Can a Wizard 1 / Cleric 1 spontaneously cast prepared wizard spells?


Rules Questions

51 to 100 of 558 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Samasboy1 wrote:
What you have just written is the exact opposite of what is in the FAQ.

It is amazing how we read the same thing and have exact opposite views of what it means.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It is my position that the FAQ would allow it, even if no DM in practice would, Yes.

FAQ wrote:
If a class ability modifies your spellcasting, it applies to your spells from all classes, not just spells from the class that grants the ability. (The exception is if the class ability specifically says it only applies to spells from that class.)

Is Spontaneous Casting a class ability? Yes

Does Spontaneous Casting modify spellcasting? Yes.

Does Spontaneous Casting specifically say it only applies to spells from that class? No.

Then it applies to spells from all classes you possess.

A Wizard 19/Cleric 1 would then be able to lose, say, Fireball for Cure Serious Wounds.

Could you argue that Spontaneous Casting does not modify spellcasting? Possibly, but I don't see it as a strong argument. Letting you convert a prepared spell into a different spell certainly seems like a modification for casting spells.

Could you argue that Spontaneous Casting specifically says it only applies to spells from that class? Again, I don't think it is a strong argument. It says "any prepared spell" rather than referencing "Cleric spell." Even the reference to Domains and Orisons isn't specific to the Cleric class (other classes have those same features).


James Risner wrote:


It is amazing how we read the same thing and have exact opposite views of what it means.

I agree. While I don't think it is universal, I have noticed we tend to be on opposite ends of discussions.


Samasboy1 wrote:

It is my position that the FAQ would allow it, even if no DM in practice would, Yes.

FAQ wrote:
If a class ability modifies your spellcasting, it applies to your spells from all classes, not just spells from the class that grants the ability. (The exception is if the class ability specifically says it only applies to spells from that class.)

Is Spontaneous Casting a class ability? Yes

Does Spontaneous Casting modify spellcasting? Yes.

Does Spontaneous Casting specifically say it only applies to spells from that class? No.

Then it applies to spells from all classes you possess.

A Wizard 19/Cleric 1 would then be able to lose, say, Fireball for Cure Serious Wounds.

Could you argue that Spontaneous Casting does not modify spellcasting? Possibly, but I don't see it as a strong argument. Letting you convert a prepared spell into a different spell certainly seems like a modification for casting spells.

Could you argue that Spontaneous Casting specifically says it only applies to spells from that class? Again, I don't think it is a strong argument. It says "any prepared spell" rather than referencing "Cleric spell." Even the reference to Domains and Orisons isn't specific to the Cleric class (other classes have those same features).

Do you see how this interpretation makes literally no sense when considering the organization of the game? Wizard 20 cannot cast any cure spells. Wizard 19/Cleric 1 can cast all of them? Don't just quote ambiguous language to me, we don't agree on the interpretation of the terms or the FAQ. Justify this outcome in terms of the game and its overall organization.

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber

How is "The Cleric" going to spontaneously convert a prepared Wizard spell into a Cure spell? Last I checked, Clerics cast Cleric spells, not Wizard spells.

The ability everyone is arguing over mentions "The Cleric". That is important. I find that to be strong evidence against swapping out spells prepared via a different class.

The FAQ works in the case of multiclassed Sorcerer/Wizards because there is no mention of any particular class, just "when you cast spells".


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Nefreet wrote:
The ability everyone is arguing over mentions "The Cleric". That is important. I find that to be strong evidence against swapping out spells prepared via a different class.

at that point though, we're asking when is a character a cleric and when is it not? is it only a cleric when it is doing cleric related things? if so there still isn't any problem with it under that wording.


In the rules forum, its normal to focus on the rules.

Theorizing why Wizards can't cast cure spells is a bit beyond the scope.

And I don't see how I am just quoting ambiguous language. I posted the relevant official FAQ, and explained how I was applying it in this situation.

If you don't think the FAQ applies, or I somehow misapplied it, that would be constructive, but I don't have to justify anything.

I didn't write the rule or the FAQ, I am just reading and applying them.

Nefreet wrote:


How is "The Cleric" going to spontaneously convert a prepared Wizard spell into a Cure spell? Last I checked, Clerics cast Cleric spells, not Wizard spells.
The ability everyone is arguing over mentions "The Cleric". That is important. I find that to be strong evidence against swapping out spells prepared via a different class.

A Wizard 19/Cleric 1 is a cleric, and casts wizard spells.

