Hey, i have some questions concerning the Wizard, the Summoner and when you multiclass both of them to Wizard 3/Summoner 1
1. A Wizard prepares a spell out of his spellbook, let's say Shatter, one time. But in fight the target of the spell succeeds with his Willsave, so his weapon doesnt break, is a Wizard able to try to cast this spell again or is this prepared spell lost?
2. I multiclass Summoner and Wizard. When i know spells as a Summoner, am i able to write them down in the spellbook as a wizard? Would make sense, but how is it handled mechanically?
3. As a Summoner i get Summon Monster I as a ability. When i summon my Eidolon, i cannot use this ability as a summoner, i cannot use it for other monsters anymore. But when the "Wizard-part" of my character is able to cast Summon Monster I, can i summon these monsters?
Thank you very much, Some Other Guy :)
1) You lose the spell. It's not "lost", but spent. You used it, so it's gone now, whether successful or not. Same goes for all other Wizard spells.
2) You know spells as a Summoner. These are instinctual and ingrained into your knowledge. However, these spells don't come with a textual knowledge. You can, however, use your Scribe Scroll feat to write down the spell and use that through the rules for scribing spells into your book to copy a known spell.
3) Your Eidolon can be used while you cast your Wizard spell Summon Monster. However, since it's not being cast using your Summon Monster SLA ability, you don't gain the Summoner benefits for it.
I'm actually thinking of writing rules that hybridize multiclass spell casters. Things like,
A) If you have a Wizard/Cleric character, you only gain one set of spells per day, but you can prepare those slots as normal for each class.
B) A Sorcerer/Oracle would have a single set of spell slots, but can learn spells from either list.
C) Cleric/Summoner would work as an Arcanist.
D) All casting class levels contribute to total caster level, essentially one caster level per character instead of separate caster levels per class.
E) Including caster level by racial and class SLAs.
CalethosVB, while I would enjoy playing such a caster, I fear I need to point out that you should include some sort of drawback otherwise there would be no reason to play a single classed caster and many people feel that casters are already too powerful.
2. No, spells can only be copies to spellbooks from scrolls and other spellbooks. The summoner's spells come from innate power, so there is no "formula" for it.
Although... you have the Scribe Scroll feat from being a Wizard. There is nothing that stops you from making a scroll (using the item creation rules for scrolls) of one of your Summoner spells and then using the scroll to scribe it into your spellbook using the rules for adding a spell to your spellbook.
It just takes a few coins.
I've got another question about the spell "Mirror Image". Do the images also copy your attacks? For example, when you cast Magic Missile while your images are active, do you cast the spell 1d4 times? Or is it just you who casts the spell?
I've got another question about the spell "Mirror Image". Do the images also copy your attacks? For example, when you cast Magic Missile while your images are active, do you cast the spell 1d4 times? Or is it just you who casts the spell?
The Mirror Images are only that, images. Think of them as holograms, they have no mass or power of their own.
Only you cast the spell. Your illusory images appear to cast the spell as well, but they only produce an illusion of the spell going off. So one actual magic missile flies from you to the target (possibly doing damage) and N illusory missiles fly from your images to the target as well (but don't do any damage).
|
CalethosVB, while I would enjoy playing such a caster, I fear I need to point out that you should include some sort of drawback otherwise there would be no reason to play a single classed caster and many people feel that casters are already too powerful.
I would think that "One set of spells" [b]is[/i] the drawback, as it sounds like the spells by level would be closer to that of one of the classes, rather than 4+3 cantrips, it might be only the 4, and so on, up the level list.
There would be advantages, but the drawbacks would be fairly large, since you would lose not just the highest level of spells a single-classed caster would get, but you only have as many spells as the lower level of one class would give you.
Unless I misunderstood...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
CalethosVB, while I would enjoy playing such a caster, I fear I need to point out that you should include some sort of drawback otherwise there would be no reason to play a single classed caster and many people feel that casters are already too powerful.I would think that "One set of spells" [b]is[/i] the drawback, as it sounds like the spells by level would be closer to that of one of the classes, rather than 4+3 cantrips, it might be only the 4, and so on, up the level list.
