|
Is bear's endurance granted by that Tiefling variant? It'll count as arcane but not as divine, because sorc/wiz takes precedence when determining classification of SLA granted by race (see FAQ immediately below one linked).
But fear not! Grab the Trickery domain (via Separatist archetype if necessary) and the copycat ability will qualify as 2nd-lvl divine because granted by divine class (same FAQ) and because "based on" a 2nd-level spell (hashed out in FAQ thread, with designer confirmation, can dig up later when not on phone if you're curious).
Sounds like there's some good fun potential with this combo, too. What sort of theme/approach/flavor are you going for?
That particular combo doesn't work. According to the FAQ, if the base spell appears on the sorcerer/wizard list, as bear's endurance does, the SLA is arcane, and arcane only.
The method posted above is invalid for the same reasons--mirror image doesn't even appear on any divine lists, and a stingy GM might tell you that the Copycat ability doesn't explicitly grant the spell as an SLA anyway, only an ability that works similar to it.
It's predictably more difficult to get divine SLAs, but not impossible. You could take the Fate inquistion with your 1 level of cleric, which grants augury (this may have been the method Joe M. was thinking of, mentioned in this thread), or you could be an Agathion-blooded aasimar, which grants summon nature's ally II. There may be other ways.
Is the monk dip solely for Wis to AC? I like the synergy with the cleric and Empyreal sorcerer. However, while I've never rolled up a MT myself, I imagine those who have would make sure you realize the risks of further slowing your already-gimped casting progression. The +4 AC will be nice at low levels, but it won't be as fun when you're a 5th-level character still casting 1st-level arcane spells.
|
|
The method posted above is invalid for the same reasons--mirror image doesn't even appear on any divine lists, and a stingy GM might tell you that the Copycat ability doesn't explicitly grant the spell as an SLA anyway, only an ability that works similar to it.
Alright, since it's necessary. Here are my sources.
Here's the first, from the FAQ mentioned:
For spell-like abiities gained from a class, use the spell type (arcane or divine) of that class to determine whether the spell-like ability is arcane or divine. If the class doesn't cast spells, use the above rule for spell-like abilities from race or type.
Edit 9/23/13: Wording updated to clarify racial/type SLAs vs. class SLAs.
Here's the second, designer (at the time) Sean K Reynolds's answer to the question in FAQ thread on the topic. See thread as a whole, including his follow-up below, for context for his not-straightforward answer. But I assure you I represent the per-Paizo rule correctly.
Q: What is the spell level of a Spell-Like Ability that acts as an existing spell, but with some changes?
A: If it cites an existing spell, and you know the spell level of that spell, what effective spell level do you think the spell-like ability is? And if it doesn't cite an existing spell, is there a rule or FAQ telling you how to determine its effective spell level?
All that said! — your GM could always rule otherwise! (And I'm not sure I'd blame any GM who did!)
I stand corrected. Thanks for providing the sources, Joe. That's definitely a more logical ruling than my earlier impression. With the links provided, Copycat should definitely count as a mirror image SLA.
Continual flame and darkness both fulfill the 2nd-level arcane requirement. For Samsaran, I'm not sure. None of their SLAs are above first level, and their crazy bonus spells ability doesn't help as far as I can tell.
If one wants to get grammatically technical these builds would not work since the MT requires "Spells" plural, your build just casts spell singular
No one here wants to hear that, Mark.
|
If one wants to get grammatically technical these builds would not work since the MT requires "Spells" plural, your build just casts spell singular
Technically the ability to cast "spells" could also mean the ability to cast a single spell multiple times. For example, "I cast darkness 3 times in that battle to help cover our escape, those were some useful spells that I cast."
If you're willing to sacrifice just a wee bit of power for flavour, the obvious partner for the void school and fated inquisition would be a domain like death or souls (worship Pharasma if in Golarion). Fated/Divination school/Knowledge domain would be another natural partnership.
On the other hand, I have to wonder why a level of monk seems like a good idea to you. At the level given (4th) it's the difference between having 2nd level spells in one class and having only 1st level spells. Wizard 2/Cleric 1 or vice versa would seem better to me.
No one here wants to hear that, Mark.
especially Discomancer from the GM of the campaign when he attempts to build the character. Best for him to not be surprised if the argument is used.
Alright, after looking it over, I think I am going to go with the Half-Elf.
Here is a basic look at what the character will look like at level 4:
** spoiler omitted **
Not solid on my feat choices at 1st and 3rd, nor am I sold on the Travel Domain choice. The Void arcane school choice is due to the powerful +2 to all saves vs. spells and SLAs, but I am happy to change it if there are better options.
Any suggestions are welcome and appreciated!
I do think a wiz, cleric combo is the way to go. The trait magical Hack will be nice to up CL. I know I also like combat casting for the concentration checks. Just my 2 cents on the build. Is your GM allowing Clerics to take Inquisitions? I was under the impression they were inquisitor only unless stated otherwise in the archetype.
|
If one wants to get grammatically technical these builds would not work since the MT requires "Spells" plural, your build just casts spell singular
The Pathfinder Design Team disagrees with this interpretation.
If one wants to get grammatically technical these builds would not work since the MT requires "Spells" plural, your build just casts spell singularThe Pathfinder Design Team disagrees with this interpretation.
Thank You, I couldn't find it myself. It does bring into question though the Arcane trickster which clearly says "one spell" as appose to all the rest of prestige classes. Discomancer should have this page on his smart phone to prove he can do it to his GM
|
|
If one wants to get grammatically technical these builds would not work since the MT requires "Spells" plural, your build just casts spell singularThe Pathfinder Design Team disagrees with this interpretation.Thank You, I couldn't find it myself. It does bring into question though the Arcane trickster which clearly says "one spell" as appose to all the rest of prestige classes. Discomancer should have this page on his smart phone to prove he can do it to his GM
You're quite welcome. Always happy to be of assistance.
