Cleric - Domains - Wands


Rules Questions


Okay, so I know that a Cleric can use wands of spells that are on their selected domains even if it is not on there normal spell list as discussed here:

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2meka?Cleric-domain-spells-scrolls-and-wands

and

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mzdz?Scrolls-and-Domains#14

However, I have someone that is trying to take the bold part here and extrapolate:

The PRD wrote:
Spell Trigger: Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it's even simpler. No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell. This is the case even for a character who can't actually cast spells, such as a 3rd-level paladin. The user must still determine what spell is stored in the item before she can activate it. Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

They are saying that because domains are a part of the class, that the class is therefore capable of casting it as long as it appears in the domains. Thus any cleric could use a wand of any spell as long as it appears on either the cleric spell list or the domains somewhere, even if they did not select the domains that they appear in.

I personally disagree, and have argued that effectively the Cleric is an aggregate of multiple classes that are grouped under the 'Cleric' name, since the Deity and Domain choices fundamentally determine the spells that a character is capable of casting, therefore your class would be something like "Cleric of Nethys - Destruction/Defense" and not simply Cleric. Meaning you could use wands of spells that are on the Destruction and Defense domain list or the actual Cleric spell list.

So my question is, which is correct? And more importantly citations and logic backing up the way the answer was obtained.

Grand Lodge

Let's try a basic reductio ad absurdum.

Rodinia is a Cleric with the Plant(Growth) domain.

Rodinia can cast the first level spell Enlarge Person, which is not normally on the Cleric list. Because she has the Plant(Growth) domain that spell is on her spell list. Rodinia can reliably use a wand of Enlarge Person, without needing to UMD.

Rodinia can not cast the first level spell Truestrike. Some domains, like Luck and Destruction, get that spell. Rodinia does not have any domain that grants Truestrike, and it is not normally on the cleric spell list. Rodinia would not expect to be able to use a Wand of Truestrike without needing to use UMD. Nor should your friendly cleric with [some other domains that do not give Truestrike].

It sounds like your friends are trying to argue that if any type of cleric, ever, has access to Truestrike, then it's on the 'cleric' spell list and therefore every cleric can e.g. use a Wand of Truestrike without UMD. That way lies madness. E.g. Paragon Surge exists, so every spell has been on some Cleric's spell list sometime. Therefore a cleric never needs UMD, because all the spells are already on their list. Uh huh.

All in all, this sounds like a fatuous claim by someone wishing to use certain wands without needing to UMD. I 100% agree with you, OP.

The 'rules' may not be 100% clear on this distinction. The best we have is what's quoted above. Go with what seems reasonable. I know what seems reasonable to me.


Here is the FAQ for you:

" When do I count as having a class feature?

You have a class feature when your class description tells you you gain that class feature, generally based on your level in that class (and perhaps altered by factors, see below).

If you have an archetype or other rules element that replaces that class feature, you do not have that class feature. For example, if your archetype replaces a rogue's sneak attack, you no longer have the sneak attack class feature (whether a requirement is as general as "sneak attack" or as specific as "sneak attack +1d6," you do not qualify for it)."

A cleric only counts as having a domain when it actually has that domain. When a cleric chooses a different domain, it does not have the other domains.

You can't get much more clear than this.


Are wands divided into arcane and divine, like scrolls or can everyone use the same wands if the spell is on their list?


Rodinia wrote:

Let's try a basic reductio ad absurdum.

Rodinia is a Cleric with the Plant(Growth) domain.

Rodinia can cast the first level spell Enlarge Person, which is not normally on the Cleric list. Because she has the Plant(Growth) domain that spell is on her spell list. Rodinia can reliably use a wand of Enlarge Person, without needing to UMD.

Rodinia can not cast the first level spell Truestrike. Some domains, like Luck and Destruction, get that spell. Rodinia does not have any domain that grants Truestrike, and it is not normally on the cleric spell list. Rodinia would not expect to be able to use a Wand of Truestrike without needing to use UMD. Nor should your friendly cleric with [some other domains that do not give Truestrike].

It sounds like your friends are trying to argue that if any type of cleric, ever, has access to Truestrike, then it's on the 'cleric' spell list and therefore every cleric can e.g. use a Wand of Truestrike without UMD. That way lies madness. E.g. Paragon Surge exists, so every spell has been on some Cleric's spell list sometime. Therefore a cleric never needs UMD, because all the spells are already on their list. Uh huh.

All in all, this sounds like a fatuous claim by someone wishing to use certain wands without needing to UMD. I 100% agree with you, OP.

The 'rules' may not be 100% clear on this distinction. The best we have is what's quoted above. Go with what seems reasonable. I know what seems reasonable to me.

They aren't arguing that if any spell ever appears as a domain spell that it is on their spell list, they are arguing this one line in particular.

"Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell."

Which does not say a spell has to be on the spell list, just that the class can cast it. Therefore, to apply your example to theirs, since Truestrike appears on a domain list the Cleric class can cast it, even if one particular cleric cannot because they do not have that domain, the class can, which means that a cleric can use wands of Truestrike even if they do not have the domain that grants it.


