Reconsider the Blood Money ban.

[Wraith235]

TBH one thing to keep in mind ... this is a Magus/ Wizard / Sorcerer / Witch Spell only

there are only a handful of cases where I can see this being used for Raise dead or other high cost Spells (Limited Wish and wish are outside the scope of PFS)

one of those is the Mystic Theruge - and only then Really if they have grandfathered shennanagins because its a worthless class otherwise
Samsarrans (I think) could add it to a divine spell list
Pathfnder savant as well (IIRC)

its basically limited to
Symbol Spells
Stoneskin
Animate dead
and a few others that slip my mind
Wish / limited wish are outside the scope of the campaign

and before you talk about Heart of the Metal,Pellet blast or anything with a Component cost of 100gp or under - there is a feat that allows you to ignore costs up to that that is legal

in reality I dont think this particularly breaks the game or WBL due to the amount of Fringe cases where it can be used for Super high cost Components

again Im not suprised to see it gone ... but Id like to request a reconsider as well

Maybe with this new document require the Blood to only come from the caster of the spell whos components are emulated ... or maybe if the Str falls to 0 the 2nd spell cant be cast / completed ... or as some have suggested - limit it to standard or 1 round casts only

[kinevon]

I think the feat you are referring to is False Focus, which is actually also given in place of Eschew Materials for Sorcerers taking the Razmiran Priest archetype.

Note that if the caster's Strength goes to 0, he is going to not be able to cast another spell by default, as he will have fallen unconscious or become helpless, due to the Strength damage.

[Taenia]

Shaman can pick up blood money with arcane enligtenment hex to grab blood money. They have raise dead and restoration on their list.

Their a number of ways of getting other class's spell through prestige classes so just because it is not on a list doesn't mean it can't get there.

[Kalindlara]

In addition, a 1st-level spell is a far smaller investment than a feat.

[Lorewalker]

Wraith235 wrote:

TBH one thing to keep in mind ... this is a Magus/ Wizard / Sorcerer / Witch Spell only

there are only a handful of cases where I can see this being used for Raise dead or other high cost Spells (Limited Wish and wish are outside the scope of PFS)

one of those is the Mystic Theruge - and only then Really if they have grandfathered shennanagins because its a worthless class otherwise
Samsarrans (I think) could add it to a divine spell list
Pathfnder savant as well (IIRC)

its basically limited to
Symbol Spells
Stoneskin
Animate dead
and a few others that slip my mind
Wish / limited wish are outside the scope of the campaign

and before you talk about Heart of the Metal,Pellet blast or anything with a Component cost of 100gp or under - there is a feat that allows you to ignore costs up to that that is legal

in reality I dont think this particularly breaks the game or WBL due to the amount of Fringe cases where it can be used for Super high cost Components

again Im not suprised to see it gone ... but Id like to request a reconsider as well

Maybe with this new document require the Blood to only come from the caster of the spell whos components are emulated ... or maybe if the Str falls to 0 the 2nd spell cant be cast / completed ... or as some have suggested - limit it to standard or 1 round casts only

As was mentioned in the thread earlier, the witch class gets raise dead naturally.

[FLite]

Skald could also do it via spell kenning maybe, though it might get a little expensive.

[Mahtobedis]

Ring of spell knowledge 2 can get it on any spontanious caster

[SterMe]

Wraith235 wrote:

there are only a handful of cases where I can see this being used for Raise dead or other high cost Spells

and before you talk about Heart of the Metal,Pellet blast or anything with a Component cost of 100gp or under - there is a feat that allows you to ignore costs up to that that is legal

in reality I dont think this particularly breaks the game or WBL due to the amount of Fringe cases where it can be used for Super high cost Components

Cherry-picking from your point a bit - outside of conjuration (healing) and spells that are intended to be game-breaking, blood money is not mechanically that impressive EXCEPT for Animate Dead - a spell that only makes sense in PFS if Blood Money is legal because undead are temporary in PFS (like BM damage). Is there a way to protect characters who animate dead while eliminating the healing shenanigans which seem to be the only concrete problem posted?

[Lorewalker]

SterMe wrote:

Wraith235 wrote:

there are only a handful of cases where I can see this being used for Raise dead or other high cost Spells

and before you talk about Heart of the Metal,Pellet blast or anything with a Component cost of 100gp or under - there is a feat that allows you to ignore costs up to that that is legal

in reality I dont think this particularly breaks the game or WBL due to the amount of Fringe cases where it can be used for Super high cost Components

Cherry-picking from your point a bit - outside of conjuration (healing) and spells that are intended to be game-breaking, blood money is not mechanically that impressive EXCEPT for Animate Dead - a spell that only makes sense in PFS if Blood Money is legal because undead are temporary in PFS (like BM damage). Is there a way to protect characters who animate dead while eliminating the healing shenanigans which seem to be the only concrete problem posted?