And the FAQ says it must say it only works with a specific class' spells, not just that it mentions the class granting the ability.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Samasboy?

Sean K. Reynolds wrote:

Seriously, this is basic stuff. The language is a little weak in some places, but you know that there's a realistic way of interpreting it...and an unrealistic way of interpreting it. If there are two interpretations, and one seems too good to be true, go with the other one.

You can't really be confused by this. Because if you are confused by that, this cleric ability is going to blow your mind:

Spontaneous Casting: A good cleric (or a neutral cleric of a good deity) can channel stored spell energy into healing spells that she did not prepare ahead of time. The cleric can “lose” any prepared spell that is not an orison or domain spell in order to cast any cure spell of the same spell level or lower (a cure spell is any spell with “cure” in its name).

...

Heck, the above language doesn't even limit it to spells you have prepared! Why not use this ability to convert someone else's spell into a cure spell? If you know the enemy lich likes to use phantasmal killer, on your turn you should just spontaneously convert his spell into cure critical wounds! Enjoy 4d8+10 damage, lich!

...

Again: the language is a little weak, but you're not stupid--and because you're not stupid, don't try to interpret the rules as if you were stupid.

Emphasis and expungement of irrelevant material mine.

Yes, I know we're on Rules Questions. Even when discussing RAW, there is a time where chilly logic should give way to common sense. This is one of these times.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't think it is necessary to call someone stupid, or acting stupid, for reading rules differently than you.

Just looking at the cleric sheet and reading the ability, I would assume it could go either way. But than we have a precedent of 1 class ability (sorcerer) applying to all spell casting, and a FAQ that specifically covers these cases

"General rule: If a class ability modifies your spellcasting, it applies to your spells from all classes, not just spells from the class that grants the ability. (The exception is if the class ability specifically says it only applies to spells from that class.)"

It is a magic world where almost anything can happen, why is it absurd to think a character that spends his life studying magic and studying under his god cannot channel the magic energy he has at his disposal into a healing spell regardless of where the energy comes from. (especially when his class abilities say he can)

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I'm wondering if the PDT is considering revoking that FAQ because of threads like this.

It's happened before.


James Risner wrote:
Samasboy1 wrote:
Spontaneous casting doesn't say it only works on Cleric spells, only that a cleric can do it (which is obvious since it is a Cleric class feature).
Every class is written as if it were single class. So when it says Cleric can do it is as good as saying "Cleric using cleric spell slots because you have no other levels in other classes."

Sooooo...

How do you explain the FAQ on sorcerers?

I am pretty sure that this interpretation is incompatible with that ruling.


Samasboy1 wrote:
James Risner wrote:


It is amazing how we read the same thing and have exact opposite views of what it means.

I agree. While I don't think it is universal, I have noticed we tend to be on opposite ends of discussions.

What do you think the PDT will say is the correct wau?


Nefreet wrote:

I'm wondering if the PDT is considering revoking that FAQ because of threads like this.

It's happened before.

That might make sense. The conclusion that the FAQ does not match the way they intend basically any other class ability ever to be interpreted might lead to the conclusion that it's not a good choice for sorcerers either.


It was locked last time because people started to become insulting and very disrespectful not just stubborn .


I would allow it as long as the rest of the specifics on cleric spells followed with it, i.e. alignment restrictions, reliance on an supernatural being for at least some of the power behind the wizard spells, etc. I would not allow such a character to cherry pick the parts they wanted to carry over, however. Spontaneous cure spells for wizard spells opens up a lot of headaches that would require a counterbalance to keep the player from abusing.

The sorcerer bloodlines don't bother me because, quite frankly, damage spells need all the help they can get; if the only effect is that an entire class of spells suddenly becomes useful, then I worry far less about the precise source of why that happened. If I were one of the actual game designers, it would probably bug me a lot more, but as a DM whose main concern is a smooth experience at the table, not in game design theory, sometimes it's simpler to take the scraps where you can find them, and not look at them too much while using them.


The FAQ makes sense to me for one ability of one class affecting an ability of another class. And in particular, sorceror/wizard spells are the same and are arcane.

But having something that makes divine "spells" and arcane "spells" interchangeable seems weird. Shouldn't source and type matter?

(Aside: Certainly it ruins the flavor)

Imagine if divine spells were called "deity mainfestations" instead of "spells" and they were "called" instead of "cast". The application of "Lose any [calling]" to "spells" would seem beyond absurd.