The spell needs to be on the class spell list, not any domain list. That's what it means. Domains are not part of the cleric casting list. If you were to take that statement to mean that you could cast any domain spell, consider this:

With miracle you can cast any spell 7th level or lower. Cleric can cast miracle. Therefore every spell 7th level or lower is castable by cleric, therefore no umd check is necessary for any spell 7th level or lower for any class that can cast miracle or wish. This is really really stupid.

Even if it could be said that raw domains as a whole are part of the cleric casting spell list, rai that is clearly not the case. He needs to umd.

Also rule 0 he is wrong, you are right. Too bad.

Sczarni

Yes, you should consider those spells as part of the character's class spell list.

(until someone quotes Stephen saying that Developer commentary is worthless)


The common sense way to understand this regardless of RAW is that you can use the wand if the spell is on your spell list. Technically the spell does not appear on the class spell list, but it makes sense for a cleric that has that spell on their list (because of the domain) to be able to use a wand as though it was on the cleric spell list. I believe this is the intention.

Regardless of anything else, as the GM your word is law. Even if they want to continue to argue about "RAW" you can tell them it doesn't work that way in your game.

Don't let your players bully you.


Clarification since it seems it's needed, I am not the GM, this is just a disagreement on the rules between two individuals and I was seeking any reasoning supporting either side to weigh and judge, unless a developer weighs in on it for some reason.

Claxon wrote:

The common sense way to understand this regardless of RAW is that you can use the wand if the spell is on your spell list. Technically the spell does not appear on the class spell list, but it makes sense for a cleric that has that spell on their list (because of the domain) to be able to use a wand as though it was on the cleric spell list. I believe this is the intention.

Regardless of anything else, as the GM your word is law. Even if they want to continue to argue about "RAW" you can tell them it doesn't work that way in your game.

Don't let your players bully you.

Yeah, I'm not seeking a common sense way, I think the argument I presented that effectively shows that view point. That Cleric itself is not the whole class but that the Deity and Domains are just as much a part of what your class is: IE Cleric of Nethys - Destruction/Defense. Meaning that Cleric is actually an aggregate of a huge number of classes with a large amount of overlap, so lumped under the Cleric name.

And again, you're dropping back to the wording of on your class list, that is not the wording of the rules for spell trigger items, so I can't use that unfortunately. Again, they are focused on that one particular line that says 'whose class can cast it', nothing about spell list at all.

Hogeyhead wrote:

The spell needs to be on the class spell list, not any domain list. That's what it means. Domains are not part of the cleric casting list. If you were to take that statement to mean that you could cast any domain spell, consider this:

With miracle you can cast any spell 7th level or lower. Cleric can cast miracle. Therefore every spell 7th level or lower is castable by cleric, therefore no umd check is necessary for any spell 7th level or lower for any class that can cast miracle or wish. This is really really stupid.

Even if it could be said that raw domains as a whole are part of the cleric casting spell list, rai that is clearly not the case. He needs to umd.

Also rule 0 he is wrong, you are right. Too bad.

You seem to have glossed over the links I posted, even Nefreet reposted the one in particular from Sean K. In it, he states that Domain spells are on the characters spell list. Also, you're doing the exact same thing that Claxon did, dropping back to the "on the spell list" instead of reading the fact that the rules clearly state "whose Class can cast it". There is a big difference.

Also, Miracle does not let you cast any other spells when it's cast, it can just duplicate them, IE it has the effect of that spell. It's still Miracle that is cast though.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/m/miracle

Nefreet wrote:

Yes, you should consider those spells as part of the character's class spell list.

(until someone quotes Stephen saying that Developer commentary is worthless)

Did you read that I specified the domains that a character does not have? Say, a Cleric of Nethys with the Destruction and Defense domains. Though a Cleric could have the Arcane subdomain, and thus have Magic Aura, the specific Cleric does not have it.


I ignored nothing. The cleric class cannot cast those domains spells. But clerics of those domains do gain the ability to cast those spell.

That is the difference to me.

Without clarification of the part of the developers, clerics shouldn't even be able to use wands of their domain spells.


Claxon wrote:

I ignored nothing. The cleric class cannot cast those domains spells. But clerics of those domains do gain the ability to cast those spell.

That is the difference to me.

Without clarification of the part of the developers, clerics shouldn't even be able to use wands of their domain spells.

We have clarification from the developers already, Sean K Reynolds in my second link, and the link that Nefreet posted says that Domain spells are spells that are on the characters spell list, just with the rule that is in the book already that if they aren't normally on the list, they can only be prepared in the domain slots.

It seems to me you are basically saying my same argument that the class that would be in question for the line "whose class can cast it" is not "Cleric" but rather "Cleric of X Deity - A/B Domains." I'm specifically seeking logic and citations either backing this, or refuting this. Because yes, as it stands I can see where they are coming from that because Domains are a class feature, there are Clerics that can cast spells that others cannot, and thus the class "Cleric" can cast it, even if some, or even most, individual Clerics cannot. However, just because I can see where they are coming from does not mean I agree with their reading.


