Is there a ruling on Magical Lineage reducing spells to cantrips?

[Sean H]

One Pathfinder Society player has asked me about building a wizard with Magical Lineage, Wayang Spellhunter and Toppling spell to get an infinite-cast Cantrip-level spell which deals damage and trips opponents. After searching through this form, I have found a lot of opinions stating that this is cheese, it shouldn't be allowed, etc. However, I couldn't find any official ruling on this, and as this is PFS, there are no houserules. That means if it's RAW, it's valid.

As such, I'm looking for an official ruling on this. Have any of the developers stated that reducing a non-0 level spell to 0 level does not allow infinite casts?

[Cheapy]

Ah PFS, where common sense is restricted.

Yes, there is.

[LazarX]

The Devs have stated that you can not reduce the metamagic cost to less than zero, no matter how many feats, traits, whatever you throw at it.

You simply can not reduce any spell to Zero level at all.

[Jiggy]

Sean H wrote:

One Pathfinder Society player has asked me about building a wizard with Magical Lineage, Wayang Spellhunter and Toppling spell to get an infinite-cast Cantrip-level spell which deals damage and trips opponents. After searching through this form, I have found a lot of opinions stating that this is cheese, it shouldn't be allowed, etc. However, I couldn't find any official ruling on this, and as this is PFS, there are no houserules. That means if it's RAW, it's valid.

As such, I'm looking for an official ruling on this. Have any of the developers stated that reducing a non-0 level spell to 0 level does not allow infinite casts?

Jason Bulmahn, Lead Designer: "Magical Lineage was never intended as a way for you to actually lower a spell's level. It was put in to allow you to reduce the increase from a metamagic feat. So, no unlimited magic missiles. I will see to it that the language of this ability is clarified soon and I will get this added to the FAQ."

Note that version 4.2 of the Guide to Organized Play states that GMs should abide by messageboard clarifications from Paizo staff. So there you go.

EDIT: Very ninja'd. :P

[David knott 242]

Does this mean that a cantrip that has a metamagic feat applied to it as well as another feat that reduces it back to level zero can be cast at will with that metamagic feat?

[Jiggy]

David knott 242 wrote:

Does this mean that a cantrip that has a metamagic feat applied to it as well as another feat that reduces it back to level zero can be cast at will with that metamagic feat?

So it starts and ends at the same level through legal means? Then yeah, that works.

[LazarX]

Sean H wrote:

That means if it's RAW, it's valid.

Some people tend to think that RAW is the last resort to browbeat a GM into swallowing a corner cheese maneuver. I'm one of those DM's that begs to differ. My job is to keep in touch of the dev clarifications that occur on this board. Now I know that there are munchkins out there that will look for and find corners to squeeze through that haven't been covered. That's the nature of the beast. My job is to rule on those cases where the game is best served, RAW be dammed if it conflicts with what I see as RAI. And it's pretty dammed clear that infinite magic missiles, shocking grasps or what have you is against RAI. And that's the way I roll on any table I run.

If you have a problem with my rulings, you can appeal to the convention coordinator or the local Venture Officers.

[Jiggy]

@LazarX: Using common sense is great, but your common-sense rulings couple with your "F*** YOU, I'M IN CHARGE" attitude about like a smiley-face sticker on the end of a baseball bat that's headed to my face.

[Sean H]

Aha! Thanks Cheapy (and Jiggy).