OTOH, psionics is framed in entirely different language yet the default is to treat powers like arcane. Still that doesn't lead to mixing, per se.


Create Mr. Pitt wrote:
Samasboy1 wrote:

It is my position that the FAQ would allow it, even if no DM in practice would, Yes.

FAQ wrote:
If a class ability modifies your spellcasting, it applies to your spells from all classes, not just spells from the class that grants the ability. (The exception is if the class ability specifically says it only applies to spells from that class.)

Is Spontaneous Casting a class ability? Yes

Does Spontaneous Casting modify spellcasting? Yes.

Does Spontaneous Casting specifically say it only applies to spells from that class? No.

Then it applies to spells from all classes you possess.

A Wizard 19/Cleric 1 would then be able to lose, say, Fireball for Cure Serious Wounds.

Could you argue that Spontaneous Casting does not modify spellcasting? Possibly, but I don't see it as a strong argument. Letting you convert a prepared spell into a different spell certainly seems like a modification for casting spells.

Could you argue that Spontaneous Casting specifically says it only applies to spells from that class? Again, I don't think it is a strong argument. It says "any prepared spell" rather than referencing "Cleric spell." Even the reference to Domains and Orisons isn't specific to the Cleric class (other classes have those same features).

Do you see how this interpretation makes literally no sense when considering the organization of the game? Wizard 20 cannot cast any cure spells. Wizard 19/Cleric 1 can cast all of them? Don't just quote ambiguous language to me, we don't agree on the interpretation of the terms or the FAQ. Justify this outcome in terms of the game and its overall organization.

We don't need to. These are the terms to game designers have put in place and those are the qualifications they use.

Whether you like it or not makes no difference. Those are the terms that the game designers chose.


RAW it applies, but RAW it should not. Just like the plagiarist draconic sorcerer dip.

Special kinds of gamers read rules that way but it is in essence a childs game after all.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Nefreet wrote:
The FAQ works in the case of multiclassed Sorcerer/Wizards because there is no mention of any particular class, just "when you cast spells".

He ignores this and follows it up with you can also convert spells an enemy casts into cures. So the spell being cast, in his mind, doesn't even have to use spell slots on you. Your ally, and enemy, a SLA from a Ogre Magi, just about any spell being cast by anyone on the planet will do.

seebs wrote:

How do you explain the FAQ on sorcerers?

I am pretty sure that this interpretation is incompatible with that ruling.

I've explained it before in this thread using two FAQs. The Sorcerer bloodline and the magus spell combat.

The bloodlines never mention a class, and only say "when you cast".

The magus mentions a class in the spell combat ability, and by mentioning a class it ties the ability to that class.

The cleric spontaneous cures ability mentions a class, namely the Cleric.

This logic is conveniently ignore in the quest for ridiculous rules. Probably because some people just like to find ridiculous rules interpretations they can pretend is "thems the rules man" and banter on about how dumb but "RAW" they are.


I might allow it as GM if a player wants to trade out a wizard level to be able to heal the group. It's not overpowered.

However, let's say I'm a Cleric 1, Druid 3.
This by the apparent RAW gives me the ability to swap out one of my druid spells for a Cure spell of the same level. Question: What level is Cure Moderate Wounds in this context? Possible answer: it's level 3 druid spell, so sacrificing a level 2 spell won't get me that. (It's a level 2 cleric spell, but it's not a cleric spell slot I'm using.) For a Cleric 1, Witch 3? I could trade a level 2 Witch spell for Cure Moderate Wounds. For a Cleric 1, Wizard 19? There are no Cure spells on the wizard list, so there is nothing you can trade for one.


Create Mr. Pitt wrote:
Also is it your position that a wizard can dip a single level in cleric and then have access to all cure spells, despite an intentional decision to restrict wizards from any access to cure spells? Would a 19 wizard/1 cleric be able cure critical wounds with his wizard spells or would they only access to cure light?

*stir pot*

Is it your position that a wizard can dip a single level in fighter and then have access to all Martial weapons and Armor, despite an intentional decision to restrict wizards from access to these proficiencies? Would a 19 wizard/1 fighter be able wear heavy armor and wield a Greatsword?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't even think that this is a question of Cleric and Wizard classes. I think it's a function of the type of magic. Clerical magic is granted by a divine source, and arcane magic is gained by force of will and study. It's not that the classes are incompatible, the magic itself is of a different nature.

