Unlimited 0-level spells and abuse by players


Rules Questions

51 to 70 of 70 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Spacelard wrote:
thaX wrote:

So, my Arcanist has the Magical Lineage (Acid Splash) and memorized, as a 0 level spell, Acid Splash with the Disruptive metamagic feat.

Thoughts on that?

Jason Bulmahn

Folks, James is right on here.

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

The Magical Lineage trait makes it so he can apply Disruptive without increasing the spell level. I'm not sure what you are attempting to illustrate with that quote.


Actually, Jason's statement wouldn't apply in thaX's scenario. Magical Lineage causes the spell to be treated as 1 level lower when applying a metamagic effect - so a level 1 spell that has a +1 metamagic applied uses a 1st level slot still.

I'd argue that by the wording of the trait ("...treat [the spell's] actual level as 1 lower for determining the spell's final adjusted level") you couldn't apply Magical Lineage to a cantrip, because there's no such thing as a -1 level spell.


thaX wrote:

So, my Arcanist has the Magical Lineage (Acid Splash) and memorized, as a 0 level spell, Acid Splash with the Disruptive metamagic feat.

Thoughts on that?

Jason Bulmahn

Folks, James is right on here.

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

Been thrashed out before...No unlimited disruptive acid splash.

The thrashing

EDIT: when did Magical Lineage come out? That was from 2009.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

That means that it treats the adjusted spell level (1) as one lower (0). I took it to mean the total before it was adjusted, to determine which level of the spell slot you needed to mem it.


Cardinal Chunder wrote:

Jason Bulmahn

Folks, James is right on here.

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

Been thrashed out before...No unlimited disruptive acid splash.

The thrashing

Again, the quote isn't relevant because in the scenario you're casting a 0-level metamagicked spell using a 0-level slot. Theoretically, a 0-level spell with Magical Lineage applied is treated as a -1-level spell when you go to apply metamagic to it.

The reason it wouldn't work (IMO) is because there is no such thing as a -1 level spell. 0 is the lowest you can go. Now, if the trait were worded in such a way as to state that you subtract 1 from the metamagic adjustment, then it would work.


Adding a magic aura effect to magic traps is probably standard practice.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Whoah.

Well, I don't see Spacelord's post, only the quoted form from Born of Fire. Now Cardinal Chunder has a post that was responded to before he posted it.

Trippy.

Yeah, my Acid Splash is in a 0 level spell slot, so it can be use as such. I just wanted a comment on if that is overpowered as what the OP though Detect Magic was.

I need as much advantage as I can get, as the Arcanist is a bit underpowered at low levels. (being somewhat vancian and spontaneous at the same time somehow gets to limited resources overall compared to the other two of the alternate classes)

The DC is static, though, and at higher levels it won't be as much of a hindrance for the foe (darn the luck)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It seems appropriate that Paladins should be able to Detect Evil. It also seems appropriate that Sorcerers should be able to detect magic. Thinking about a game where the DM house ruled away these “abuses” I imagined the following scenario, an example of play which might be improved by the addition of an evil dwarf Fighter named Gutboy Barrelhouse (but what example of play wouldn’t?):

Paladin: “Is that door/fountain/kitchen appliance magic?”
Sorcerer: “Beats me! Is it evil?”
Paladin: “I’m saving that slot to cast Cure Light Wounds on your familiar.”
Sorcerer: “Yo, Barbarian!”
Barbarian: “Trap again? Why no Rogue?”
Sorcerer: “I might have played a Monk/Rogue, but there’s a martial vs caster imbalance. Paizo nerfed Crane Wing, but Wizard’s still have Time Stop.”
Barbarian: “Why you guys not just play class you want and have fun?”
Sorcerer: “We’d never survive since the DM hot rodded every encounter to deal with overpowered PCs.”
Barbarian: “Isn’t all PC overpowered? If not why we always win?”
Sorcerer: “Just take the damage and make the Fort save! Then we’ll put every object in the room on Floating Disk so we can take it to camp and use Detect Magic on our day off.”
DM: “No way, this adventure is a Big Emergency. You can’t take a day off. Else you might craft a magic item...uh...and the Princess will die...and be transformed into a ghoul who can masquerade as a beautiful human, seduce people, and turn them to her kind and cause.”
Paladin: “I’m immune to disease, and I’ve got a RIng of Freedom of Movement.”
DM: “Your PC wouldn’t hook up with an Evil creature!”
Paladin: “Why not? Your house rule says I can’t Detect Evil anymore! Is she into horses?”
DM: “That’s perverted!”
Paladin: “Like sexy S&M bondage ghouls isn’t? My horse is getting lucky with the Princess”
Barbarian: “Ok, ok, I set off trap.”
DM: “Aha! Nobody said that they moved away first! I win again!”


