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


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 558 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

21 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ.

Basically my question is in the title.

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

I have a character of this and the relevant text from the PRD says:

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).

I took this to mean that the multiclassing wizard/cleric could convert any prepared wizard spell into a cure, but I have heard mixed reviews on this without actual RAW rulings, would love a link to the rule that I am missing.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Seems like a hyper-literal RAW interpretation to me. You seem to be technically correct, but I doubt many GM's would go for it.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

There are two definite answers we've gotten, in general:

1. Of course any ability that refers to your spellcasting applies to all of your spellcasting; for instance, sorcerer bloodline traits that modify spell damage would apply to all spell damage, not just sorcerer spell damage.
2. All the text for classes defaults to assuming you are single-classed and should not be taken as applying generally.

You might note that these answers contradict.

I think the clear intent is that this is a special feature of the clerical spellcasting abilities, and as such applies to your clerical spells only, but then, I would have thought that sorcerer bloodline powers would only modify your sorcerer abilities.

Sczarni

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I read it as "The Cleric", not "The Character", so it would only be referring to the Cleric prepared spells.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Your wizard and clerical abilities and spells are treated entirely separately. Think of them as two separate characters which just happen to live in the same body.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

spells for a class are attached to a specific class and are cast how that class casts them. so I'd say it only applies to that class's spells. aka, only spells obtained from Cleric levels could be used that way.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So I definitely see that most replys so far seem to think it should go the other way, contrary to RAW, which is confusing.

If a wizard5/Sorc 1 with the draconic bloodline gets to add damage when casting wizard spells, why would there be a difference? Neither Bloodline nor Spontaneous Casting say "sorcerer spells" or "Cleric spells" but one is assumed to count for all, and the other is assumed to mean just cleric? Just seems off.


Mostly, I think it's flavor. It seems reasonable for clerics to convert their divine magic which they got from their god into healing.


Pathfinder Adventure Subscriber

I'm curious how far your ruling would take this. Is it your impression that a Cleric 1/Wizard 8 could sacrifice a fourth-level wizard spell and get commensurate healing from it, even though the most powerful cure spell he could actually prepare would be first level?

I'm not "native" to Pathfinder, but I think I understand the rules well enough to see that that could be very easily abused.

Personally, I'm definitely from the "separate classes function separately" camp. My class determines my spell allotment, and the level at which each spell is cast. The sorcerer ruling I'm reading about just baffles me.


It's because the distinction of "all Prepared spells" applying to only specific spell casting classes is pretty arbitrary. aka, it makes more sense to only apply it to that class as if it wasn't multi-classed, or ALL spells, and it clearly doesn't say all spells.

mean while the sorc ability is a bonus to spells, not a change another class's spells to behave like a specific class ability in another class. a bonus on top of another spell is more understandable than the cleric eating spells to fuel it's healing power.

Chaderick the Penguin wrote:

The sorcerer ruling I'm reading about just baffles me.

it's just like a very specific bonus to very specific spells because his great granddad accidentally spilled magic all over the family or something.

like aberrant bloodline gives polymorph spells a 50% increase in duration.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jayder22 wrote:

So I definitely see that most replys so far seem to think it should go the other way, contrary to RAW, which is confusing.

If a wizard5/Sorc 1 with the draconic bloodline gets to add damage when casting wizard spells, why would there be a difference? Neither Bloodline nor Spontaneous Casting say "sorcerer spells" or "Cleric spells" but one is assumed to count for all, and the other is assumed to mean just cleric? Just seems off.

because the bloodline is a specific rule that trumps general.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, seeing as a multiclass draconic sorcerer/wizard get to add +1 damage per die to his wizard spells, I would say yes. It seems like this came up about 6 months ago and the conclusion was that it technically works but no one would allow it in their home games and good luck getting any PFS DM's to go with it .


Chaderick the Penguin wrote:

I'm curious how far your ruling would take this. Is it your impression that a Cleric 1/Wizard 8 could sacrifice a fourth-level wizard spell and get commensurate healing from it, even though the most powerful cure spell he could actually prepare would be first level?

I'm not "native" to Pathfinder, but I think I understand the rules well enough to see that that could be very easily abused.

Personally, I'm definitely from the "separate classes function separately" camp. My class determines my spell allotment, and the level at which each spell is cast. The sorcerer ruling I'm reading about just baffles me.