Yup. Limit Blood Money to standard action or less spells.

[Ragoz]

Channeled Revival, Breath of Life, Ultimate Mercy, and Twilight Transfer all are legal ways that already raise people for free. I'm not convinced blood money raises are significantly changing the game's economy. They prevent the person who just died from having to pay a large sum of money, exactly like the other options, and the user of the spell gains no benefits themselves.

Invigorating Repose gives the user more time to also use Breathe of Life during or even after the combat finishes (more than likely it will finish within these rounds easily.)

The most issues I have seen have been misunderstandings of the mechanics of the spell.

[Lorewalker]

Ragoz wrote:

Channeled Revival, Breath of Life, Ultimate Mercy, and Twilight Transfer all are legal ways that already raise people for free. I'm not convinced blood money raises are significantly changing the game's economy. They prevent the person who just died from having to pay a large sum of money, exactly like the other options, and the user of the spell gains no benefits themselves.

Invigorating Repose gives the user more time to also use Breathe of Life during or even after the combat finishes (more than likely it will finish within these rounds easily.)

The most issues I have seen have been misunderstandings of the mechanics of the spell.

Did you see the paladin example I wrote earlier in the thread? Raising several people, each day, for free is something not only legal but fairly easy to do.

Yes, the spell does something duplicatable in some respects, the most costly respects at least up to as far as PFS goes.

But, the flavor may be wrong. It is supposed to be a 'rare' spell, after all. Having let it through already does make this annoying...
but I'm hoping they tell us the reason for the ban in this case.

[Ragoz]

Yeah I did see your. I was just restating since it seemed that the discussion was headed back toward the free aspect of raising that it is already very easy to do so.

I'm just hoping there actually is some discussion happening at the office now that the holiday is over.

[UndeadMitch]

Ragoz wrote:

Channeled Revival, Breath of Life, Ultimate Mercy, and Twilight Transfer all are legal ways that already raise people for free. I'm not convinced blood money raises are significantly changing the game's economy. They prevent the person who just died from having to pay a large sum of money, exactly like the other options, and the user of the spell gains no benefits themselves.

Invigorating Repose gives the user more time to also use Breathe of Life during or even after the combat finishes (more than likely it will finish within these rounds easily.)

The most issues I have seen have been misunderstandings of the mechanics of the spell.

Out of the methods you listed there, only one is an effect equivalent to Raise Dead.

Channeled Revival: Either comes online at 11, or sooner with a commitment of resources (a phylactery or some other way to increase channel dice) and is equivalent to Breath of Life, much more limited than Raise Dead.

Breath of Life: With its one-turn limit is much trickier to use than raise dead.

Ultimate Mercy: Requires a substantial feat tax, plus usually an investment in gold (either a headband to get to the 19 CHA or Bracers to increase the number of LoH) to get online. But doesactually functions as a raise dead.

Twilight Transfer: is a breath of life effect, not raise dead.

Invigorating repose: Helps make BoL more viable, but requires either knowing combat is about to occur (which happens sometimes, but is not a given) or a standard action on the first round of combat, when there is usually something more useful to be doing to contribute.

BM has a much smaller investment and usually pays for itself with the first Raise Dead. And that's not even counting all the other spells with expensive components that BM takes care of (Stoneskin, et al).

[Ragoz]

UndeadMitch wrote:

Invigorating repose: Helps make BoL more viable, but requires either knowing combat is about to occur (which happens sometimes, but is not a given) or a standard action on the first round of combat, when there is usually something more useful to be doing to contribute.

You can easily cast this spell after a combat and still be within your 1/2 cl time limit. It is unnecessary to precast (even though you can).

[ElterAgo]

Blood Money is not my favorite or most hated spell. However, I do have issues with it.

There just plain are some issues with understanding how/when/what it can be used to do. It is kinda hard to say whether it is overpowered until those are resolved.

There are some players who do build a character around blood money (usually using the most liberally advantageous interpretation of the spell). Those builds really do bother some/many/few of the GM's an awful lot. Sometimes even the other players get somewhat pissy about it.

A while back I did play quite a few times with someone that made HUGE use of Blood Money. It really honestly did trivialize some of the scenarios when every PC and pet had a stone skin going in every single fight. In addition to all the other uses anyone could think of.

{shrug} Personally, I would rather have seen the spell clarified and possibly limited in some form rather than banned.