Sarcasmancer wrote:
Rerednaw wrote:

Player: I cast detect magic.

GM: You sense magic.
Player: Concentrate.
Player: Concentrate.
Player: Make Spellcraft check.
This is great. I'd make them slowly repeat "Concentraaaate..." over the span of the six-second round.

Best way to prevent abuse, you must say "Concentraaaate..." for each round you use detect.


thaX wrote:
That means that it treats the adjusted spell level (1) as one lower (0). I took it to mean the total before it was adjusted, to determine which level of the spell slot you needed to mem it.

From the FAQ:

"In general, use the (normal, lower) spell level or the (higher) spell slot level, whichever is more of a disadvantage for the caster. The advantages of the metamagic feat are spelled out in the Benefits section of the feat, and the increased spell slot level is a disadvantage."


MrCab wrote:
Lots of magic traps have a trigger of being seen.

Wizard: I can detect magic

Rogue: I can tell the difference between a trap and a fake aura
GM: It doesn't matter. The trap goes off as soon as you see it.
The players of the late rogue and wizard look meaningfully at each other, collect their things, dump their beer over the GM's upholstery, and slam the door so hard collectible plates crash off of the walls when they leave. They are still not the biggest jerks in the group.

There is no excuse to ever publish or use something that by design does not permit reaction other than that the writer has no concept of what the word game means or the GM is a power tripping jerk.

Liberty's Edge

Aardvark Barbarian wrote:

Well, darn, I found a flaw in my assessment. There are two types of magic traps, spell traps and magic device traps. One is a spell in place (identifiable aura), and the other requires Craft Wondrous Item (implying that a magic device trap is in fact a Magic Item).

So, it seems both auras would stand out, but the magic device trap would still require 3 rounds of thorough examination, which could set off the trap.

Nonetheless, all you get from Detect Magic is an aura, and with a roll the school.

Despite which even evocation has non-offensive spells, like light, dancing lights, continual flame to name just a few that one could possibly find often in most situations where there are also magic traps.

Edit: Time can still play a heavy factor. You could stop and take 3 rounds every single time you see an aura. So make sure the person moving half speed (by using their standard to always be concentrating or recasting) by maintaining a constant Detect Magic is never walking behind anyone carrying a magic item (like the Fighter's weapon or armor).

1) "Magical areas, multiple types of magic, or strong local magical emanations may distort or conceal weaker auras."

2) "Aura Strength: An aura's power depends on a spell's functioning spell level or an item's caster level; see the accompanying table. If an aura falls into more than one category, detect magic indicates the stronger of the two."

If you look the magic item descriptions you will see that only the strongest aura is indicated, not the auras of all the spells involved in the item construction.
We can assume that the same is true for all the crafted items, included traps and things like the so common walls "Magically treated" to be sturdier, the various permanent lights and similar features.

That mean that in any dungeon with the "Magically treated" walls the traps aura will be covered by the background radiation of the walls unless the aura is exceptionally strong. Note that, as the walls cost a fixed sum that don't varies with the caster level and they are made using the Craft wondrous item feat, the caster can set the wall CL at a higher level than his. He simply need to be able to make the required spellcraft check, that based on the feat, is 5+the intended CL.
Translated: a 7th level wizard will have no trouble crafting walls with a CL of 20.

Magically treated walls will be impervious to a good number of spells, so they are a worthwhile investment.

Other relatively common long term effects that will mess with detect magic:
- forbiddance.
- hallow/unhallow

Short term:
- consecrate/desecrate;
- guard and wards;
- magic aura.

So the Detect magic tactic is useful for a limited span of levels and/or against creatures that haven't the capacity to cast long or short term effects with ease. Essentially it is useful from when you start to meet your first magical traps to the moment in which you start to routinely meet creatures that can cast desecrate 1/day (like a CR 8 hydrodaemon), guards and wards or similar effects or locations with permanent magical fixtures. Something like from level 3 to level 7 (YMMV).
Let them enjoy it as far as it last, giving them every so often a remainder that it is not so reliable.

Liberty's Edge

thaX wrote:

So, my Arcanist has the Magical Lineage (Acid Splash) and memorized, as a 0 level spell, Acid Splash with the Disruptive metamagic feat.

Thoughts on that?

A spell modified by a metamagic isn't a cantrip any longer. You don't get to cast it an unlimited number of times.

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).

You have a 0 level spell modified to 1st level, the reduced again to 0 level. The second in which you apply the metamagic effect, even if the spell level don't change, it become a metamagiched spell and it is no more a cantrip.

People has already tried that with merciful spell and arcane lineage.


Sushewakka wrote:
I told my players a thin lead sheet can block detect magic (Which is in the description of the spell). They stopped trying to spot magical traps with detect magic, simply because they know it can be easily thwarted.

