Magical lineage and waying spellhunter


Rules Questions

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Simple, do these stack?

Would you consider this uber/semi or mild cheese even if the character had a great background story?

I would love an "Official" answer to this.


Yes, they do.

Neither use uses the phrase 'trait bonus', or in fact applies a bonus at all, so the 'same named bonuses' rule never comes into play.

I wouldn't consider it particularly cheesy, nor would I require a particularly wild backstory, especially considering that the trait's names and flavor can be easily altered.


Last time this question was asked, the only official restriction was that they can't reduce the spell level below the unaltered spell level. So yeah, they stack.


So wayang spellhunter is only a 3rd level spell or less. I can handle that.


can someone link me to it? I'm on the srd and can't seem to find it

Shadow Lodge RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8

Thomas Long 175 wrote:
can someone link me to it? I'm on the srd and can't seem to find it

They renamed it on the pfsrd when they opened up their online store: Link


lol I already found that one, that's what I get for not looking at the actual url :P

thank you

Liberty's Edge

Interesting all yah votes, granted from a small sample group. I will use this as a bump to see if I can get some more input.

My first thought was that this had a mild cheese aroma

Liberty's Edge

Cheese differs from person to person.

Silver Crusade

It's a mild cheese, not as sharp as cheddar.


Traits almost need a 'no synergy' rule. IMO, traits were intended to do stuff like give yourself another class skill with a minor bonus and shore up a weak saving throw. I don't think they were intended to be stacked in this sort of way---imagine someone stacking magical lineage, the spellhunter trait, and the trait that gives you +1 on caster level and dcs on three separate spells---they'd need either 3 traits or the extra traits feat, but it's more stackage in traits than I'm comfortable with as a GM.


FEAR MY GOUDA!

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage work together. The term "stacking" is not really appropriate, as there is no bonus to "stack".

Scarab Sages

Yes they stack.

Yes, they can be used as the foundation of some very cheesy combinations.
(wizards with Dazing Fireball, magi with Intensified Rimed Snowball, etc.)

Shadow Lodge

Some thread necromancy. This came up this past weekend, and my search-fu failed to find this question.

Say you have an admixture wizard with both traits on fireball and a lesser extend rod.

Could said wizard use the lesser extend rod (capped at 3rd level spells) with an empowered fireball (originally 5th level, modified down to 3rd)?

Or is this spell technically considered 5th level every though it's being powered by a 3rd level slot (thus requiring a normal metamagic rod)?

Spontaneously casting specialized selective, empowered fireballs of any elemental damage are/were pretty impressive from a 5th level wizard/1st level sorcerer.


i think its considered 5th. there is a rule talking about items interacting wwith metamagic where it uses the least advantageous stat of the spell but i cantremember frofro where a faq maybe


I flagged the original post for FAQ.
Looking at how traits are intended, I think these two feats should not stack. However, by RAW these is nothing forbidding this.


I Think they stack but in my group it would be like that ancient cheese the folks from Scandinavia sometimes eat.


Cap. Darling wrote:
I Think they stack but in my group it would be like that ancient cheese the folks from Scandinavia sometimes eat.

They do stack but can't lower past the spells original level, I believe.

However...
*mini rant*
It is on my hate list as its one of the biggest offenders on my "play the mechanics only" and "Pazio has given something so good that 99% of that build type *must* have it!".

Shadow Lodge

Mojorat wrote:
i think its considered 5th. there is a rule talking about items interacting wwith metamagic where it uses the least advantageous stat of the spell but i cant remember from where a faq maybe

It's this FAQ entry

It says this:

FAQ wrote:
In general, use the (normal, lower) spell level or the (higher) spell slot level, whichever is more of a disadvantage for the caster.

The parenthesis appear to refer to the example above it, without those it reads:

FAQ wrote:
In general, use the spell level or the spell slot level, whichever is more of a disadvantage for the caster.

I suppose this would mean in the case of the two traits, you'd use the normal spell level and not the spell slot level, because it's the one that is more of the disadvantage.

This has quite an impact actually. It means that characters couldn't be using 1st level pearls of power to recall originally 3rd level spells (like an empowered burning hands) that were reduced back to 1st via the two traits (although as lineage actually modifies the spell level, a 2nd level pearl could be used for the originally 3rd level spell).

Perhaps a good thing as it makes this particular cheese less gooey?

Grand Lodge

wakedown wrote:
Mojorat wrote:
i think its considered 5th. there is a rule talking about items interacting wwith metamagic where it uses the least advantageous stat of the spell but i cant remember from where a faq maybe

It's this FAQ entry

It says this:

FAQ wrote:
In general, use the (normal, lower) spell level or the (higher) spell slot level, whichever is more of a disadvantage for the caster.

The parenthesis appear to refer to the example above it, without those it reads:

FAQ wrote:
In general, use the spell level or the spell slot level, whichever is more of a disadvantage for the caster.

I suppose this would mean in the case of the two traits, you'd use the normal spell level and not the spell slot level, because it's the one that is more of the disadvantage.

This has quite an impact actually. It means that characters couldn't be using 1st level pearls of power to recall originally 3rd level spells (like an empowered burning hands) that were reduced back to 1st via the two traits (although as lineage actually modifies the spell level, a 2nd level pearl could be used for the originally 3rd level spell).

Perhaps a good thing as it makes this particular cheese less gooey?

Neither trait can reduce the adjusted spell slot below the original level. So a Fireball will never be lower than a Third level slot, even if you put a 0 slot adjustment metamagic on it.

HOWEVER, as far as I can tell, an Empowered Fireball modified with Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage is still eligible for use with Lesser Metamagic Rods, since both its actual level and spell slot level are third in this case.

Shadow Lodge

Jeff Merola wrote:
HOWEVER, as far as I can tell, an Empowered Fireball modified with Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage is still eligible for use with Lesser Metamagic Rods, since both its actual level and spell slot level are third in this case.

It's certainly challenging to tease it out.

Here's the FAQ with the parenthesis altered for the example of an empowered fireball (that starts at 5th level) but ends up in a 3rd level spell slot.

FAQ wrote:
In general, use the (normal, higher) spell level or the (lower) spell slot level, whichever is more of a disadvantage for the caster.
Wayang Spellhunter wrote:

Choose: A spell of 3rd level or below.

Benefit: When you use the chosen spell with a metamagic feat, it uses up a spell slot one level lower than it normally would.

Magic Lineage wrote:
Pick one spell when you choose this trait. When you apply metamagic feats to this spell that add at least 1 level to the spell, treat its actual level as 1 lower for determining the spell's final adjusted level.

AFAICT, this means Magic Lineage is by far the better trait. It actually makes the original empowered fireball a 4th level spell instead of a 5th level spell.

The FAQ seems to suggest that you'd pick the least favorable ruling for the spellcaster on the spell level in each case where its spell level is factor.

This means it gets the 3rd level DC, the 4th level concentration check, and is effectively 4th level for interaction with magic items like pearls, rods, etc. Wayang spellhunter doesn't change the spell's level, just the slot used by casting it.

That's at least how I take all the information from this thread, the FAQ and the descriptions.

Howeverm I can certainly see extensive table variation on this, because it could also mean you decide the spell level once (either 3rd or 4th) by trying to determine which is less favorable overall (thus expressing a preference for the definition of disadvantage when it comes to DCs, concentration or item interaction).


Both feats are very likely intended to do the same thing, reduce the total adjusted metamagic level, but because of slightly differing wording it merits a discussion.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Magical lineage and waying spellhunter All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.