If you look at the sorcerer/wizard question, it's arcane to arcane, so it's two like types of magic being amplified by the bloodline.

Druid/Cleric would also be divine to divine magic, so dropping to gain a cure OR dropping to gain a summon spell would also be like types of magic.

I also agree with Matthew, that the Cure spell would need to be one that either of the two classes would need to be able to cast, in order to spontaneously cast it.


Whose game is this breaking?

Making it harder for players to heal is IMO a strong case of anti-fun. Recovery is already fairly easy, for good reason; its a chore most people want to have done with ASAP because a lot of groups would rather move on to other things they enjoy.

If I had a player wanting to play a religious wizard with access to healing, slowing his wizard progression by a level seems like a fair trade. And it's supported by the bloodline arcana ruling.

Heck, for what it's worth, I've always considered wizard/cleric dangerous because I've assumed that my wizard opposed schools would make my clerics spell choice that much more difficult...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Create Mr. Pitt wrote:
Samasboy1 wrote:

It is my position that the FAQ would allow it, even if no DM in practice would, Yes.

FAQ wrote:
If a class ability modifies your spellcasting, it applies to your spells from all classes, not just spells from the class that grants the ability. (The exception is if the class ability specifically says it only applies to spells from that class.)

Is Spontaneous Casting a class ability? Yes

Does Spontaneous Casting modify spellcasting? Yes.

Does Spontaneous Casting specifically say it only applies to spells from that class? No.

Then it applies to spells from all classes you possess.

A Wizard 19/Cleric 1 would then be able to lose, say, Fireball for Cure Serious Wounds.

Could you argue that Spontaneous Casting does not modify spellcasting? Possibly, but I don't see it as a strong argument. Letting you convert a prepared spell into a different spell certainly seems like a modification for casting spells.

Could you argue that Spontaneous Casting specifically says it only applies to spells from that class? Again, I don't think it is a strong argument. It says "any prepared spell" rather than referencing "Cleric spell." Even the reference to Domains and Orisons isn't specific to the Cleric class (other classes have those same features).

Do you see how this interpretation makes literally no sense when considering the organization of the game? Wizard 20 cannot cast any cure spells. Wizard 19/Cleric 1 can cast all of them? Don't just quote ambiguous language to me, we don't agree on the interpretation of the terms or the FAQ. Justify this outcome in terms of the game and its overall organization.

We don't need to. These are the terms to game designers have put in place and those are the qualifications they use.

Whether you like it or not makes no difference. Those are the terms that the game designers chose.

Yes you do. Rules exist as part of a system of rules. They need to be interpreted on that basis. Much as law is interpreted. You are advocating for the preposterous outcome that a Wizard 19/Cleric 1 has access to and can swap all their spells out for any cure spell. That's an insane outcome that flies directly against the general premise that arcane and divine spells are not interchangeable and wizards cannot cast cure spells. You need to justify absurd outcomes, not just point to an outlier FAQ regarding specialized class powers, not a general class feature of "the cleric."

Also no one has explained why cantrips aren't referenced in this section, but osirons are. That to me is plain textual evidence that this is intended only for clerics and clerical spells.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Create Mr. Pitt wrote:
You are advocating for the preposterous outcome that a Wizard 19/Cleric 1 has access to and can swap all their spells out for any cure spell.

A high level wizard who can already reshape the universe with his astonishing powers who is also a cleric and thus able to use clerical spells, use clerical scrolls and wands of curing spells? Also able to cast cure moderate wounds? Preposterous indeed!


Matthew Downie wrote:
Create Mr. Pitt wrote:
You are advocating for the preposterous outcome that a Wizard 19/Cleric 1 has access to and can swap all their spells out for any cure spell.
A high level wizard who can already reshape the universe with his astonishing powers who is also a cleric and thus able to use clerical spells, use clerical scrolls and wands of curing spells? Also able to cast cure moderate wounds? Preposterous indeed!

Not to mention that the premise that a 20th level wizard can't cast healing spells is fundamentally flawed; limited wish and wish let them cast (or exceed) such Magic for a relative pittance.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

2 people marked this as a favorite.

We are drifting into should it work, is it fair and away from is it allowed if we follow the rules and FAQ.


Kelarith wrote:

I don't even think that this is a question of Cleric and Wizard classes. I think it's a function of the type of magic. Clerical magic is granted by a divine source, and arcane magic is gained by force of will and study. It's not that the classes are incompatible, the magic itself is of a different nature.