There would be advantages, but the drawbacks would be fairly large, since you would lose not just the highest level of spells a single-classed caster would get, but you only have as many spells as the lower level of one class would give you.
Unless I misunderstood...
Correct. Instead of gaining spell slots per class, you would gain them on a character-wide level, but the spell level of those slots depends completely on your level in each class.
For example: A Wizard 3/Cleric 1 would have a caster level of 4. He could choose to fill his 1st level slots with either Wizard or Cleric spells, as he chooses, but can only fill his 2nd level spell slots with Wizard spells. He may choose to lose any prepared 1st level slot to spontaneously cast Cure Light Wounds at a caster level of 4. At level 4, he follows the Wizard table for total spells per day, +1 1st level Domain spell slot. If the character has a high enough Intelligence score, he would gain extra spell slots to power Wizard spells, noted separately from any other class's spells he has prepared. If he has a high enough Wisdom score, he would gain extra spell slots to power Cleric spells, noted separately from any other class's spells he has prepared. Otherwise, he gains a single spells per day table.
This Wizard 3/Cleric 1 would have 4 0-level spell slots, 3 1st level +1 Domain spell slots, and 2 2nd level spell slots. He may choose to fill his 0th and 1st level spell slots with spells gained from either class, but may only prepare 2nd level spells from his Wizard list since his Cleric levels aren't high enough to support 2nd level spells. All spells cast by this character are cast at CL 4.
Additional rules would be made for spontaneous casters mixing with prepared, or 4/6/9 level casters mixing classes.
It's a fair bit complicated and perhaps the current system is better balanced, but I'm going to be looking at how everything squares over the next few days.
Thanks.
Just to check if I've understood it:
This wiz3/cle1 has the slots and spell progression of a 4th level wizard yet also has access to domains etc and can choose to use 1st level cleric spells? And now counts as having both spell lists for magic it use.
I see no downside.
Fewer spells per day, plus you've lost a level of spell progression in Wizard. Under the current rules (PF Core) you would gain separate spell slots for each class. This way, you gain them per character instead to dole out among each of your classes' spells. My way allows for a more natural Theurge, though having to use those resources a bit more carefully.
Spell casting is one of those class features that's most ubiquitous among Pathfinder classes, but once you multiclass you forget or have to relearn some basics. And your reward for this is extra spells.
I see the scenario of the Wizard 3/Cleric 1 that I've described as a fair scenario. You've traded away a level of Wizard to gain a level of Cleric that can use all of your 1st level spell slots to cast Cleric spells. It's not a bad trade, and it puts your progression on par with that of a Sorcerer of equal character level, plus grants you two Domains as a 1st level Cleric.
Only spells gained from any class gain the advancing CL progression. Class features that aren't spells do not. SLAs granted by classes would also not gain CL progression, and the wording of this would preclude that scenario from happening.
I think the part that confuses me is where the wiz3/cle1 has just as many spell slots (and of the same levels) as a wiz4 in the example. Ie 2 2nd level slots.
If it's lost a level of spell progression, then it would only have 1 2nd level slot.
And that set up would indeed be a downside. So much so that compared with the current rules, it would be significantly weaker and therefore be undesirable most of the time.
Next question (bit complicated, the whole magicstuff in pathfinder...):
What is your spell level? As far as I know, as a Wizard 3/Summoner 1 your spell level is 3 when you cast as a Wizard and 1 when you cast as a summoner.
Is that right? Or is my spell level 4 because I have 4 levels in Classes that are able to cast magic?
If it would be the first option, what about scrolls and magic items? When i cast a spell by using a scroll, what is my spell level then? And when i create a magic item, what's my spell level?
