Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage

[zean]

http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz5c27?Wayang-Spellhunter-and-Magical-Lineage-Tra its

This was asked in the Rules forum and never got fully answered. I'm posting it here in the hopes that someone smart might answer it. For the purposes of Society gameplay, can I choose the same spell twice, with these two traits, and have these traits stack in their effects? (Never reducing the spell to below its original level, but effectively allowing me to get two "free" levels of metamagic on a single spell?)

[Scray]

Well, as an opinion I'd say they're both trait bonuses and so would not stack. Hope you get some more responses though. :)

[blackbloodtroll]

They are not listed as a bonus, and do count as such.

Without those restrictions, they should stack, as per RAW.

[Spacelard]

They don't work together. They are Trait Bonuses.
This has been thrashed out before.

[blackbloodtroll]

They are not bonuses.

They are reductions.

Rules on bonuses do not apply.

[Spacelard]

They don't stack...

It stops the Empowered Shocking Grasp Magical Lineage/Spell Hunter cheese and making it a 0 Level spell.

But I just know you'll disagree

[Mad Alchemist]

Spacelard wrote:

They don't work together. They are Trait Bonuses.

This has been thrashed out before.

Do you have a Link? I can easily see a DM deceding RAI that they were bonuses and therefor did not stack, but RAW I gotta agree with Blackbloodtroll.

[blackbloodtroll]

Explain why they do not stack, as per RAW.

Note: Neither trait can reduce the spell level below it's original level.

[Christopher Woldridge]

As a GM in my home game, no.

In PFS I would say no and later tell my VC or VL of the ruling (or right then if he was at hand).

I can see where blackbloodtroll is trying to make a corner case of it. It reduces one level from a metamagic feat's increase, so it is a reduction. I would call foul as it is actualy a bonus that when using a metamagic feat that you do not increase the level of the spell slot needed to cast the spell. What it is not a typical bonus it is still and bonus and the rules on bonuses should apply.

[Icyshadow]

If I were DM, I'd allow it.

[blackbloodtroll]

Not everything that is beneficial, is a bonus.

If it is a bonus, then it is noted as a bonus.

Neither are noted as bonuses.

It is not a bonus because you want it to be.

You may not like it, and it may not even be RAI, but it is most certainly RAW.

They stack.

[Cheapy]

Basically, for PFS, if you aren't sure it works, don't try it.

[Virgil]

RaW, it's allowed. Regardless of the RaI, I don't see how it's a problem. You can have an empowered shocking grasp be a 0-level spell, since Empower is a +2. One of the better 'tricks' is a toppling magic missile, and we've got a thread specifically calling out its marginal utility. Outside of that, you're essentially paying two traits for a super-charged cantrip; and if anyone remembers the switch over to Pathfinder when cantrips universally became at-will, you'll notice that your casters are hardly dominating the game because of it.

If you don't use it for infinite 1st or 2nd level spells, then you're essentially getting a spell a couple more times per day (instead of a lower level spell), and I just don't see the disparity as something to be concerned about.

[Aelryinth]

It's already been noted that you can't use Wayang to reduce a spell below it's original number.

So, no cantrip abuse like this!

==Aelryinth

[Spacelard]

Virgil wrote:

If you don't use it for infinite 1st or 2nd level spells, then you're essentially getting a spell a couple more times per day (instead of a lower level spell), and I just don't see the disparity as something to be concerned about.

I am making a HUGE assumption but that is what the OP might be looking at... Infinite Intensified Shocking Grasp because it becomes a 0 lvl spell and orisons can be at will cheese.

If I am wrong I apologize in advance.

[Virgil]

Just Wayang, or both it and Lineage? That makes a world of difference. And again, unlimited magic missile isn't actually overpowered. Warlocks from 3.5 were doing better with eldritch blasts, and they weren't reigning over the peons.