The Cleric "spontaneous casting" ability isn't part of their "spells" ability. It is separate. So it will affect all of your "spells" ability. So, if you were a cleric 1/wizard 7 then you could absolutely sub out your prepared black tentacles for a cure critical wounds.

The caveat is, "good luck finding a GM who allows it."


LazarX wrote:
Jayder22 wrote:

So I definitely see that most replys so far seem to think it should go the other way, contrary to RAW, which is confusing.

If a wizard5/Sorc 1 with the draconic bloodline gets to add damage when casting wizard spells, why would there be a difference? Neither Bloodline nor Spontaneous Casting say "sorcerer spells" or "Cleric spells" but one is assumed to count for all, and the other is assumed to mean just cleric? Just seems off.

because the bloodline is a specific rule that trumps general.

What general rule? There is no general rule governing this situation. Also cleric's "spontaneous casting" is just as specific as "bloodline."

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Jaydar, what most people are saying does not go against RAW. When taken in context, when you read that text in the Cleric entry, "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" the text is clearly referring to cleric spells.


The spontaneous casting segment for divine magic in the spells chapter of the CRB states that the conversion uses the 'divine energy' of the spell in question

But I have a feeling that might not be convincing enough for someone determined to make it work so I hope any resulting table tiffs are civil

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
BigDTBone wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Jayder22 wrote:

So I definitely see that most replys so far seem to think it should go the other way, contrary to RAW, which is confusing.

If a wizard5/Sorc 1 with the draconic bloodline gets to add damage when casting wizard spells, why would there be a difference? Neither Bloodline nor Spontaneous Casting say "sorcerer spells" or "Cleric spells" but one is assumed to count for all, and the other is assumed to mean just cleric? Just seems off.

because the bloodline is a specific rule that trumps general.
What general rule? There is no general rule governing this situation. Also cleric's "spontaneous casting" is just as specific as "bloodline."

And again you're twisting RAW. Class rules are only intended to apply WITHIN THE CLASS THEY ARE WRITTEN FOR. The spontaneous casting rule is written within the cleric class rules, so it's clearly not intended for spells not prepared within clerical slots. For my beef, I don't allow the draconic rule to affect non-sorcerer spells either.


Again reading into the cleric I saw this:

A cleric can't cast spells of an alignment opposed to her own or her deity's (if she has one). Spells associated with particular alignments are indicated by the chaotic, evil, good, and lawful descriptors in their spell descriptions.

I would also assume a wizard 1/cleric 1 of a good deity, would not be able to cast evil spells from his wizard spell list, as it doesn't say "cant cast cleric spells of an alignment opposed to her own alignment, it says "cant cast spells"


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Jayder22 wrote:

So I definitely see that most replys so far seem to think it should go the other way, contrary to RAW, which is confusing.

If a wizard5/Sorc 1 with the draconic bloodline gets to add damage when casting wizard spells, why would there be a difference? Neither Bloodline nor Spontaneous Casting say "sorcerer spells" or "Cleric spells" but one is assumed to count for all, and the other is assumed to mean just cleric? Just seems off.

because the bloodline is a specific rule that trumps general.
What general rule? There is no general rule governing this situation. Also cleric's "spontaneous casting" is just as specific as "bloodline."
And again you're twisting RAW. Class rules are only intended to apply WITHIN THE CLASS THEY ARE WRITTEN FOR. The spontaneous casting rule is written within the cleric class rules, so it's clearly not intended for spells not prepared within clerical slots. For my beef, I don't allow the draconic rule to affect non-sorcerer spells either.

Wow, you sound really angry about a rule you made up. As BigDTBone said,

Quote:
What general rule? There is no general rule governing this situation.

@OP: RAW there isn't really an answer. The actual answer is "the GM decides."

Personally I haven't seen any cleric/wizards, but if I did I would probably rule that their cleric spells are separate from wizard spells, mainly because it is a lot easier to keep track of. It isn't really a power issue (wizard/cleric multiclass is already very weak, and healing is a weak way to spend cleric spells on top of that, making this a very weak combination, even if it is allowed.) It is just potentially more complicated to track when you combine spells from different classes.

Silver Crusade RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

The answer is "no."