Character spell list is not the same thing as class spell list

Sczarni

I used to argue the same as Claxon.

In searching thru my posts, looking for that link, I was reminded of that.

I value the opinions of (most) of the Design team.

When I read SKR's post, I changed my mind, and now allow (for example) Clerics with the Fire Domain to use scrolls of Fireball.

Even when I GM for PFS.

And even when ppl quote Stephen Radney-MacFarland.

But I recognize that ppl like Claxon exist, and their arguments are equally as valid, and don't fault anyone for refusing my Travel Cleric to use his wand of Longstrider.

Until it's outlined in an FAQ, it's up in the air.


Nefreet wrote:

I used to argue the same as Claxon.

In searching thru my posts, looking for that link, I was reminded of that.

I value the opinions of (most) of the Design team.

When I read SKR's post, I changed my mind, and now allow (for example) Clerics with the Fire Domain to use scrolls of Fireball.

Even when I GM for PFS.

And even when ppl quote Stephen Radney-MacFarland.

But I recognize that ppl like Claxon exist, and their arguments are equally as valid, and don't fault anyone for refusing my Travel Cleric to use his wand of Longstrider.

Until it's outlined in an FAQ, it's up in the air.

Nefreet, you misunderstand. I think it's clear intention to let clerics use wands and scrolls of their domain spells without UMD.

But the way the rules were originally written should prevent it. But clearly at least SKR thought they should be able to, and I agree. But it still stands that the character's spell list and the class list are two different things. And the domain spells never got an official change up to allow characters to use associated items.

So ignoring the part about characters with proper domains and their ability to use items of that spell, general clerics shouldn't be able to use any item of any domain spell because they are not on the cleric spell list.*

*Ignoring the spells that are granted by domains which are already on the cleric list.


Nefreet wrote:

I used to argue the same as Claxon.

In searching thru my posts, looking for that link, I was reminded of that.

I value the opinions of (most) of the Design team.

When I read SKR's post, I changed my mind, and now allow (for example) Clerics with the Fire Domain to use scrolls of Fireball.

Even when I GM for PFS.

And even when ppl quote Stephen Radney-MacFarland.

But I recognize that ppl like Claxon exist, and their arguments are equally as valid, and don't fault anyone for refusing my Travel Cleric to use his wand of Longstrider.

Until it's outlined in an FAQ, it's up in the air.

Re-read the OP, nefreet. You have completely misinterpreted it.

A more pertinent question would be: would you allow a cleric without the fire domain to use scrolls of fireball? That's what the OP is discussing.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Nefreet wrote:

Yes, you should consider those spells as part of the character's class spell list.

(until someone quotes Stephen saying that Developer commentary is worthless)

That text means it's on THAT character's class list, not on the list of every cleric whether they possess the domain or not.


Okay, again I'm not concerned about whether it's on the spell list or not. That is not an issue in the slightest, because that is not the wording of the text in spell trigger item rules. What I'm concerned about is the fact that, and the person I'm arguing against with this is correct by one reading of the text, anyone whose class can cast the spell, the wording is ambiguous because of the fact that it doesn't say all characters of a class have to be able to cast it, just that the class itself has to be able to do so.

I very much disagree with that, but I am having a hard time arguing against it outside of me saying that Cleric isn't a class in and of itself but rather an aggregate of multiple classes as determined by the Deity and Domains.

For instance, take a Ranger. A Ranger at 1st level is not capable of casting any spells, but they are capable of using wands because the Class is able to cast spells even if the 1st level character is not. Even if they only ever took one level of it, the Class of Ranger can still cast spells. Same for a Paladin.*

So again, their argument is the fact that it doesn't rely on whether a specific character can cast it, but whether can the Class do so. And in a technical way, yes Clerics (if viewing Domains as a whole part of the class features and not a fundamental determining part of the class) can cast things like Fireball or True Strike, because there are domains that allow Clerics to do so. Even if one character cannot cast them, the Class can when viewed overall. Again, I'm not saying that the spell is on the Class Spell List, and the other person has admitted that they don't see it as being on the list for all Clerics either, just that the Class can cast it.

Effectively it seems that their argument comes down to the fact that if a Class has the potential to cast something, whether at higher levels or based off of Domain choices since domains are part of the Cleric Class, means the Class itself can cast it even if an individual member of that Class cannot. And this is the part I have a hard time arguing against, because there are explicit examples that seem to support this, as I have given.

I disagree with this view as I have stated multiple times, I just have a difficulty finding a clear cut RAW that supports my disagreement. And just to make it known, they very much view RAW as superior in all cases to RAI without FAQ or a designer explicitly stating it. Their reasoning being that RAI is inherently an interpretation and it may or may not line up with what the designers actually intended, so unless there is a RAW, FAQ or designer input that supports it, the RAW will win. Even if the RAW results in ridiculous results.

*Barring certain archetypes that explicitly say that the character cannot cast spells or use wands.

Grand Lodge

Okay, ask him this question:

Do you agree that the Cleric spell list consists of those spells that any Cleric can prepare, no matter what domains he has taken?