[The black raven]

I had a similar question some time ago (do not remember in which thread though) and someone official answered that a similar benefit given by 2 traits could not stack, even if it was not called out as being a trait bonus

EDIT : Found it. Not quite what I remembered though.

[Michael Sayre]

They work together based on the way they're written, and as long as you follow the guideline that they can't lower a spell past its original level, you should be fine. The thing is, they don't actually do the same thing.
Wayang Spellhunter says:"When you use the chosen spell with a metamagic feat, it uses up a spell slot one level lower than it normally would."

and Magical Lineage says:"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, Wayang Spell hunter allows you to lower the adjusted level, and Magical Lineage allows you to act as though the starting level is one lower.

[Michael Sayre]

The black raven wrote:

I had a similar question some time ago (do not remember in which thread though) and someone official answered that a similar benefit given by 2 traits could not stack, even if it was not called out as being a trait bonus

EDIT : Found it. Not quite what I remembered though.

The two traits you were referencing in that post give a spell a +1 trait bonus to caster level. They work completely differently from the two traits in question. Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage don't provide a bonus, and thus don't fall under that ruling.

[zean]

James' thoughts on it

As awful as it may sound though, I think he might be wrong. Still, it seems to be at first glance that the intention was that they do not stack.

[The black raven]

Ssalarn wrote:

The black raven wrote:

I had a similar question some time ago (do not remember in which thread though) and someone official answered that a similar benefit given by 2 traits could not stack, even if it was not called out as being a trait bonus

EDIT : Found it. Not quite what I remembered though.

The two traits you were referencing in that post give a spell a +1 trait bonus to caster level. They work completely differently from the two traits in question. Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage don't provide a bonus, and thus don't fall under that ruling.

Actually, the traits I was referencing in that thread say :

Precocious Spellcaster
Benefit: Select one cantrip and one 1st-level spell; when you cast these spells, they function at one caster level higher than your actual caster level.

Gifted Adept
Benefit: Pick one spell when you choose this trait. Whenever you cast that spell, its effects manifest at +1 caster level.

There was no mention of a trait bonus.

Good to see that J. Jacobs keeps the same stance on this over the years . The Devs' intent here is crystal clear to say the least.

[Tels]

Jason Bulmahn's response in a thread about stacking Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage to get super-cantrips.

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Hey there Folks,

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.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

The answer is no, you can't stack Wayang and Magical Lineage to reduce a first or second level spell below it's original level. That doesn't mean you can't stack them to reduce a spell back to it's original level. So you could have, say, an Empowered Shocking Grasp cast out of a First level slot, or an Intensified, Elemental (Cold) Rime Shocking Grasp out of a Second level slot. Or an Elemental (Cold) Rime Shocking Grasp out of a First level slot. Or Intensified, Reach (Close) Shocking Grasp out of a First level slot.

I mention Shocking Grasp a lot because it seems to be a board favorite for these two traits.

For the non-PFS players, see if you can't get your GM to allow Admixture Wizards to prepare Rime spells (because Admixture changes the energy type at the moment of casting, not at spell preparation) on spells you intend to change to cold. Then, have all kinds of fun casting Intensified, Rime Fireballs, and if you build it right, take Spell Perfection at 15th to get Heighten for free, then take on two free Metamagic levels. My favorite is a Heighten (free), Selective, Rime Fireball or Heighten (free), Intensified, Rime Fireball.

[Drondak]

Only works if every min-maxer in from Minata. It is a regional trait for that area which is largely Tien. So if their country of origin is not Minata - no Chelaxian wizards with wayang spellhunter or metamagic master (Paizo requested Wayang be renamed due to copyright issues once d20pfsrd went commercial with the store). If you were to house rule it, you'd almost have to make it a magic trait which rules out magical lineage. So the debate is largely pointless for 99.9% of wizards.

[Azten]

Five years of threadomancy and just for that? Come on, you just made is so 99.9% of blasters are from Minata, and since blasters are usually considered one of the worst kinds of casters...