Not even a Theurge can do this using the Combined Spells ability. Well, I suppose they could, but they'd have to have a cure prepared, and it would take a slot a level higher in the Sorcerer/Wizard side to cast it. Take note of the special discussion on spontaneous casters as well.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

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.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Even after everything that everyone has said, I still think Jayder is technically correct by literal RAW. You can draw distinctions about context, but the actual rules text of Sorcerer bloodlines and Cleric spontaneous conversion just isn't different enough to support differing rulings based on RAW alone.

I certainly don't believe any GM should rule this way (Chaderick brings up a very good example of the problems that could arise) but I do think it's important to recognize when your ruling is backed by your own sense of what the rules should be rather than what they actually are. Sometimes, this is not nearly as clear-cut as it appears and what seems like an "obvious" ruling to you may be completely counter-intuitive to someone else.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:

because the bloodline is a specific rule that trumps general.

FAQ wrote:

Sorcerer: Do the bonuses granted from Bloodline Arcana apply to all of the spells cast by the sorcerer, or just those cast from the sorcerer's spell list?

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.

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.)

No, it is an application of a general rule that is specifically stated in the FAQ.

Spontaneous Casting wrote:

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).

An evil cleric (or a neutral cleric of an evil deity) can't convert prepared spells to cure spells but can convert them to inflict spells (an inflict spell is one with “inflict” in its name).

A cleric who is neither good nor evil and whose deity is neither good nor evil can convert spells to either cure spells or inflict spells (player's choice). Once the player makes this choice, it cannot be reversed. This choice also determines whether the cleric channels positive or negative energy (see channel energy).

It definitely doesn't specify it only applies to Cleric spells. And it doesn't even mention "divine energy" like someone claimed.

Is it a class ability that modifies spellcasting?

I would say Yes.

Can I imagine many people implementing this?

No.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Jayder22 wrote:

So I definitely see that most replys so far seem to think it should go the other way, contrary to RAW, which is confusing.

If a wizard5/Sorc 1 with the draconic bloodline gets to add damage when casting wizard spells, why would there be a difference? Neither Bloodline nor Spontaneous Casting say "sorcerer spells" or "Cleric spells" but one is assumed to count for all, and the other is assumed to mean just cleric? Just seems off.

because the bloodline is a specific rule that trumps general.
What general rule? There is no general rule governing this situation. Also cleric's "spontaneous casting" is just as specific as "bloodline."
And again you're twisting RAW. Class rules are only intended to apply WITHIN THE CLASS THEY ARE WRITTEN FOR. The spontaneous casting rule is written within the cleric class rules, so it's clearly not intended for spells not prepared within clerical slots. For my beef, I don't allow the draconic rule to affect non-sorcerer spells either.

I'm not twisting anything. You have a serious issue distinguishing between "what I want to be true" and "what is true." What is true is that this is the same rule application as the sorcerer FAQ.

For what it is worth, I don't think it is a great idea to let a player do this. But from my reading of the rules text it is completely legit.

Liberty's Edge

YMMV. FAQ link.

The question becomes, is dumping a prepared spell to spontaneously cast considered modifications to spell casting? Personally, within the context of all of this, I say no. Increasing a DC is modifying spell casting, dumping a spell slot is not. Neither is the cleric's restriction on opposite aligned spells.

  • A CG wiz 1/clr 1 is allowed to prepare an [evil] spell in a wiz spell slot. Now, that's not to say that if a player actually did this, I wouldn't require an atonement spell, there just isn't anything mechanically that prevents it.

In short, the cleric's ability to spontaneously cast spells is written within the context of spells prepared in cleric spell slots.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

No, you can only convert your cleric spells into spontaneous healing spells.

SKR


2 people marked this as a favorite.
bbangerter wrote:

No, you can only convert your cleric spells into spontaneous healing spells.

SKR

After the last few days I am loathe to disagree with SKR; however, the FAQ says pretty much the opposite.

Edit: This would be a great candidate for Nefreet's FAQ thread.


Honestly, this isn't game breaking. As per the FAQ we already have it does seem they ruled it would work.

Claiming this ability doesn't modify spellcasting I'd say is disingenuous is best.