If he says no, ask him where anything else is added to the Cleric spell list?

Domain spells are added to a Cleric's spell list, in a very limited capacity, as they can only be prepared in a specific spell slot, not in any of their Cleric spell slots, just in the Domain Spell spell slot.

Note that that is added to a Cleric's spell list, not added to the Cleric spell list.

Since it is not added to the Cleric spell list, where any Cleric can prepare it, like a Cure Light Wounds spell, it cannot be used to activate a spell trigger item, since the general run of Clerics do not understand how that spell works.

A cleric with the Fire domain can activate a scroll of Fireball, as it is on their Domain spell list, so they know how Fireball works. A regular Cleric can just go, "Huh?" about the spell, as they have no referents on how it works to go by. They can try to activate it in a hit-or-miss fashion, by using UMD.

Depending on the GM, it might require a second UMD check, if neither their Charisma or Intelligence is 13 or higher, since, classically, those are the usual casting stats for the classes that can cast Fireball normally. A nicer GM might allow using Wisdom for the casting stat due to Fire Domain Clerics and Empyreal Sorcerers, but that is a GM call.


UMD wrote:
Use a Wand, Staff, or Other Spell Trigger Item: Normally, to use a wand, you must have the wand's spell on your class spell list. This use of the skill allows you to use a wand as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list. Failing the roll does not expend a charge.
Cleric wrote:
Each domain grants a number of domain powers, dependent upon the level of the cleric, as well as a number of bonus spells. A cleric gains one domain spell slot for each level of cleric spell she can cast, from 1st on up. Each day, a cleric can prepare one of the spells from her two domains in that slot. If a domain spell is not on the cleric spell list, a cleric can prepare it only in her domain spell slot. Domain spells cannot be used to cast spells spontaneously.

What matters for activating a wand or scroll is whether the spell is on your class's spell list. Taking a domain which adds a non-cleric spell to your spells augments your spell list, and you can use the relevant magical items.

If you do not have the domain, you do not add the spells to your spell list. That some other Cleric can cast that spell does not make it a Cleric spell. So no, you cannot use a wand of fireball if you're a Cleric and you don't have the Fire domain.


kinevon and fretgod, re-read what I have stated. I have pointed out repeatedly that Spell List is not what I'm interested in at all, since that doesn't have any bearing on Spell Trigger items per the Spell Trigger Item section on page 458 of the CRB.

The wording does not say spell list at all, and thus it isn't a factor. It's whether the class can cast it or not.

Grand Lodge

Killebrew wrote:

kinevon and fretgod, re-read what I have stated. I have pointed out repeatedly that Spell List is not what I'm interested in at all, since that doesn't have any bearing on Spell Trigger items per the Spell Trigger Item section on page 458 of the CRB.

The wording does not say spell list at all, and thus it isn't a factor. It's whether the class can cast it or not.

Spell list is how you determine if members of the class can cast the spell.

If it is not on the spell list, then it is not available as a spell trigger item BECAUSE it CANNOT be cast by the CLASS.

Casting a DOMAIN spell is NOT casting a CLERIC spell.

DOMAINS and their spells do not exist for any Cleric which does not have that as a chosen domain.

Note that, in base, what I am saying, and what you and your friend should be taking as a given, is that there is NO Cleric class.

There are a very large number of sub-types of clerics.
Fire Domain & Travel Domain Cleric, not just Cleric.

Domains are very similar to archetypes. A Cleric with Domains X & Y is a different class than a Cleric with Domains A & B. And they are both different classes from a Cleric with Domains A & X, even though both of them have significant overlaps.


Did you miss the part where I quoted the rule saying you normally have to have a spell on your spell list to use the magic device? Whether you are interested or not, your spell list is what is relevant. If a spell is not on your spell list, you need UMD to use the relevant wand. That a Cleric can cast a spell doesn't make it a Cleric spell. If it's not a Cleric spell, you have to UMD.


fretgod99 wrote:
Did you miss the part where I quoted the rule saying you normally have to have a spell on your spell list to use the magic device? Whether you are interested or not, your spell list is what is relevant. If a spell is not on your spell list, you need UMD to use the relevant wand. That a Cleric can cast a spell doesn't make it a Cleric spell. If it's not a Cleric spell, you have to UMD.

And that's the crux of the reason why I'm ignoring spell list. I quoted and put the relevant section of the Spell Trigger items in my opening post. The other persons argument is basically that since there are Clerics that can cast something, the Class can cast it even though not all members of the class can, and in a technical sort of way they are correct. The wording isn't that it has to be on the spell list, just that the class has to be able to cast it. In all honesty, if the wording was with the 3.5 version it wouldn't be a problem at all, since it clearly stated spell list instead of the ambiguous "whose class can cast it."


kinevon wrote:
Killebrew wrote:

kinevon and fretgod, re-read what I have stated. I have pointed out repeatedly that Spell List is not what I'm interested in at all, since that doesn't have any bearing on Spell Trigger items per the Spell Trigger Item section on page 458 of the CRB.

