|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I believe that the Magical Knack trait is pretty clear -- there's no prerequisite for having a spellcasting class. There are no requirements similar to "ability to cast 1st level spells." No require to have a "class spell list" or anything of that type. The trait itself says "pick a class" but doesn't limit it in any way, or even require that you choose a class you already have. At 1st level I should be able to take Magical Knack (Rogue). In fact, I should be able to take my first level as Fighter but still select Magical Knack (Rogue), even though it won't be usable until my rogue gains the above rogue talents...
Or so it seems to me.
A counter-argument for the GM might be, "Show me the rules that support a wizard taking this trait?!" and then use the same points in support of the rogue, but I fear such a proof won't be found compelling enough. :-/
What are the logical arguments to allow a 1st level rogue to take Magical Knack (Rogue)?
Thanks everyone! :)
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A counter reference, some people used to assert that taking favored class bonuses that boost abilities you don't possess were ok because by the time the boost was active you had the ability. For example a +1/6 blah and you get blah at 6th level so at 6th your blah ability is effective 7th level.
We know that doesn't work now. We don't know whether or not you can take a fighter level at 1st and a trait Magical Knack (Rogue) at 1st level.
The other question that is present is on whether or not a bonus of caster level even effects a spell like ability. SLA are not spells except in specific ways. So generic caster level enhancements may or may not aid the caster level of a SLA.
The only person that does actually know the answers to these questions would be your GM, as he is in charge of rules interpretations. If you differ in a rules interpretation with your GM, your best option is fine a new GM.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have no idea why your GM is skeptical about it but I also don't see why an argument would be necessary. I'd recommend sidestepping the whole thing and ask them if they'd allow you to use the feat Additional Traits to pick up Magical Knack later.
If you really want an argument, here's what I'd point out:
• Magical Knack doesn't provide any benefit to any 1st level character regardless of class choice. Clearly, it being immediately useful is not a prerequisite. If it were, its use would be restricted to campaigns where everyone started at a higher level. That being said, the flavor-text references your childhood, implying that this should be a trait you have almost your whole life. Why would it be impossible for your character to have had that childhood?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's quite a title.
Thanks, BBT. I was going for completeness. Do I win?
;-)
SLA are not spells except in specific ways. So generic caster level enhancements may or may not aid the caster level of a SLA.
Yes, I saw the FAQ entry regarding whether SLAs can qualify for Item Creation feats, and I can understand that some SLAs would be tricky to rule on. It seems to me (strictly my interpretation and not supported by any written rule) that SLAs that are defined as "your caster level is the number of rogue levels you have" would qualify for Magical Knack treatment, while SLAs that that don't tie the caster level to the class level would not.
Regarding finding a new GM... We're going to play the RotRL anniversary AP and the Gm wants to play PFS legal PCs as much as possible so that certs can be earned by other characters that the players might have. I don't play Cons so I'm not that concerned, and the GM of the AP does have some leeway, but part of the goal is to help familiarize players with the PFS environment so without a clearcut way of making the argument, it'll probably be a no-go.
One argument I thought of:
"If my rogue were to take Weapon Focus (spiked chain) it would be disallowed because he's not proficient with the spiked chain and the WF feat specifically says, "Proficiency with selected weapon" as a prerequisite. Applying the same logic to Magical Knack means that without a prerequisite there's nothing to stop the rogue from taking the trait, even if they don't benefit from it yet."
Sort of like taking Practiced Spellcaster before having any non-spellcaster levels. It's useless in terms of game mechanics until later, but the rules don't prevent you from taking it. (Sorry, lapsed into 3.5 mode. Forgive me. :))
Magical Knack doesn't provide any benefit to any 1st level character regardless of class choice.
Doh! That's obvious now that you point it out. The fact that it's useless for any spellcaster means that it being useless for a rogue shouldn't be a factor in the determination of whether it's legal.
Which means the question is likely to come down to the caster level and how it applies to SLAs...
What Cuuniyevo said is spot on.
And re: Favored Class comparison, I would in fact equate it to the selection of what class your FC *IS* (not of each level's bonus)
which of course can be a class you are not taking at 1st level, and indeed you might NEVER end up taking.
Are you planning to take levels in a class other than rogue? If not, Magical Knack won't do anything.