If you look at the sorcerer/wizard question, it's arcane to arcane, so it's two like types of magic being amplified by the bloodline.

The ruling on sorcerer, though, is that any casting you do, regardless of class gets the benefit from the bloodline power. So if you were a sorcerer/oracle, you'd get that benefit on all your oracle spells. It doesn't mention "wizard". It says that any character of that bloodline gets that effect on all spell casting.

James Risner wrote:

I've explained it before in this thread using two FAQs. The Sorcerer bloodline and the magus spell combat.

The bloodlines never mention a class, and only say "when you cast".

The magus mentions a class in the spell combat ability, and by mentioning a class it ties the ability to that class.

The cleric spontaneous cures ability mentions a class, namely the Cleric.

(I snipped the completely gratuitous insults.)

That's an interesting distinction to draw, but that's not actually particularly aligned with the sorcerer FAQ.

The sorcerer FAQ says:

"General rule: If a class ability modifies your spellcasting, it applies to your spells from all classes, not just spells from the class that grants the ability. (The exception is if the class ability specifically says it only applies to spells from that class.)"

It doesn't say "mention a class", it says "says it only applies to spells from that class."

So, let's see. Sorcerer:

PRD wrote:
Bloodline Arcana: Whenever you cast a spell of the polymorph subschool, increase the duration of the spell by 50% (minimum 1 round). This bonus does not stack with the increase granted by the Extend Spell feat.
PRD wrote:
Bloodline Arcana: Whenever you cast a spell of the summoning subschool, the creatures summoned gain DR/good equal to 1/2 your sorcerer level (minimum 1). This does not stack with any DR the creature might have.

By your interpretation, only one of these bloodline arcana applies to spells other than sorcerer spells, because the other "mentions" the class.

That's the exact opposite of the FAQ ruling, which says:

FAQ wrote:
The Bloodline Arcana powers apply to all of the spells cast by characters of that bloodline, not just those cast using the sorcerer's spell slots.

So, your interpretation is clearly wrong. "Mentioning" a class does not limit an ability to the spells of that class.

So, again:

Can you reconcile your claim about how this works with the sorcerer FAQ in a way that does not directly contradict the FAQ if we actually apply your ruling to the sorcerer rules?

Silver Crusade RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think the FAQ is absolutely clear. Since the Cleric's spontaneous casting does not specifically preclude it from being used on other prepared spells (so at least there is a limiter), that a 1 level dip into Cleric will give other prepared casters full access to spontaneous Cure spells.

I also agree 100% that the 19/1 Wizard/Cleric provides a preposterous example of how this would work, but I think that is exactly how it works given the language in the FAQ.

Previous to that FAQ, and note my surprise in a post yesterday after reading the FAQ, I would have said "no way can a Cleric convert their Wizard spells," but after reading it, I am 180 degrees reversed. It seems crystal clear to me that the 19/1 example works, despite every grain of my being thinking that's a bad idea.


Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:

I think the FAQ is absolutely clear. Since the Cleric's spontaneous casting does not specifically preclude it from being used on other prepared spells (so at least there is a limiter), that a 1 level dip into Cleric will give other prepared casters full access to spontaneous Cure spells.

I also agree 100% that the 19/1 Wizard/Cleric provides a preposterous example of how this would work, but I think that is exactly how it works given the language in the FAQ.

Previous to that FAQ, and note my surprise in a post yesterday after reading the FAQ, I would have said "no way can a Cleric convert their Wizard spells," but after reading it, I am 180 degrees reversed. It seems crystal clear to me that the 19/1 example works, despite every grain of my being thinking that's a bad idea.

Pretty much this. The FAQ puts an extremely high bar for disallowing this. In order to disallow this interaction Spontaneous Casting would have to specifically call out that it doesn't allow you to use other classes spells. 19wiz/1cleric works by RAW. It also isn't broken, if anything it causes a trap option where the wizard will dump a sleep/mirror image/invisibility/fly/haste/black tentacles/dimension door to instead heal some damage.

I still don't much care for the idea though purely for flavor reasons which don't belong in the rules forum.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

seebs wrote:
It doesn't say "mention a class", it says "says it only applies to spells from that class."

Either you need to say the Magus FAQ on Spell Combat is invalidated by the Sorcerer bloodline FAQ, or you conclude that any time it mentions a class or a class spell list the Sorcerer bloodline FAQ is not in effect.