The wording does not say spell list at all, and thus it isn't a factor. It's whether the class can cast it or not.

Spell list is how you determine if members of the class can cast the spell.

If it is not on the spell list, then it is not available as a spell trigger item BECAUSE it CANNOT be cast by the CLASS.

Casting a DOMAIN spell is NOT casting a CLERIC spell.

DOMAINS and their spells do not exist for any Cleric which does not have that as a chosen domain.

Note that, in base, what I am saying, and what you and your friend should be taking as a given, is that there is NO Cleric class.

There are a very large number of sub-types of clerics.
Fire Domain & Travel Domain Cleric, not just Cleric.

Domains are very similar to archetypes. A Cleric with Domains X & Y is a different class than a Cleric with Domains A & B. And they are both different classes from a Cleric with Domains A & X, even though both of them have significant overlaps.

If you read through my post, I explicitly agreed with you about that, and have repeatedly stated that I disagree with what my friend is stating. I simply cannot find explicit RAW that supports the fact that I don't think Cleric is a class in and of itself but rather that it'd be Cleric of X Deity and A/B Domains. While my friend keeps saying that the Class is "Cleric" everything else is a part of being a Cleric and it's simply choice.

I keep trying to make it clear that I'm looking for something refuting specific things, and as I said, if the wording of Spell Trigger items on 458 still said spell list then this would have been moot.


Clerics can't cast Fireball. Even Fire Domain Clerics can't prepare Fireball in a Cleric spell slot. It's not a Cleric spell. What matters is whether it is on the relevant spell list. And the two quotes I provided demonstrate that this isn't the case.

The intent is clearly not supposed to be what this player is arguing. The Rules don't support what this player is trying to do. There's no basis for it.


A cleric without the fire domain cannot use a wand of fireball for the same reason a spell-less ranger cannot use a wand of entangle.

You don't actually have a class feature unless you have that feature. If you make a choice that means you no longer have that feature, you no longer have that feature. The FAQ is really, really clear on this and it's not just an archetype thing.

Otherwise I could say that all paladins can use wands of 1st-4th level arcane spells because those spells are potentially obtainable via unsanctioned knowledge. Likewise, domain spells are potentially obtainable via the domain class feature: but you don't actually have them unless you have them.

There is an explicit exception to this: paladin and ranger spellcasting is called out as being different, presumably because their spellcasting class feature is always active (they just don't get any spells or a caster level until 4th level). The fact that it needed to be called out as an exception proves the rule. Note that this rule doesn't apply even for other ranger/paladin abilities: you cannot take boon companion until level 4 as a ranger, for example.


Blakmane wrote:

A cleric without the fire domain cannot use a wand of fireball for the same reason a spell-less ranger cannot use a wand of entangle.

You don't actually have a class feature unless you have that feature. If you make a choice that means you no longer have that feature, you no longer have that feature. The FAQ is really, really clear on this and it's not just an archetype thing.

Otherwise I could say that all paladins can use wands of 1st-4th level arcane spells because those spells are potentially obtainable via unsanctioned knowledge. Likewise, domain spells are potentially obtainable via the domain class feature: but you don't actually have them unless you have them.

There is an explicit exception to this: paladin and ranger spellcasting is called out as being different, presumably because their spellcasting class feature is always active (they just don't get any spells or a caster level until 4th level). The fact that it needed to be called out as an exception proves the rule. Note that this rule doesn't apply even for other ranger/paladin abilities: you cannot take boon companion until level 4 as a ranger, for example.

Where does it state that explicit exception? I knew that they could use them, but don't recall there being anything other than the blurb about them having no caster level through 3rd level and at 4th level their caster level is their level -3. That could be a pretty good example to use to show him that his reading is incorrect, in combination with your class feature thing. Unfortunately, I know that he's going to say something along the lines that Domains as a whole are a class feature if I use that by itself. There is a reason I am being very particular about the reasoning behind this, like I said, he's very much RAW, extrapolating something that doesn't explicitly call it out is essentially RAI to him and he won't go with it unless the FAQ or a Developer explicitly addresses it.


I just thought of a very clear-cut example:

ask your player if he thinks all sorcerers are capable of using a wand of bless.

By his interpretation, they can, because the celestial bloodline grants bless as a bonus spell. In fact, all non-arcane bloodline spells should be castable via wand if this was the case.

This is clearly farcical, even moreso than the cleric domain example.


Blakmane wrote:

I just thought of a very clear-cut example:

ask your player if he thinks all sorcerers are capable of using a wand of bless.

By his interpretation, they can, because the celestial bloodline grants bless as a bonus spell. In fact, all non-arcane bloodline spells should be castable via wand if this was the case.

This is clearly farcical, even moreso than the cleric domain example.

Alright, thanks. I'll do so and see what he says, I'll let you know.


Each domain grants a number of domain powers, dependent upon the level of the cleric, as well as a number of bonus spells. A cleric gains one domain spell slot for each level of cleric spell she can cast, from 1st on up. Each day, a cleric can prepare one of the spells from her two domains in that slot. If a domain spell is not on the cleric spell list, a cleric can prepare it only in her domain spell slot. Domain spells cannot be used to cast spells spontaneously.

