spell was a cantrip oracles would not have orizons.

Cantrips are level 0 arcane spells, Orisons are level 0 divine spells - same difference really.

PS - I'm not trying to find a way to "do this" just fyi (regarding my earlier post) - I'm trying to play devil's advocate hoping to find a solid RAW against it. In my home game I can always DM fiat and say "nuh uh" to it, but in PFS if it's RAW... I might not be able to justify to a player why they can't do it.


S


4 people marked this as a favorite.

The only references in the RAW to 0-level spells not being expended are in specific Class Feature entires:

PRD wrote:
Cantrips: Wizards can prepare a number of cantrips, or 0-level spells, 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).
PRD wrote:
Orisons: Clerics can prepare a number of orisons, or 0-level spells, each day, as noted on Table: Cleric under “Spells per Day.” These spells are cast like any other spell, but they are not expended when cast and may be used again.

Both Cantrips and Orisins refer to 0-level spells, not 0-level slots. A Shocking Grasp is still a first level spell not a Cantrip, so the rule doesn't apply.

PRD wrote:
Effects of Metamagic Feats on a Spell: In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast using a higher-level spell slot.

So, a non-Cantrip prepared in a 0-level slot expends that slot. Spontaneous Casters do not have 0-level slots, so they can't even cast spells reduced to 0-level this way.

Edit: To put it another way, an Empowered Fireball is a 3rd-level spell prepared in a 5th-level slot, it is not a 5th-level spell. A Merciful Shocking Grasp with Magical Lineage is a 1st-level spell that can arguably be prepared in a 0-level slot, but it is in no way a 0-level spell.


Umbranus wrote:
If every level 0 spell was a cantrip oracles would not have orizons.

Pretty sure that was a joke, but just in case...

A orizon is a Cantrip. A Cantrip is a Orizon. BOTH are just another name for 0-Level spells. If tomorrow they come up with another class that gets 0-Level spells and they name them Bubbleraps.... Bubbleraps will be 0-Level spells.... Get it?


Right and also, there was a thread about adepts and 0-level spells where a dev said 0 level spells slots don't get expended, period, no matter what name they are called In a class description... Or something to that effect. Let me see if I can dig it up.

Silver Crusade

Quantum Steve wrote:

Both Cantrips and Orisins refer to 0-level spells, not 0-level slots. A Shocking Grasp is still a first level spell not a Cantrip, so the rule doesn't apply.

PRD wrote:
Effects of Metamagic Feats on a Spell: In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast using a higher-level spell slot.
So, a non-Cantrip prepared in a 0-level slot expends that slot. Spontaneous Casters do not have 0-level slots, so they can't even cast spells reduced to 0-level this way.

That, sir, is an exceptional logical argument against spontaneous casters using this to turn level 1 spells into level 0 ones. One might argue, however, that since it's being reduced it won't use up the 1st level slot either, meaning that it can still be used an unlimited number of times.

Prepared casters, however, do have 0-level slots, and the text (for wizards, at least) adds more confusion to the matter:

PRD wrote:
Cantrips: Wizards can prepare a number of cantrips, or 0-level spells, 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).

Methinks the easiest solution to this would be a one-sentence errata in the Magic chapter: "No feat, trait, or any other effect may reduce any spell's effective level/slot below its original spell level/slot."

Edit - Regarding the PRD comment on wizards using "two of his available slots", that makes me more confused since they say that the spells are not expended. Unless I'm reading cantrips all wrong and you only get to cast 4 cantrips per day (for example), but you can memorize 4 and choose to cast the same one 4 times, or two of them twice, or 1 and 3, etc.


2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

Doesn't need an eratta. Metamagic adjust the spell level slot used to memorize the spell. It doesn't change the spell level.

A level 1 spell that has the spell slot reduced to level 0 takes up a level 0 spell slot, but is still inherently a level 1 spell. Cantrip unlimited casting would not apply. You could still make a fireball take up a level 1 or level 2 slot, which might be a bit bonkerz, but can't make something become a cantrip like this.

PRD: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/feats.html
SRD: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/metamagic-feats

Metamagic Feats
Metamagic feats allow spellcasters to modify their spells, granting the spells new powers and effects. Such spells generally take up a higher-level spell slot than the normal spell. For complete rules on how to apply metamagic feats to spells.


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

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

Bolding mine.

Sorry not linkified.

Quote courtesy of Tels.

Silver Crusade

CanisDirus wrote:


Edit - Regarding the PRD comment on wizards using "two of his available slots", that makes me more confused since they say that the spells are not expended. Unless I'm reading cantrips all wrong and you only get to cast 4 cantrips per day (for example), but you can memorize 4 and choose to cast the same one 4 times, or two of them twice, or 1 and 3, etc.

No, nevermind, that can't be it because Sorcerers don't have 0th level slots for their cantrips, meaning they can memorize 4 at level 1 and use those 4 as many times as they like, so by the same token a wizard would be able to know as many as they like, memorize 4 per day, and use them unlimited amounts.

Which really makes me confused regarding the PRD's comment about using two slots for a cantrip from a prohibited school.


CanisDirus wrote:
CanisDirus wrote:


Edit - Regarding the PRD comment on wizards using "two of his available slots", that makes me more confused since they say that the spells are not expended. Unless I'm reading cantrips all wrong and you only get to cast 4 cantrips per day (for example), but you can memorize 4 and choose to cast the same one 4 times, or two of them twice, or 1 and 3, etc.

No, nevermind, that can't be it because Sorcerers don't have 0th level slots for their cantrips, meaning they can memorize 4 at level 1 and use those 4 as many times as they like, so by the same token a wizard would be able to know as many as they like, memorize 4 per day, and use them unlimited amounts.

Which really makes me confused regarding the PRD's comment about using two slots for a cantrip from a prohibited school.

That comment means that a cantrip from a prohibited school counts as two of the four cantrips he can prepare each day. So:

Regular, Regular, Regular, Regular
Prohibited, Regular, Regular
Prohibited, Prohibited

All can be cast unlimited, it just affects the variety he has available

Silver Crusade

Bobson wrote:

That comment means that a cantrip from a prohibited school counts as two of the four cantrips he can prepare each day. So:

Regular, Regular, Regular, Regular
Prohibited, Regular, Regular
Prohibited, Prohibited

All can be cast unlimited, it just affects the variety he has available

Thanks for that - brief brain-addled moment on my part apparently.

So now just back to the "if you somehow get a level 1 spell to use a level 0 slot... what happens?"


I would say RAI, you just can't. Of course that's just a guess.
Unfortunately, RAW... You can and it's unlimited. Unless someone can link to errata or ruling of some kind.


Thats easy in my opinion, a wizard who wants to memorize a cantrip from is prohibitd school has to use two cantrip slots to memorize it.

So if he normally has 4 slots and want to memorize a prohibited he can do so but has only 2 slots left for other cantrips.
Those could be used for 2 normal cantrips or a second prohibited cantrip.


Dragonamedrake wrote:
Umbranus wrote:
If every level 0 spell was a cantrip oracles would not have orizons.

Pretty sure that was a joke, but just in case...

Not a joke, just a way to say that the sentence "every level 0 spell is a cantrip" is not true. And I stick to it. Orizons and cantrips are different things, even if they work by the same rules. (which they don't. cantrips are subject to arcane spell failoure, orizons aren't.)


S


Grimmy wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

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

Bolding mine.

Sorry not linkified.

Quote courtesy of Tels.

Found it

http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz1k9r&page=5?A-little-gem-about-0-level-spel ls#234


Nice work.

1 to 50 of 129 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Potential Shocking Grasp as a Level 0 spell? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.