The bloodline you quoted with Sorcerer mentioned sets a value, it doesn't reference the class doing something (like Magus using Spell Combat or Cleric using Spontaneous Cures) and it doesn't reference the Sorcerer spell list.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:
seebs wrote:
It doesn't say "mention a class", it says "says it only applies to spells from that class."

Either you need to say the Magus FAQ on Spell Combat is invalidated by the Sorcerer bloodline FAQ, or you conclude that any time it mentions a class or a class spell list the Sorcerer bloodline FAQ is not in effect.

The bloodline you quoted with Sorcerer mentioned sets a value, it doesn't reference the class doing something (like Magus using Spell Combat or Cleric using Spontaneous Cures) and it doesn't reference the Sorcerer spell list.

Um, the magus FAQ does specifically state Spell Combat only works with Magus spells, which means it does override the Sorcerer FAQ.

Which is specifically what is NOT present for clerics spontaneous casting.

Right?


Slacker2010 wrote:
Create Mr. Pitt wrote:
Also is it your position that a wizard can dip a single level in cleric and then have access to all cure spells, despite an intentional decision to restrict wizards from any access to cure spells? Would a 19 wizard/1 cleric be able cure critical wounds with his wizard spells or would they only access to cure light?

*stir pot*

Is it your position that a wizard can dip a single level in fighter and then have access to all Martial weapons and Armor, despite an intentional decision to restrict wizards from access to these proficiencies? Would a 19 wizard/1 fighter be able wear heavy armor and wield a Greatsword?

Haha, of course. A level 1 fighter can wear heavy armor and wield a greatsword, so a 19Wiz/1Ftr can, as well.

A level 1 cleric, on the other hand, cannot cast cure critical wounds, so the 19Wiz/1Clr cannot. Now, a Wiz/Clr can indeed use Spontaneous Casting to cast cure light wounds. A cleric can cast any spell on the cleric spell list, provided he can cast spells of that level (by RAW).

But here's the real question: Can a Cleric/Druid spontaneously cast cure or summoning spells with any slot? If so, then watch the cleric domain spells turn into summon spells! That frees up the druid spells for curing, and you can cure and summon all day long!


James Risner wrote:
seebs wrote:
It doesn't say "mention a class", it says "says it only applies to spells from that class."

Either you need to say the Magus FAQ on Spell Combat is invalidated by the Sorcerer bloodline FAQ, or you conclude that any time it mentions a class or a class spell list the Sorcerer bloodline FAQ is not in effect.

The bloodline you quoted with Sorcerer mentioned sets a value, it doesn't reference the class doing something (like Magus using Spell Combat or Cleric using Spontaneous Cures) and it doesn't reference the Sorcerer spell list.

Well, one option could be that you could look at my very first post in this thread where I point out that the FAQ rulings contradict each other.

What you said originally was that if the ability mentions the class, that restricts it to that class's abilities. Obviously, that's not true, because we have an absolute statement that all bloodline arcana abilities affect all spellcasting.

I think it is pretty clear that the magus ability is simply written incorrectly, and says "the magus spell list" where it means "your magus spells". (These are entirely distinct categories; consider that a level 3 paladin with a wisdom of 9 can still use wands of level 4 paladin spells, because they are on the paladin spell list.)

I also think that the FAQs are contradictory in their explanations of how the abilities work.


Wrong John Silver wrote:
A level 1 cleric, on the other hand, cannot cast cure critical wounds, so the 19Wiz/1Clr cannot.

By that logic, A level 1 fighter, on the other hand, cannot use the feat Vital Strike, so the 19Wiz/1Fighter cannot.

Spoiler:
Im just making trouble, I don't believe the above statements.


Wrong John Silver wrote:
Slacker2010 wrote:
Create Mr. Pitt wrote:
Also is it your position that a wizard can dip a single level in cleric and then have access to all cure spells, despite an intentional decision to restrict wizards from any access to cure spells? Would a 19 wizard/1 cleric be able cure critical wounds with his wizard spells or would they only access to cure light?

*stir pot*

Is it your position that a wizard can dip a single level in fighter and then have access to all Martial weapons and Armor, despite an intentional decision to restrict wizards from access to these proficiencies? Would a 19 wizard/1 fighter be able wear heavy armor and wield a Greatsword?

Haha, of course. A level 1 fighter can wear heavy armor and wield a greatsword, so a 19Wiz/1Ftr can, as well.