Clearly states the domains spell is not on cleric list so you need Umd if you want
to cast fireball or some other domain spell you can't memorize domain spell into regular slots unless it's on cleric spell list
you can use pearls of power to cast a domain spell multiple times I think .


Blakmane wrote:

I just thought of a very clear-cut example:

ask your player if he thinks all sorcerers are capable of using a wand of bless.

By his interpretation, they can, because the celestial bloodline grants bless as a bonus spell. In fact, all non-arcane bloodline spells should be castable via wand if this was the case.

This is clearly farcical, even moreso than the cleric domain example.

Alright, so they said that yes, because there is a bloodline that can cast it, the class can cast it.

Edit: Corrected their to there.


Killebrew wrote:
Blakmane wrote:

I just thought of a very clear-cut example:

ask your player if he thinks all sorcerers are capable of using a wand of bless.

By his interpretation, they can, because the celestial bloodline grants bless as a bonus spell. In fact, all non-arcane bloodline spells should be castable via wand if this was the case.

This is clearly farcical, even moreso than the cleric domain example.

Alright, so they said that yes, because their is a bloodline that can cast it, the class can cast it.

So, because somewhere in the multiverse a sorcerer with the celestial bloodline is capable of casting bless, specifically via his connection to the upper planes..... an abyssal or draconic sorcerer can now use a wand of bless that a cleric has prepared in an entirely unrelated circumstance?

Really? I'm beginning to think your player is lacking even a modicum of common sense. Thankfully, there's an FAQ which touches on this:

New Spells Known: If I gain the ability to add a spell that is not on my spell list to my list of spells known, without adding it to my spell list, can I cast it?

No. Adding a spell to your list of spells known does not add it to the spell list of that class unless they are added by a class feature of that same class. For example, sorcerers add their bloodline spells to their sorcerer spell list and oracles add their mystery spells to their oracle spell list. The spell slots of a class can only be used to cast spells that appear on the spell list of that class.

Their bloodline spells. Not all bloodline spells. The spells need to be actually added by a class feature in order to be on the spell list (you don't just get them for nothing). We know that sorcerer spells are added on a per level basis, not at level one (obviously) because of the wording of the bloodline ability:

At 3rd level, and every two levels thereafter, a sorcerer learns an additional spell, derived from her bloodline.

He does not learn the other spells from other bloodlines, and thus they are not added to spell list. Further more, he can not learn any non-arcane spell which is not part of his bloodline list, because he does not have those bloodlines as a class feature (the original FAQ makes that clear, once you've made a choice you don't 'have' the other choices anymore) and thus is ineligible for their usage through a wand without UMD even by the most lenient of wordings.

Domains are exactly the same. When a cleric gets access to a domain spell as a bonus spell, he adds it to his spell list (with the caveat it can only be cast with domain slots, obviously). He doesn't have and cannot have access to the other (non-cleric) spells on other domain lists for the same reason as above.

*edit*

I'm hoping your player now tries to claim 'their' is inclusive of all bloodlines/mysteries now, because this creates a ridiculous situation where now any sorcerer bloodline has bless on his class list and can learn it whenever he wants. At this point his interpretation has clearly broken even the faintest hint of common sense.


Blakmane wrote:
Killebrew wrote:
Blakmane wrote:

I just thought of a very clear-cut example:

ask your player if he thinks all sorcerers are capable of using a wand of bless.

By his interpretation, they can, because the celestial bloodline grants bless as a bonus spell. In fact, all non-arcane bloodline spells should be castable via wand if this was the case.

This is clearly farcical, even moreso than the cleric domain example.

Alright, so they said that yes, because their is a bloodline that can cast it, the class can cast it.

So, because somewhere in the multiverse a sorcerer with the celestial bloodline is capable of casting bless, specifically via his connection to the upper planes..... an abyssal or draconic sorcerer can now use a wand of bless that a cleric has prepared in an entirely unrelated circumstance?

Really? I'm beginning to think your player is lacking even a modicum of common sense. Thankfully, there's an FAQ which touches on this:

New Spells Known: If I gain the ability to add a spell that is not on my spell list to my list of spells known, without adding it to my spell list, can I cast it?

No. Adding a spell to your list of spells known does not add it to the spell list of that class unless they are added by a class feature of that same class. For example, sorcerers add their bloodline spells to their sorcerer spell list and oracles add their mystery spells to their oracle spell list. The spell slots of a class can only be used to cast spells that appear on the spell list of that class.

Their bloodline spells. Not all bloodline spells. The spells need to be actually added by a class feature in order to be on the spell list (you don't just get them for nothing). We know that sorcerer spells are added on a per level basis, not at level one (obviously) because of the wording of the bloodline ability:

At 3rd level, and every two levels thereafter, a sorcerer learns an additional spell, derived from...