If you are, does the GM know?
There is no prerequisite.
It doesn't require any active benefit.
SLAs have a caster level.
This is totally legit. Heck, you could be a cleric/wizard and take this trait for rogue, if you wanted. The only question in my mind is, what exactly is your master plan? It seems like the more customary use of this trait would be to multiclass, or to circumvent a paladin's low caster level. If you've come up with something cooler, I'd love to hear it. :)
You meet all prerequisites for the trait.
Shroudb might have a point though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think shroud has the most correct answer.
Theres nothing that will prevent you from selecting magical knack (rogue). It just wont do anything for you.
Rogues don't have caster levels. SLA don't grant casters levels anymore (they reversed previous FAQs). Magical knack has nothing to enhance.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
RAW, I think Shroud has it right. The magical knack specifically says it raises the caster level of that class, while the rogue talent says that the CL for the ability is equal to your rogue class level (not that it creates a rogue caster level). The Rogue class does not grant caster levels. Magical knack does not modify your class level. Therefore the level that acts as the CL for the SLA is not modified by the trait.
That said, I think as a GM I'd allow this. The spirit of the Magical Knack trait is that if a caster wants to multi-class, it helps mitigate the penalty. It's capped at 2 levels, so at most you are giving the caster an extra damage die, an extra +2 to damage, or maybe an extra two rounds or minutes for a spell duration. It's a great trait to have a low levels, but fairly weak at high levels. Overall, it's not that game breaking.
So if a rogue wants to devote two talents so that they can gain two spells to cast, and also wants to multi-class for 2 levels, I don't think I'd have an issue with giving him 2 extra rounds of vanish in exchange for a trait.
RAW, I think Shroud has it right. The magical knack specifically says it raises the caster level of that class, while the rogue talent says that the CL for the ability is equal to your rogue class level (not that it creates a rogue caster level). The Rogue class does not grant caster levels. Magical knack does not modify your class level. Therefore the level that acts as the CL for the SLA is not modified by the trait.
That's a distinction without a difference. The actual rule for caster level under Magic is:
Caster Level
A spell's power often depends on its caster level, which for most spellcasting characters is equal to her class level in the class she's using to cast the spell.
So, spells have caster level, which is based on class level -- exactly like a rogue.
As for item creation, it's true the FAQ says SLAs don't give you a caster level for item creation. Still, I'm not really sure why that's true. It just seems like going too much the other direction after the misuse of SLAs to count for "the ability to cast 3rd level spells" which never seemed right to me. All that can be said definitively is that SLAs don't (currently) count for item creation.
As for SLAs themselves,
If a character class grants a spell-like ability that is not based on an actual spell, the ability's effective spell level is equal to the highest-level class spell the character can cast, and is cast at the class level the ability is granted.
Again, caster level for a particular spell is keyed to a class level.
The game is simply not set up where "caster level" is a quantity casters have and non-casters do not.
The rules argument is that traits aren't restricted. You could take magical knack simply because your character background fits with it. Maybe you plan on multiclassing later on. It really doesn't matter; it's a trait with no prerequisites.
EDIT: Sorry, forgot that magical knack requires you to name a class. Even then, if rogue can be a spellcasting class (it can, as you have already pointed out) then it should be allowed.
My two cents.
1) A caster level is equal to a spellcasting character's class level, but the minor and major magic traits only set a caster level for those specific abilities. The reason I think this doesn't work by strictest interpretation is that the rogue is not a spellcasting class, thus increasing its caster level by 2 simply puts it from 0 to 2, and minor and major magic circumvent that limitation regardless.
2) Even if it worked, it's important to remember that this ability cannot push your caster level above your Hit Dice, which means you must be multiclassed away from rogue in order to gain the benefits. Have you made your DM aware that you're multiclassing, if that was his only problem? The thing is, this isn't a very powerful (at all) interaction, so as a DM I might rule that it's okay, I'd just have to let the player know that it doesn't work by my strict interpretation.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for the input, everyone. :)
My GM now agrees that MK(Rogue) should be possible, partly because of the opinions expressed here and partly because I'm really good at debate. ;-)
I can't seem to select Rogue for MK inside HeroLab but that's a side issue; I could create my own MK trait and use that instead, thus circumventing the (apparently wrong) rules interpretation imposed by the HL software. It would be nice if they treated it correctly, but I understand that they will only make changes that are obviously in line with Paizo's intent regarding the rules. Maybe there will be a FAQ entry for this so that HL will update their PF data set? (I wonder what PCGen does? Hm, something to check out.)