A level 1 cleric, on the other hand, cannot cast cure critical wounds, so the 19Wiz/1Clr cannot. Now, a Wiz/Clr can indeed use Spontaneous Casting to cast cure light wounds. A cleric can cast any spell on the cleric spell list, provided he can cast spells of that level (by RAW).

But here's the real question: Can a Cleric/Druid spontaneously cast cure or summoning spells with any slot? If so, then watch the cleric domain spells turn into summon spells! That frees up the druid spells for curing, and you can cure and summon all day long!

According to the FAQ? Yes, a Cleric/Druid can do both.

I dont think that's an issue. Losing a level of spell progression is painful. It won't break the game.

And contradictory rules stuff is a thing. Specific overrides general. The general sorcerer ruling is overridden by the specific magus thing. That is how all rules contradictions work.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
PRD wrote:

Bloodline Arcana: Whenever you cast a spell with an energy descriptor that matches your draconic bloodline's energy type, that spell deals +1 point of damage per die rolled.

...

Spontaneous Casting: A good cleric (or a neutral cleric of a good deity) can channel stored spell energy into healing spells that she did not prepare ahead of time. The cleric can “lose” any prepared spell that is not an orison or domain spell in order to cast any cure spell of the same spell level or lower (a cure spell is any spell with “cure” in its name).

There's the critical difference. The Bloodline Arcana which prompted the "spellcasting modifications apply to all spellcasting" simply states "you" which references the character. Spontaneous Casting, on the other hand, states, "The Cleric" meaning it only applies in the context of your levels of Cleric. You can only swap Cleric spells for Cure spells because it specifically calls out the class. If it said, "You can "lose" any prepared spell..." then that would apply to the character as a whole, including any prepared spells from another class. But it says, "The Cleric can "lose" any prepared spell..." which is specific to the Cleric class and we apply the rule that "characters are presumed to be single-class and all class benefits (except spellcasting that applies generally (which this isn't)) are self-contained".


Slacker2010 wrote:
Wrong John Silver wrote:
A level 1 cleric, on the other hand, cannot cast cure critical wounds, so the 19Wiz/1Clr cannot.

By that logic, A level 1 fighter, on the other hand, cannot use the feat Vital Strike, so the 19Wiz/1Fighter cannot.

Spoiler:
I know, but the logic is important.

No, it's not the same, because using Vital Strike does not require a specific fighter class feature. It requires BAB +6. Any class combo that gets you a BAB +6 is sufficient.

The cure spells, on the other hand, are specific to the class.


Kazaan wrote:
PRD wrote:

Bloodline Arcana: Whenever you cast a spell with an energy descriptor that matches your draconic bloodline's energy type, that spell deals +1 point of damage per die rolled.

...

Spontaneous Casting: A good cleric (or a neutral cleric of a good deity) can channel stored spell energy into healing spells that she did not prepare ahead of time. The cleric can “lose” any prepared spell that is not an orison or domain spell in order to cast any cure spell of the same spell level or lower (a cure spell is any spell with “cure” in its name).

There's the critical difference. The Bloodline Arcana which prompted the "spellcasting modifications apply to all spellcasting" simply states "you" which references the character. Spontaneous Casting, on the other hand, states, "The Cleric" meaning it only applies in the context of your levels of Cleric. You can only swap Cleric spells for Cure spells because it specifically calls out the class. If it said, "You can "lose" any prepared spell..." then that would apply to the character as a whole, including any prepared spells from another class. But it says, "The Cleric can "lose" any prepared spell..." which is specific to the Cleric class and we apply the rule that "characters are presumed to be single-class and all class benefits (except spellcasting that applies generally (which this isn't)) are self-contained".

No, the character is 'The cleric'. For it to mean what you want it to, it would need to read 'the cleric can lose any prepared cleric spell'...

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Kazaan wrote:
PRD wrote:

Bloodline Arcana: Whenever you cast a spell with an energy descriptor that matches your draconic bloodline's energy type, that spell deals +1 point of damage per die rolled.

...

Spontaneous Casting: A good cleric (or a neutral cleric of a good deity) can channel stored spell energy into healing spells that she did not prepare ahead of time. The cleric can “lose” any prepared spell that is not an orison or domain spell in order to cast any cure spell of the same spell level or lower (a cure spell is any spell with “cure” in its name).