No, he straight out admits that it's pretty dumb, he's just stating that that is the rule as written, that basically if any member of a class can cast something, it fits the criteria given under the spell trigger rules that their class can cast it. I was trying to show that that is an illogical way to read the way that it's written, but he doesn't seem to agree and keeps saying that I can read it that way, and he even says he can see why I'm reading it that way but that it's not what it says.

I thank you for trying, but he's pretty much said that because that's the rules as written, unless a developer says something, or it's in an FAQ, he doesn't care what anyone says.


No worries. There comes a point where, if someone wants to misinterpret something, there's not a lot you can do. I would give him this quote from SKR (an ex-dev) specifically talking about ambiguous wording:

Sean K Reynolds wrote:


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.

Or, an alternative version

Sean K Reynolds wrote:


You can't write rules so they're 100% clear to everyone. Skip used to get Sage Advice questions asking "Do I have to take Power Attack before I can take Cleave?" You have to aim for a reasonable level of comprehension that won't run overlong and be redundant or condescending. If some people still aren't able to correctly interpret the intent of the rule, then those people shouldn't be GMing.

Sovereign Court

Clerics in this game just got even more powerful.


Killebrew wrote:
I thank you for trying, but he's pretty much said that because that's the rules as written, unless a developer says something, or it's in an FAQ, he doesn't care what anyone says.

Then tell him to get the f%++ out of your game. If he can't accept your ruling as a GM, then you don't need him there.

His attitude comes off as toxic, and I wouldn't stand for it.


Upon reading the domains section of cleric it does seem like you can cast spells that are not on cleric list, you have to prepare it in the dormain slot and cannot memorize it in your regular slots so technically you are casting the spell. at least once per day if not more if you have pearls of power.

Spell Trigger: Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it's even simpler. No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell. This is the case even for a character who can't actually cast spells, such as a 3rd-level paladin. The user must still determine what spell is stored in the item before she can activate it. Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

so that means it works =D


4 people marked this as a favorite.

<face palm>

I made my will save. I will not be sucked into this nonsense.

<exits thread>

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Killebrew wrote:
fretgod99 wrote:
Did you miss the part where I quoted the rule saying you normally have to have a spell on your spell list to use the magic device? Whether you are interested or not, your spell list is what is relevant. If a spell is not on your spell list, you need UMD to use the relevant wand. That a Cleric can cast a spell doesn't make it a Cleric spell. If it's not a Cleric spell, you have to UMD.
And that's the crux of the reason why I'm ignoring spell list. I quoted and put the relevant section of the Spell Trigger items in my opening post. The other persons argument is basically that since there are Clerics that can cast something, the Class can cast it even though not all members of the class can, and in a technical sort of way they are correct. The wording isn't that it has to be on the spell list, just that the class has to be able to cast it. In all honesty, if the wording was with the 3.5 version it wouldn't be a problem at all, since it clearly stated spell list instead of the ambiguous "whose class can cast it."

The problem is you can't ignore the spell list as it's the crux of what kind of spell-trigger or spell completion magic items a character can use.

And the other person is simply wrong for reasons already stated by myself and others upthread.

Every cleric has a unique spell list which is the sum of the following; the main cleric spell list, plus the spells belonging that cleric's domain or domains, minus the spells forbidden to said cleric by diety or alignment. The spell trigger and spell completion items usable to an individual cleric without relying on UMD is determined by their personal spell list. This also applies to druids with their spell list and domains as well.

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Killebrew wrote:
I thank you for trying, but he's pretty much said that because that's the rules as written, unless a developer says something, or it's in an FAQ, he doesn't care what anyone says.

This is a good example of why I dislike the term "rules-as-written".

There is really no such thing.

Rules are read and interpreted.

Two (or more) people are capable of reading the exact same sentence and coming to two (or more) different conclusions.

This is a good example.

When posters ask, "Blah blah blah, is this RAW???", I just want to facepalm.

That's not how the English language works.

Sczarni

LazarX wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

Yes, you should consider those spells as part of the character's class spell list.

(until someone quotes Stephen saying that Developer commentary is worthless)

That text means it's on THAT character's class list, not on the list of every cleric whether they possess the domain or not.

Indeed.

I hadn't realized the distinction the OP was trying to outline.

His "friend's" argument is nebulous at best.


What a bizarre thread....

It seems patently obvious that a domain spell IS a cleric spell BUT for THAT cleric ONLY

In a way there is no such thing as a "cleric" (or a "sorceror" for that matter) since they are all slight variants on a basic template. Which logically makes perfect sense.

ALL divine spells for a cleric (including domains) are granted as powers by their deity in exchange for devotion and worship.... its not as though a fire cleric meets some bloke down a dark alleyway to get an illicit fireball spell without his deity knowing!!

"You got any of that fire magic mate??"....

"Course pal... loads of it."

"Great.. sort me out.... not a word though... hush hush!"

A cleric can of course use a wand containing domain spells. A domain spell is merely a spell that can only be prepared once per day. It is a signifier of a clerics devotion to a particular deity.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Killebrew wrote:

clear cut RAW

RAI is inherently an interpretation

There are less clear cut RAW than there are wishy washy RAW. RAW is mostly an interpretation.