Since the bump of caster level by +2 is not much of a bonus, I'm planning to forego the argument and just pick a different trait (no, RJGrady, I don't have a fabulous new twist; I just wanted the boost for the gravity bow spell that I'll be using for my Major Magic talent at low levels where adding a couple minutes could be very important). It bums me out, though; game mechanics that are not clearly defined, thus causing a change in character background (not taking MK) seems like an arbitrary restriction and one that doesn't fit with the concept of the game being "heroic fantasy". Oh well. :)
As I said, thanks everyone for giving me your opinions on both how the rules DO work and perhaps how they SHOULD work. :)
I'm pretty certain it won't do anything.
For reference, Mark has weighted that picking magical knack on a kineticist won't do a thing since, despite everything they do being a sla, they don't have an actual CL.
Rules wise:
Magical knack raises your CASTER level.
+
Sla's don't grant CL any more.
=
Your rogue CL will always be 0Your sla are based on ROGUE level
+
Magical knack doesn't do anything for your rogue level
=
Your sla will always be equal to rogue level.
I think you're reading too deeply into this. Spell-like abilities clearly have a caster level (for the spell-like ability in question).
Spell like abilities aren't spells anymore. I don't see how it would work.
A rogue has no caster level.
A rogue can have an ability to do something very similar to a spell (SLA)
When he uses that ability it tells you how to figure out the effects of said ability. (treat rogue levels as the caster level for the spell effect it's emulating.)
So boosting a rouge's caster level doesn't do anything.
But things that effect spells themselves, like spell focus, can still work.
Mark said that a caster level increase to kineticist would only help punch through SR if it did anything, not increase the damage.
Spell like abilities aren't spells anymore. I don't see how it would work.
The trait says nothing about spells or SLA's. I don't see how either impacts the trait.
A rogue has no caster level.
Maybe. If you go by Mark this seems to be what's intended. There isn't anything in the actual rules to clarify it though.
"The rogue's caster level for this ability is equal to her rogue level." Nothing differentiates this caster level from other caster levels. "your caster level in that class gains a +2 trait bonus as long as this bonus doesn't raise your caster level above your current Hit Dice" could just as easily take effect on any instance in where the class has a caster level, either from the start or later in level.
Whatever way you look at it, caster level could use an FAQ on the differences in caster level, if they exist, between spells and SLA's.
Traits and favored class bonuses: We can't have them work the same as several traits can't work at first like Honored Fist of the Society. No class has KI at first level.
I just wanted the boost for the gravity bow spell that I'll be using for my Major Magic talent at low levels where adding a couple minutes could be very important).
You still seem to have missed the point, that even if this were completely applicable to your rogue spell-like ability, you can never raise your caster level to a value higher than you have hit dice with this trait. So, unless you plan on multi-classing, which I doubt, since you said "at low levels", you can gain no benefit from this trait at all.
The only single-classed characters that can benefit from this trait are those with classes that have a caster level that is less than their class level, such as rangers or paladins.
He's not reading too deeply, that's pretty much what Mark said. Class-granted SLA's do not give an overall caster level, instead each ability has an internal caster level equal to class level. Since magical knack only affects an overall caster level, it doesn't change class-granted SLA caster levels. I don't necessarily agree/like that interpretation, and it isn't an actual FAQ, but it does give an idea where the winds are blowing.I think you're reading too deeply into this. Spell-like abilities clearly have a caster level (for the spell-like ability in question).I'm pretty certain it won't do anything.
For reference, Mark has weighted that picking magical knack on a kineticist won't do a thing since, despite everything they do being a sla, they don't have an actual CL.
Rules wise:
Magical knack raises your CASTER level.
+
Sla's don't grant CL any more.
=
Your rogue CL will always be 0Your sla are based on ROGUE level
+
Magical knack doesn't do anything for your rogue level
=
Your sla will always be equal to rogue level.