Next question (bit complicated, the whole magicstuff in pathfinder...):
What is your spell level? As far as I know, as a Wizard 3/Summoner 1 your spell level is 3 when you cast as a Wizard and 1 when you cast as a summoner.
Is that right? Or is my spell level 4 because I have 4 levels in Classes that are able to cast magic?
If it would be the first option, what about scrolls and magic items? When i cast a spell by using a scroll, what is my spell level then? And when i create a magic item, what's my spell level?
Scrolls are cast at the spell and caster level they are written at, same as wands. In PF Core, staves operate at your caster level, which currently depends on the level of the class that is able to cast spells from the staff. Your CL is generally equal to your class's level (a Wizard 3/Summoner 1 would have a CL of 3/1 depending on the class you cast the spells from), except in certain cases some class abilities and magic items can enhance your caster level.
I think the part that confuses me is where the wiz3/cle1 has just as many spell slots (and of the same levels) as a wiz4 in the example. Ie 2 2nd level slots.
If it's lost a level of spell progression, then it would only have 1 2nd level slot.
And that set up would indeed be a downside. So much so that compared with the current rules, it would be significantly weaker and therefore be undesirable most of the time.
This is an error on my part. The Wizard 3/Cleric 1 in question would have a spells per day table of a 3rd level Wizard.
Yes, this does make the character weaker in number of spells overall, but makes the character stronger in versatility. No, your God Wizard is not going to become even more godly. He doesn't need to be. But it brings casters more versatility without making more spell slots their only method of doing so.
I think the part that confuses me is where the wiz3/cle1 has just as many spell slots (and of the same levels) as a wiz4 in the example. Ie 2 2nd level slots.
If it's lost a level of spell progression, then it would only have 1 2nd level slot.
And that set up would indeed be a downside. So much so that compared with the current rules, it would be significantly weaker and therefore be undesirable most of the time.
This is an error on my part. The Wizard 3/Cleric 1 in question would have a spells per day table of a 3rd level Wizard.
Yes, this does make the character weaker in number of spells overall, but makes the character stronger in versatility. No, your God Wizard is not going to become even more godly. He doesn't need to be. But it brings casters more versatility without making more spell slots their only method of doing so.
It makes multiclassed spellcasters weaker... and multiclassed spellcasters (sans early entry theurge) are already incredibly weak. I don't really see the point of all the extra rules to nerf a combination that already never gets used..
Oups, yes is mean caster level ^^
Ok fine, thank you.
more questions on the way:
Does a familiar fight? Or do they only give the Wizard the bonus and that's it (apart from RP-fun of course)?
Can a Wand be longer than a few inches? I kknow why they are as short as they are, but when you create a wand by yourself, can you use a longer stick?
-> Is it possible to use a wand (wands are not that expensive, thats why i dont mean rods) as a walking stick?^^
wanted to add to what was said before. as you have all summon spells in your summoner spell list. you can also cast summon spellvia your normal sommuner spells. it will only last 1 round\level. but you cna do it with the eidolon on. it is only whne you use the spell like ability to summon monsters that the eidolon need to leave.
Does a familiar fight?
They can, although they are generally extremely bad at it. If they're Tiny, for example (as most familiars are), they eat an attack of opportunity every time they attack, because they have no reach and hence have to enter the opponent's square.
A more typical tactic is to have the familiar do something else in combat. If you have an improved familiar with hands, for example, it may be able to use wands (for example, to heal or buff allies). A flying familiar may be able to carry and drop splash weapons. But just sending your lizard in to savage the ogre is likely to result in a dead lizard and a slightly amused ogre.
Ok, thank you.
So again, can you change the appearance of magic items? Can you take a long Gandalf-like staff and create a wand out of it, even when wands are normally small sticks?
Ok, thank you.
So again, can you change the appearance of magic items? Can you take a long Gandalf-like staff and create a wand out of it, even when wands are normally small sticks?
If your GM says that you can, then you can; if they say you can't, then you can't. No one here can answer that definitively.