I just want to add that I hate the sorcerer bloodlines apply to other classes spellcasting. It means that characters dip crossblooded sorcerer for two bloodlines that both increase fire damage etc, and then go into wizard to actually use it to avoid the penalty associated with the archetype. It really really bothers me, that the most powerful blaster sorcerer is a wizard with a sorcerer dip.


bbangerter wrote:

No, you can only convert your cleric spells into spontaneous healing spells.

SKR

Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
Messageboard posts on a subjects made by the design and development team are not "official rulings" on the games. Clarifications in FAQ posts and errata are official rulings.

We have a FAQ. The FAQ takes precedence over a a post.


Generally classes refer to themsdlves as if no other class exists.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Samasboy1 wrote:
bbangerter wrote:

No, you can only convert your cleric spells into spontaneous healing spells.

SKR

We have a FAQ. The FAQ takes precedence over a a post.

The key difference is the Sorcerer bloodlines say "Whenever you cast a spell that deals damage, that spell deals +1 point of damage per die rolled." and don't reference a class.

If the ability references a class, it only works on that class like this "can also cast any spell from the magus spell list with a casting time of 1 standard action" which is limited to magus slots.

Both these FAQ are consistent. Cleric spontaneous casting mentions cleric here "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" so it is limited to Cleric spell slots.

Silver Crusade RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

Ok, WOW! That FAQ blows me away. It is 180 degrees out from SKR's post. 5 minutes ago, I would have ruled exactly as SKR says, "you know it doesn't work that way."

With that FAQ, I think SKR's post is just flatout wrong compared to the FAQ. I am totally going to take a level of Cleric and start converting my enemy's spells to cure spells!!! Well, maybe not that, but damn if it doesn't make me think the Cleric/Wizard/Druid/Magus can't convert any spells to cure spells.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The FAQ takes precedence, but, the FAQ is also more specific, and I think the post wins over generalizing.

My interpretation:

The sorcerer ability is a quality of the caster.
The cleric ability is a quality of the divinely-granted spells.


I believe that the reader is supposed to read it as:

"The cleric can “lose” any prepared [cleric] spell that is not an orison or domain spell in order to cast any cure spell of the same spell level or lower"

However, this is a perfect example of the type of loophole a cleric of Asmodeus would take advantage of. Therefore, I would probably allow it, especially in PFS.

If your wizard wants to sacrifice Haste to cast a cure serious wounds, that's ok by me.


bbangerter wrote:

No, you can only convert your cleric spells into spontaneous healing spells.

SKR

Sean is my hero for the last line alone. If I tried putting that in any of these dumb rules arguments Chris Lambertz would be along in record time.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Samasboy1 wrote:
bbangerter wrote:

No, you can only convert your cleric spells into spontaneous healing spells.

SKR

Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
Messageboard posts on a subjects made by the design and development team are not "official rulings" on the games. Clarifications in FAQ posts and errata are official rulings.
We have a FAQ. The FAQ takes precedence over a a post.

Seeing as you feel you trump SKR post with Radney-MacFarland post, I thing it only right to cite what he say in the pos just below that of SKR:

Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
seebs wrote:
I don't necessarily generally think it's safe to assume that coworkers know each others' intent.

When it comes to our team, you can count on it. Trust me, we talk every day about the rules, we discuss the wording in the rulebook and the intent of the rules, where they collide and where they deviate. We have had a number of discussions about this thread.

You've asked your question, we have answered it. You have made your viewpoint plain on many posts in this thread. Thank you.


Thomas Long 175 wrote:

Honestly, this isn't game breaking. As per the FAQ we already have it does seem they ruled it would work.

Claiming this ability doesn't modify spellcasting I'd say is disingenuous is best.

Whether or not it is game breaking has nothing to do with how the PDT intend for the rules to work.


Samasboy1 wrote:
bbangerter wrote:

No, you can only convert your cleric spells into spontaneous healing spells.

SKR

Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
Messageboard posts on a subjects made by the design and development team are not "official rulings" on the games. Clarifications in FAQ posts and errata are official rulings.
We have a FAQ. The FAQ takes precedence over a a post.

The sorcerer FAQ is on modifying spells. It has no affect on the cleric situation because no spell is being modified. It is being exchanged for another spell, and like SKR said it does not even say you have to modify your own spells, and SKR is not changing the rule. He is giving intent.