[kinevon]

To be honest, ElterAgo, there are a lot worse combinations that are still legal for PFS.
Dazing metamagic, for instance.
Toppling metamagic, or a medium or better built trip/disarm PC.
Color Spray Oracles
Just for a starter.

[Sebastian Hirsch]

kinevon wrote:

To be honest, ElterAgo, there are a lot worse combinations that are still legal for PFS.

Dazing metamagic, for instance.
Toppling metamagic, or a medium or better built trip/disarm PC.
Color Spray Oracles
Just for a starter.

O think one of those option really should be removed from organized play, at least the damn metamagic rod...

... was I ever not this jaded ...? ^^

[Wraith235]

kinevon wrote:

To be honest, ElterAgo, there are a lot worse combinations that are still legal for PFS.

Dazing metamagic, for instance.
Toppling metamagic, or a medium or better built trip/disarm PC.
Color Spray Oracles
Just for a starter.

I agree with all of these - aside from the trip builds (I have one and effectiveness drops to nill at a certain point)

allow me to add -
rulership variant negative energy channeling
Ale Variant negative energy channeling channeling

unfortunatly since we dont know the specifics of why this was removed as a legal option we cant debate it, we can only speculate

[Azothath]

to be honest, the strongest argument to ban Blood Money within PFS is that it is a money loophole and PFS directly uses money to keep characters balanced.
While most of the direct spells don't stick around from game to game the effects of that "free" spellcasting increases your odds of success, escaping harm (skewing the effective challenge rating downwards) or bringing a PC back from the dead.

I agree most of the casting involved with Blood Money goes towards protecting OTHER party members and not usually the spellcaster (other than creating undead which gives you henchmen).
So my argument is "Should we change the component cost for Stoneskin or Animate Undead to $150 to $0?" (this is essentially what Blood Money does via Lsr Restoration scroll or living with the ability score loss in a generous reading of spell material usage)

Personally I think it's a fair trade, but that's just my opinion. It's some paperwork and a first level spell to save $100 to $250. At 9+ level that's minor money and really more about lowering the effective challenge rating and a sense of security.

[Azothath]

FYI that is my view of the situation and not an "official" statement. I think that is the argument/statement to overcome with other arguments/statements in a debate.

Stephen Ross wrote:

... (an edit)...

Personally I think it's a fair trade, but that's just my opinion. It's some paperwork and a first level spell to save $100 to $250. At 9+(7th level) level that's minor money and really more about lowering the effective challenge rating and _creating_ a sense of security.

[kinevon]

Stephen Ross wrote:

FYI that is my view of the situation and not an "official" statement. I think that is the argument/statement to overcome with other arguments/statements in a debate.

Stephen Ross wrote:

... (an edit)...

Personally I think it's a fair trade, but that's just my opinion. It's some paperwork and a first level spell to save $100 to $250. At 9+(7th level) level that's minor money and really more about lowering the effective challenge rating and _creating_ a sense of security.

For some of it, it doesn't, actually, lower the cost by much, if at all, if you use those lesser restoration scrolls, since they are second level spells, so cost 150 gp per casting, or 2 PP to get a scroll of 5 castings.

[ElterAgo]

kinevon wrote:

To be honest, ElterAgo, there are a lot worse combinations that are still legal for PFS.

Dazing metamagic, for instance.
Toppling metamagic, or a medium or better built trip/disarm PC.
Color Spray Oracles
Just for a starter.

I understand and at least somewhat agree with you. { I would prefer not to get involved with unresolvable arguments about what is worse. }

But for some reason, this one really jumps out and offends a lot of people. I don't really know why, but it is there.

[Plot Thickens]

kinevon wrote:

To be honest, ElterAgo, there are a lot worse combinations that are still legal for PFS.

Dazing metamagic, for instance.
Toppling metamagic, or a medium or better built trip/disarm PC.
Color Spray Oracles
Just for a starter.

How to play the most unusual color spray oracle ever (in a Tier 10-11 game):

"Well since I'm an oracle I'll color spray him in the face."
"Sigh, how many HD does that affect?"
"There's no upper limit to color spray."
"No, I mean how many HD can you knock unconscious thanks to your Awesome Display revelation."
"Who said anything about a Heavens Oracle? I'm an Ancient Lorekeeper of Battle. And now that's he's stunned and dropped that +3 weapon he was holding I'm going to pick it up!"

[kinevon]

Plot Thickens wrote:

kinevon wrote:

To be honest, ElterAgo, there are a lot worse combinations that are still legal for PFS.