Allow me to clarify: Spell-like abilities don't count for the purposes of item creation anymore, but that doesn't necessarily mean that a caster level isn't a caster level for other purposes. I see absolutely no reason why what the OP proposes wouldn't work.
spells slots per day and high casting stats.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As I noted above, a wizard's caster level for spells is ALSO keyed to the wizard's class level, not some general "caster level" quantity. If it doesn't work for rogues because rogues use "class level" as "caster level," it also doesn't work for any spellcasters.
Look at all the rules that require you to have something in order to improve: FCB, archetypes, class features, etc... The spell eater bloodrager archetype has a specific example with DR. It expressly has DR/- 0 in order to be eligible for DR/- boosting abilities it would not qualify if it had no DR/-. Nothing + X always equals nothing.There is a difference between no caster level and a caster level of zero.Citation?You just provided evidence of the opposite of what you are claiming...
If a feat or whatever lists something as a prereq, it implies that it is NOT the default assumption, otherwise they didn't need to list it when it is required.
Just like when a feat lists "Level 1 fighter" as a prereq, it's doing that precisely because level 1 fighter is NOT a default requirement for taking a feat, so they have to especially list it when it is.
So listing "Zero of ___" as a prereq definitely serves as evidence that if anything this is NOT the default case, otherwise this would not need to have been listed.
So do you have any other citations that don't work against your point??
He didn't mention feats at all...
He's referencing the rule that you can't take the human FCB that boosts superstition unless you have superstition.I'm not sure what he meant when he said archetypes and class abilities.
|
|
But the class itself does not. Magical knack raises the caster level of a class not of particular spells. A rogue with an SLA still has an overall lack of caster levels for any other purpose.
Unfortunately for my proposed build, I agree. The trait says "your caster level for this class" is raised by two. While the rogue's level is used as the caster level for the talents, the rogue's caster level doesn't exist.
Clearly, even Mark isn't sure what it should be. Would it be unbalancing to allow it? I think not. But without a clear ruling one way or the other, I can't expect folks like Lone Wolf to update their software to allow me to select it, nor can I expect to use it at a PFS event without an argument over whether it's valid. Simpler to avoid the issue entirely. (Sigh)
(Oh, and in answer to Zaister's question about the HD limit: yes, I had planned to start with two levels of fighter to get some archery feats, then switch to rogue.)
Ah okay. Yes then, that is one piece of thin evidence of needing zero of something first.
Do you have more than one example? Or a general rule, to make this very important implication that changes dozens of things about the game clearly an intended policy in general? Agreed the editor of that ability thought it was yes.
Bonus spell slots per day from high casting stats and not having the spell level. This is the reason rangers and paladins start with 0 spells per day. Reading into discussions about spell slots you'll find the Dev comment indicating that you have to have something to boost it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But the class itself does not. Magical knack raises the caster level of a class not of particular spells. A rogue with an SLA still has an overall lack of caster levels for any other purpose.
So does a wizard. Seriously.
|
Regarding finding a new GM... We're going to play the RotRL anniversary AP and the Gm wants to play PFS legal PCs as much as possible so that certs can be earned by other characters that the players might have. I don't play Cons so I'm not that concerned, and the GM of the AP does have some leeway, but part of the goal is to help familiarize players with the PFS environment so without a clearcut way of making the argument, it'll probably be a no-go.
Just to answer this part of your post, as that may affect your GM's thoughts:
If you are playing an AP in Campaign Mode (non-PFS PCs, credit being assigned to PFS PCs), there is absolutely no requirement for the PCs actually played to be, in any fashion, PFS legal.
Indeed, it has been discussed, and confirmed by the then Campaign Coordinator, that an AP run in Campaign Mode doesn't even need to be run using the Pathfinder rules set, as long as the spirit of the AP, and more-or-less the same events, are there, so you can understand the stories, and have yours understood, by other people who have played the AP.
The discussion in the relevant thread got a little far afield, IIRC, with a discussion on whether using a diceless system was too far away...
|
|
If you are playing an AP in Campaign Mode (non-PFS PCs, credit being assigned to PFS PCs), there is absolutely no requirement for the PCs actually played to be, in any fashion, PFS legal.
That's very interesting; I didn't know that and the GM for this game may not either.
I think the plan is to introduce the group to PFS in general though, including the types of rules restrictions that will come up, and I think that's why PFS rules were being used for the AP. AFAIK, anyway.