Yes, that means his comment is not official. It does not mean his comment is wrong or incorrect.

edit: The cleric situation also calls out clerics. The sorcerer situation works because it does not say anything hinting at only sorcerer spells. You can try this at home, but not at PFS.


wraithstrike wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:

Honestly, this isn't game breaking. As per the FAQ we already have it does seem they ruled it would work.

Claiming this ability doesn't modify spellcasting I'd say is disingenuous is best.

Whether or not it is game breaking has nothing to do with how the PDT intend for the rules to work.

They stated in the FAQ how the design team wanted it to work. Whether people hate that sorcerer dipped wizards make better blasters or that spellcasting modifications affect all spells unless otherwise stated makes no difference.

They stated their intent outright. It seems people did not like the result and are asking for a do over. Don't call it RAW vs RAI though when they already specifically stated that spellcasting modifications affect all spells unless stated otherwise.


wraithstrike wrote:
Samasboy1 wrote:
bbangerter wrote:

No, you can only convert your cleric spells into spontaneous healing spells.

SKR

Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
Messageboard posts on a subjects made by the design and development team are not "official rulings" on the games. Clarifications in FAQ posts and errata are official rulings.
We have a FAQ. The FAQ takes precedence over a a post.

The sorcerer FAQ is on modifying spells. It has no affect on the cleric situation because no spell is being modified. It is being exchanged for another spell, and like SKR said it does not even say you have to modify your own spells, and SKR is not changing the rule. He is giving intent.

Yes, that means his comment is not official. It does not mean his comment is wrong or incorrect.

edit: The cleric situation also calls out clerics. The sorcerer situation works because it does not say anything hinting at only sorcerer spells. You can try this at home, but not at PFS.

That is at best suspect logic. Nowhere does it ever state that specifying what class you are changes the rules by which the abilities you are given work.


wraithstrike wrote:


The sorcerer FAQ is on modifying spells. It has no affect on the cleric situation because no spell is being modified. It is being exchanged for another spell, and like SKR said it does not even say you have to modify your own spells, and SKR is not changing the rule. He is giving intent.

Yes, that means his comment is not official. It does not mean his comment is wrong or incorrect.

edit: The cleric situation also calls out clerics. The sorcerer situation works because it does not say anything hinting at only sorcerer spells. You can try this at home, but not at PFS.

I suggest you read it again. The FAQ is on modifying spellcasting not spells. Does Spontaneous Casting modify spellcasting? I would say yes, it is called Spontaneous Casting after all.

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).

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.)

That the dev team agrees on something doesn't change that it is unofficial until it makes it into FAQ/errata. And claiming it shows "intent" is just trying to create a backdoor to make it official.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

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."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
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."

Except that it doesn't say that.

What you have just written is the exact opposite of what is in the FAQ.


If it helps at all, this question was for my PFS character, and I just want to make sure I follow the RAW, and possibly have something to reference if a DM asks. Looks like the FAQ and prd can both be relevant, also the post by SKR.


if you're adding words to support a sentence, you're probably doing something wrong.
don't think of it like
"Cleric using cleric spell slots because you have no other levels in other classes."

think of it like
Cleric{
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.
}
Fighter{
i get free combat feats
}
etc{
etc
}


For those of you who really believe RAW written permits conversion of Wizard spells, do you believe that you can convert a cantrip to a cure spell? The text doesn't mention cantrips, just osirons. Is this because the RAW allow you to convert cantrips into cure spells? No. It's because this rule is written for clerics and clerical spells. It doesn't even contemplate the possibility of converting cantrips. The general rule is that class attributes only apply to that class of spells. Replacing slots with cure spells is a specific function of your clerical power. You can't even use this with domain spells, let alone wizard spells.


Jayder22 It's not something I expect most DMs to allow, PFS or otherwise. I do think it is possible RAW (with the FAQ), just not realistically something you can expect many DMs to agree with.

Create Mr.PittSo what if cantrips could be used....Is there are 0 or lower cure spell to convert them to? (Hint: No).

And you are 100% wrong on the general rule about class abilities, as seen in the FAQ quoted.


The point is not that cantrips can be used. It would be ridiculous if cantrips can be used. The point is that the text is clear written with only clerics and clerical spells in mind.


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?

1 to 50 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