Dazing metamagic, for instance.
Toppling metamagic, or a medium or better built trip/disarm PC.
Color Spray Oracles
Just for a starter.

How to play the most unusual color spray oracle ever (in a Tier 10-11 game):

"Well since I'm an oracle I'll color spray him in the face."
"Sigh, how many HD does that affect?"
"There's no upper limit to color spray."
"No, I mean how many HD can you knock unconscious thanks to your Awesome Display revelation."
"Who said anything about a Heavens Oracle? I'm an Ancient Lorekeeper of Battle. And now that's he's stunned and dropped that +3 weapon he was holding I'm going to pick it up!"

I keep forgetting that stunned means you drop anything held. Sigh.

[Mekkis]

UndeadMitch wrote:

BM has a much smaller investment and usually pays for itself with the first Raise Dead. And that's not even counting all the other spells with expensive components that BM takes care of (Stoneskin, et al).

The fact is, Blood Money + Raise dead comes online, at the earliest, at 10th level (which requires a significant investment in multiclassing). Otherwise an 11th level witch can handle it (although not dumping str in either of these cases is again an investment that doesn't bear fruit for most of a Pathfinder's career).

Regardless, at 10th and 11th level, the ability to raise someone for free isn't actually that powerful an effect: it's only useful after a party has already found themselves on the short end of the stick. How many pathfinders end up Permanently Dead post-9th level anyway?

If we're talking how Blood Money affects the economy, I think the biggest effect that PFS rules effect the economy is how most long-duration (often permanent) spells with material components (Symbol of Revelation, etc) don't carry across between scenarios. I'm not advocating that they should, but blood money makes these spells playable.

[SterMe]

I feel like this thread has done a pretty good job of staying on topic and discussing a lot of well-reasoned options to avoid most of the over-the-top game breaking aspects of Blood Money. I would be interested to get an update on if this has caused further discussion inside of campaign leadership and how that is progressing, if at all. If we actually completely missed the point of the ban and should have thought about it a different way that would be interesting as well.

[Ragoz]

SterMe wrote:

I feel like this thread has done a pretty good job of staying on topic and discussing a lot of well-reasoned options to avoid most of the over-the-top game breaking aspects of Blood Money. I would be interested to get an update on if this has caused further discussion inside of campaign leadership and how that is progressing, if at all. If we actually completely missed the point of the ban and should have thought about it a different way that would be interesting as well.

+1

I feel there has been good discussion here and many rules elements have been properly explored. It be nice to hear back now.

[Ring_of_Gyges]

The easiest way to get access to it is to have a 2,000gp ioun stone capable of storing it, any class can cast it as a swift action then.

My PFS cleric just hit level 9, has a 20 strength, and was looking forward to it, I can't fault the decision to remove it though.

Raise dead for free is a big deal, certain spells have expensive material components as an explicit balancing device. Blood Money removes that balancing feature willy nilly.

I could get behind a change to Animate Dead though for necromancers in PFS. Normally the cost isn't so bad since the undead last until destroyed, that breaks down in PFS.

[GreySector]

Casting a spell from a cracked vibrant purple prism ioun stone has a minimum casting time of 1 standard action.

[The Beard]

Well crap. Come back to Pathfinder after a little over a year long hiatus and find out my necromancer has been rendered non-functional. Wasn't the most powerful build -- animate dead specialists are pretty much always doomed to suffer in other areas -- but I did rather thoroughly enjoy it all the same.

The destruction of Blood Money is.... wow. That sole spell made quite a few things viable for PFS that would normally have been impossible due to how the campaign is set up, especially dedicated necromancers. It didn't actually serve to really increase the spellcaster's overall wealth at all, if one thinks about it. I'd be lying if I said I didn't expect this for years, though; there has always been a very vocal minority wanting to get rid of the spell. Looks like they won.

So, being as I literally just got back into the swing of things tonight, can someone tell me what the rules are pertaining to the change? Are people being allowed to restructure their characters that might be extremely reliant on this spell, or are they simply expected to eat the loss and move on to another one?

[Ragoz]

There isn't a rule for spells just straight banned from play but from the other page where people talked about the situation it seems you just eat the loss.

[The Beard]

Ragoz wrote:

There isn't a rule for spells just straight banned from play but from the other page where people talked about the situation it seems you just eat the loss.

Ouch... Well, thanks for the heads up. Maybe we'll luck out and they'll reverse their decision, but I'm not gonna hold my breath on that one. I can't really recall instances of decisions like these being overturned during my time as an active player.

[Taenia]

Actually there have been several cases where the rules were overturned based on further rulings or player discussion. Pummeling Charge comes to mind as does the Magical Knack trait.