What triggers the trap? Generally, something has to trigger, and the trigger is what can be Perceived.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Yes, what he said.

I do not agree with penalizing a player for using the tools that they have. If anything I liked the fact that Pathfinder made these spells unlimited cast and changed the way searching a place went.

My most common counter was the time limit, and as I previously posted, the DC 0 listen check for monsters to hear your party casting. Just you because you can add hours to your spelunking time, doesn't mean the BBEG is going to slow down his evil ritual of horrible worldly doom. So you compromise. Cast it when you can, not nonstop. That's what Arcane Sight is for.

But as others have posted, limited utility and plenty of low level and even mundane counters.

I remember when we had to take 20 one 5 foot square at a time. Every flipping room because we only have limited Detects available. Frankly, I never found that much fun.


thaX wrote:

So, my Arcanist has the Magical Lineage (Acid Splash) and memorized, as a 0 level spell, Acid Splash with the Disruptive metamagic feat.

Thoughts on that?

Disruptive metamagic won't have any effect with Acid Splash.

The spell doesn't have a save DC. So the concentration check it causes will be zero: DC of the spells save (no save) + spell level (zero).

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Atarlost wrote:
MrCab wrote:
Lots of magic traps have a trigger of being seen.

Wizard: I can detect magic

Rogue: I can tell the difference between a trap and a fake aura
GM: It doesn't matter. The trap goes off as soon as you see it.
The players of the late rogue and wizard look meaningfully at each other, collect their things, dump their beer over the GM's upholstery, and slam the door so hard collectible plates crash off of the walls when they leave. They are still not the biggest jerks in the group.

There is no excuse to ever publish or use something that by design does not permit reaction other than that the writer has no concept of what the word game means or the GM is a power tripping jerk.

Eh hem:

MrCab wrote:
Only the Rogue (or something else with trapfinding) can approach this trap without triggering it.

So if the thing with trapfinding is searching for it, it doesn't go off!

See also - Symbol of Death. It's a long spell description so I won't paste it here, but it can be set to trigger upon being seen, and it can be disarmed by a character with Trapfinding.


Xaratherus wrote:
Cardinal Chunder wrote:

Jason Bulmahn

Folks, James is right on here.

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

Been thrashed out before...No unlimited disruptive acid splash.

The thrashing

Again, the quote isn't relevant because in the scenario you're casting a 0-level metamagicked spell using a 0-level slot. Theoretically, a 0-level spell with Magical Lineage applied is treated as a -1-level spell when you go to apply metamagic to it.

The reason it wouldn't work (IMO) is because there is no such thing as a -1 level spell. 0 is the lowest you can go. Now, if the trait were worded in such a way as to state that you subtract 1 from the metamagic adjustment, then it would work.

It never becomes a -1 level spell.

The trait modifies the 'adjusted level' of the spell by -1 when you apply metamagic to it.

The adjusted level is 0+1 with disruptive spell.

Thus, the trait takes the adjusted level of 1 and subtracts 1, bringing it back to 0.

As a 0 level spell, it is a cantrip.

There is nothing wrong with a disrupting spell'd acid splash. If a caster wants to spend his turn doing 1d3 damage and making it a little tougher for 1 enemy to cast a spell... have at it!

An archer can do the same thing, but better. Ready an action to shoot the caster when he casts. He'll do a lot more than a d3, and the concentration DC will be higher.

Ain't nothing wrong with this...


Remy Balster wrote:

It never becomes a -1 level spell.

The trait modifies the 'adjusted level' of the spell by -1 when you apply metamagic to it.

The adjusted level is 0+1 with disruptive spell.

That's not what RAW states. Per RAW:

RAW 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.

Emphasis mine.

So, with this trait, you aren't lowering the 'adjusted level' of the spell. You are lowering the "actual level" of the spell. Making the level of a 0-Level spell -1.


Democratus wrote:
Remy Balster wrote:

It never becomes a -1 level spell.

The trait modifies the 'adjusted level' of the spell by -1 when you apply metamagic to it.

The adjusted level is 0+1 with disruptive spell.

That's not what RAW states. Per RAW:

RAW 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.

Emphasis mine.

So, with this trait, you aren't lowering the 'adjusted level' of the spell. You are lowering the "actual level" of the spell. Making the level of a 0-Level spell -1.

Correct. Magical Lineage is worded differently than Wayang Spellhunter.

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

The former states that you subtract one from the level of the spell prior to adjustment; the latter states that the adjusted spell takes up a slot one level lower, meaning that the adjustment is made to the final level.

Now, from a RAI\house rule perspective, I would allow them both to function in the same manner, because mechanically the do the same thing. But RAW, they're worded so they achieve the same goal in different ways.

51 to 70 of 70 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Unlimited 0-level spells and abuse by players All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.