Nefreet wrote:

I dislike the term "rules-as-written".

There is really no such thing.

Rules are read and interpreted.

+1


Killebrew wrote:
Blakmane wrote:
There is an explicit exception to this: paladin and ranger spellcasting is called out as being different, presumably because their spellcasting class feature is always active (they just don't get any spells or a caster level until 4th level). The fact that it needed to be called out as an exception proves the rule. Note that this rule doesn't apply even for other ranger/paladin abilities: you cannot take boon companion until level 4 as a ranger, for example.
Where does it state that explicit exception? I knew that they could use them, but don't recall there being anything other than the blurb about them having no caster level through 3rd level and at 4th level their caster level is their level -3. That could be a pretty good example to use to show him that his reading is incorrect, in combination with your class feature thing.

This seems to have gone unaddressed.

PRD wrote:
Spell Trigger: Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it's even simpler. No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell. This is the case even for a character who can't actually cast spells, such as a 3rd-level paladin. The user must still determine what spell is stored in the item before she can activate it. Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Relevant section is bolded. Paladins and Rangers can still use wands from their class list, even though they can't actually cast spells yet.

And again, it's "anyone whose class can cast the spell", not "anyone who belongs to a class a member of which can cast the spell", which is how your friend is reading it. At this point, there's likely nothing you can do. Your friend is undeniably wrong and unwilling to budge. You can lead a horse to water and all that.


It should be pointed out that wile paladins and ragers dont have spells till 4th level they still have a spell list, complrised of all their spells they have yet to obtain.

I personnally find this exploytative and clearly against the spirit of the system, and i prefer to ply by the spirit of the system not the letter, in my home games i would simply say no and my players are ok with that as they know i have the interest of the game at heart and i would have to rules quote them on the matter. i totally get clerics being able to add the domains they pick to their spell list but if they dont hae the domain then they dont have the spell thus cant use those wants withought UMD simple as that.


fretgod99 wrote:
Killebrew wrote:
Blakmane wrote:
There is an explicit exception to this: paladin and ranger spellcasting is called out as being different, presumably because their spellcasting class feature is always active (they just don't get any spells or a caster level until 4th level). The fact that it needed to be called out as an exception proves the rule. Note that this rule doesn't apply even for other ranger/paladin abilities: you cannot take boon companion until level 4 as a ranger, for example.
Where does it state that explicit exception? I knew that they could use them, but don't recall there being anything other than the blurb about them having no caster level through 3rd level and at 4th level their caster level is their level -3. That could be a pretty good example to use to show him that his reading is incorrect, in combination with your class feature thing.

This seems to have gone unaddressed.

PRD wrote:
Spell Trigger: Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it's even simpler. No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell. This is the case even for a character who can't actually cast spells, such as a 3rd-level paladin. The user must still determine what spell is stored in the item before she can activate it. Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Relevant section is bolded. Paladins and Rangers can still use wands from their class list, even though they can't actually cast spells yet.

And again, it's "anyone whose class can cast the spell", not "anyone who belongs to a class a member of which can cast the spell", which is how your friend is reading it. At this point, there's likely nothing you can do. Your friend is undeniably wrong and unwilling to budge. You can lead a horse to water...

Aha, thanks. Though I feel blind for having missed it now.

And you're correct, I tried to point out how illogical it was to say that because some members of a group can do something, that the group can do it, he shrugged and said that we'd have to agree to disagree.


A_psychic_rat wrote:

It should be pointed out that wile paladins and ragers dont have spells till 4th level they still have a spell list, complrised of all their spells they have yet to obtain.

I personnally find this exploytative and clearly against the spirit of the system, and i prefer to ply by the spirit of the system not the letter, in my home games i would simply say no and my players are ok with that as they know i have the interest of the game at heart and i would have to rules quote them on the matter.

I'm confused. Are you saying it's exploitative for rangers and paladins to be able to use wands, even at first level? How is that against the spirit of the system? This isn't one of those situations where the rules are ambiguous and so going by one particular written meaning of the rules violates what is clearly the intended meaning. It's explicitly spelled out in the rules that rangers and paladins can do so; there's no other way to interpret that. How does that violate the spirit of the system?


I think he means trying to get all domain spells on your spell list?

Interestingly, and less certain, I think from the FAQ you can't actually cast domain spells through wands until you actually gain that domain spell. You only add it as a bonus spell (and thus get it on your spell list) on the levels you recieve the spell, unlike paladin and ranger spells who have them on their spell list from level 1, even if they can't cast them yet. It works just like taking unsanctioned knowledge in this case: you don't get it till you get it.

Letting clerics wand cast domain spells they will get in the future isn't exactly broken anyway, so I doubt it would come up or really matter if you ruled it the other way.

OP: did you ever get a reply on the unsanctioned knowledge bit? Can you ask your odd player if he thinks paladins can wand cast all bard spells because some paladins, somewhere in the multiverse, have taken unsanctioned knowledge for those spells?

If he says yes, i'll have a quiet chuckle on your behalf :-)

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Cleric - Domains - Wands All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.