There's the critical difference. The Bloodline Arcana which prompted the "spellcasting modifications apply to all spellcasting" simply states "you" which references the character. Spontaneous Casting, on the other hand, states, "The Cleric" meaning it only applies in the context of your levels of Cleric. You can only swap Cleric spells for Cure spells because it specifically calls out the class. If it said, "You can "lose" any prepared spell..." then that would apply to the character as a whole, including any prepared spells from another class. But it says, "The Cleric can "lose" any prepared spell..." which is specific to the Cleric class and we apply the rule that "characters are presumed to be single-class and all class benefits (except spellcasting that applies generally (which this isn't)) are self-contained".

Thank you for this. I'm glad I'm not the only one who was trying to point that out.

EDIT: LOL! Ninja'd by a person using the same quote in disagreement. Oh, irony.


Yup. The issue here is sentence structure. You/the cleric, it describes who is doing the thing. We all agree on that.

What were not agreeing on what is which spells The Player is allowed to 'lose' .

In the quoted statement The character is allowed to 'lose' any prepared spell, not any prepared cleric spell.

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber
KrispyXIV wrote:
In the quoted statement The character cleric is allowed to 'lose' any prepared spell, not any prepared cleric spell.

Fixed that for you.


fretgod99 wrote:
This seems like allowing a Fighter/Monk to retrain bonus Monk feats using the Fighter bonus feat class feature. We know you can't do that. So you should not be able to do this.

But that is for martials. Spell casters are allowed to have nice things. :P

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

I want to point you all to another FAQ:

FAQ wrote:

Fighter: What feats can I retrain at level 4, 8, and so on?

Class entries in the Core Rulebook are written assuming that your character is single-classed (not multiclassed). The fighter's ability to retrain feats allows you to retrain one of your fighter bonus feats (gained at 1st level, 2nd level, 4th level, and so on). You can't use it to retrain feats (combat feats or otherwise) from any other source, such as your feats at level 1, 3, etc., your 1st-level human bonus feat, or bonus feats from other classes.

You may want to asterisk your fighter bonus feats on your character sheet so you can easily determine which you can retrain later.

That specification that classes abilities are written for single classes character is right in the FAQs, not only in a Dev post.

This will change someone position?


Diego Rossi wrote:

I want to point you all to another FAQ:

FAQ wrote:

Fighter: What feats can I retrain at level 4, 8, and so on?

Class entries in the Core Rulebook are written assuming that your character is single-classed (not multiclassed). The fighter's ability to retrain feats allows you to retrain one of your fighter bonus feats (gained at 1st level, 2nd level, 4th level, and so on). You can't use it to retrain feats (combat feats or otherwise) from any other source, such as your feats at level 1, 3, etc., your 1st-level human bonus feat, or bonus feats from other classes.

You may want to asterisk your fighter bonus feats on your character sheet so you can easily determine which you can retrain later.

That specification that classes abilities are written for single classes character is right in the FAQs, not only in a Dev post.

This will change someone position?

Its completely irrelevant. No one is disputing WHO may use spontaneous casting under cleric, which is the only context cleric is referred to under the rule.

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Thank you, Diego, but I think the inclusion of that text will only speak to those that already believe Clerics can't convert Wizard spells.

EDIT: KrispyXIV is on a roll today with the initiative checks.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
KrispyXIV wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:

I want to point you all to another FAQ:

FAQ wrote:

Fighter: What feats can I retrain at level 4, 8, and so on?

Class entries in the Core Rulebook are written assuming that your character is single-classed (not multiclassed). The fighter's ability to retrain feats allows you to retrain one of your fighter bonus feats (gained at 1st level, 2nd level, 4th level, and so on). You can't use it to retrain feats (combat feats or otherwise) from any other source, such as your feats at level 1, 3, etc., your 1st-level human bonus feat, or bonus feats from other classes.

You may want to asterisk your fighter bonus feats on your character sheet so you can easily determine which you can retrain later.

That specification that classes abilities are written for single classes character is right in the FAQs, not only in a Dev post.

This will change someone position?

Its completely irrelevant. No one is disputing WHO may use spontaneous casting under cleric, which is the only context cleric is referred to under the rule.

To me it support Kazaan and Nefreet position nicely. The ability is written with a a single classed cleric in mind.

The cleric ability don't change the character spellcasting ability, it give a single class cleric the ability swap the spell from his single class with healing spells, so the other FAQ don't apply. You guys are trying to invent a option that don't exist.

51 to 100 of 558 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Can a Wizard 1 / Cleric 1 spontaneously cast prepared wizard spells? All Messageboards