A discussion on Blood Havoc, and if you think it should be allowed.


Pathfinder Society


When I first saw this ability in Magic Tactics Toolbox, I was hoping it would come to PFS to open up options for the blaster sorcerer. It's currently not legal in pfs, but I think the ability is at least worth discussing, seeing what people think.

Disclaimer: I have not played a blaster in PFS, but I have theory-crafted building one, and like looking at what options there are.

This ability is from the bloodline mutations section, which has this overall rule:

bloodline mutations wrote:

Whenever a bloodrager or a sorcerer gains a new bloodline power, she can swap her bloodline power for a bloodline mutation whose prerequisites she meets. Once this choice is made, it cannot be changed, and a bloodrager or sorcerer cannot swap a bloodline power that she has altered or replaced with an archetype for a bloodline mutation.

Alternatively, a bloodrager or sorcerer can select a bloodline mutation in place of a bloodline bonus feat, provided her class level is at least equal to the level of the bloodline ability the mutation normally replaces. Blood Havoc: Whenever you cast a bloodrager or

Now the ability

blood havoc wrote:
Whenever you cast a bloodrager or sorcerer spell that deals damage, add 1 point of damage per die rolled. This benefit applies only to damaging spells that belong to schools you have selected with Spell Focus or that are bloodline spells for your bloodline. This ability replaces the sorcerer’s 1st-level bloodline power or the bloodrager’s 4th-level bloodline power.

Looking at this ability, a few things jump out.

1.A crossblooded sorcerer could pick this up at earliest, level 7 with his bonus bloodline feat, since his first level power is altered.

2. This only works when casting a sorcerer or bloodrager spell, so it does not work with the popular sorcerer1/wizardx build.

3. This is limited to only spells that the caster has spell focus or is a bloodline spell for.

With these limitations, the ability doesn't seem like it would be creating any problems. Maybe I am wrong, I would love to hear some feedback from players that have played blasters, gm'ed for them, or been at the table. Is this type of caster not fun to play with?

It feels like this doesn't boost the power of the blaster option, but opens up options for the sorcerer to be able to be closer in effectiveness as the wizard for it. The sorcerer wouldn't have admixture, or the bonus from the evocation subschool to damage, but would now have the option of getting the +2 damage/dice without going crossblooded, or getting +3/dice at level 7 onwards if picking crossblooded (which has a host of other, serious drawbacks).

Basically this would open up a few archetypes to players that want to be sorcerer blasters with the +2/dice damage option. Eldritch Scrapper, Razmiran Priest, Seeker, and Tattooed Sorcerer would all be possible, some taking the mutation at 1st level, others taking it at 7th with the feat. Of course, these are all options now, just getting +1/dice damage on spells instead of +2.

Does this ability seem too strong, and you are glad it is excluded from PFS? I'd love to hear opinions on this.

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

Perhaps its too good for dipping?


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Perhaps its too good for dipping?

Am I missing something Wolf? Because it says "Whenever you cast a bloodrager or sorcerer spell that deals damage", doesn't that mean it only works when you cast spells from your sorcerer list? Even if you have wizard levels, they wouldn't be sorcerer spells at that point.

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

Jayder22 wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Perhaps its too good for dipping?

Am I missing something Wolf? Because it says "Whenever you cast a bloodrager or sorcerer spell that deals damage", doesn't that mean it only works when you cast spells from your sorcerer list? Even if you have wizard levels, they wouldn't be sorcerer spells at that point.

i'm picturing draconic half orc blood sorcerers all picking this up for +3 to every damage die.

Mind you, damage may not be the best option, but channeling every damage dealing spell slinging into the same option may not be something to encourage.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

It's not the best option, sure, but when you're dropping 175 damage flammenkugels (at level 10 13d6+39 empowered maximized intensified + Varisian Tattoo + Spell Specialization) even damage has a chance.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Let me throw up a quick comparison, at levels 7 and 10 using this mutation versus the more common Sorc1/Wizardx build that is thrown around on the forums (I have never actually seen it played). Keep in mind the following examples don't have every optimization, but a fair bit.

Level 7

Admixture Wizard 6/Crossblooded (orc/draconic) Sorcerer 1.
Traits: Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage (Fireball)
Feats: Spell Focus (evocation) Greater Spell Focus (Evocation)
Empower Spell, Varisian Tattoo (Evocation), Spell Specialization (Fireball) Fast Study
This wizard casts empowered fireball in a 3rd level slot for the following
((9d6+18)x1.5)+4, an average of 77 damage on a failed save. He can change it to a different element as needed for resistances (which he should have the knowledge to identify). If it is a different element, the damage drops to 64 (ice/acid/electricity). He has 4 level 3 spell slots per day, has at least 4 level 3 spells in his spellbook for free.

Crossblooded Sorcerer 7 (Orc/Draconic)
Traits: Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage (Fireball)
Feats: Spell Focus (evocation) Greater Spell Focus (Evocation)
Empower Spell, Spell Specialization(Fireball) (Evocation). Bonus Bloodline Feat-Bloodline Mutation Blood Havoc. All feats chosen

This Sorcerer casts empowered fireball as a 3rd level spell as a full round action, it is the only 3rd level spell he knows, but he can cast 5 of them a day. The damage does the following
(9d6+27)x1.5 for an average of 87 damage on a failed save. It can only be fire damage, no options for changing to another element if the target resists or is immune to fire. To be fair, fire resist 10 or even 20 isn't going to be that much of a problem.

So the Sorcerer comes out 10 damage ahead here, Blood Havoc is adding 13 damage that the sorcerer wouldn't otherwise have. Sorcerer wins slightly on damage, but the Wizard has much much more flexibility in spells known, fast study to prepare spells when he needs them, quick and on the fly damage type changing.

Level 10

Admixture Wizard 9/Crossblooded (orc/draconic) Sorcerer 1.
Traits: Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage (Fireball)
Feats: Spell Focus (evocation) Greater Spell Focus (Evocation)
Empower Spell, Varisian Tattoo (Evocation), Spell Specialization (Fireball) Fast Study, Intensified Spell
This wizard casts empowered fireball in a 3rd level slot for the following ((10d6+20)x1.5)+6, an average of 88 damage. In 4th level slots, he can cast an intensified version of the same spell for average of 105 damage. He can change it to a different element as needed for resistances (which he should have the knowledge to identify). If it is a different element, the damage drops to 73 and 87 respectively. Rough estimate, but probably 6 3rd level spell slots, 5 4th level spell slots, and 3 5th level spell slots.

Crossblooded Sorcerer 10 (Orc/Draconic)
Traits: Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage (Fireball)
Feats: Spell Focus (evocation) Greater Spell Focus (Evocation)
Empower Spell, Spell Specialization(Fireball) . Bonus Bloodline Feat-Bloodline Mutation Blood Havoc. Intensified Spell.

This Sorcerer casts empowered fireball as a 3rd level spell as a full round action, He now knows 2 3rd level spells, 1 4th level spell but does not know any 5th level spells at all. The fireball does the following damage.
(10d6+30)x1.5 for an average of 97 damage on a failed save. Intensified would be (12d6+36)x1.5 or average 117 as a 4th level spell. It can only be fire damage, no options for changing to another element if the target resists or is immune to fire.

Here in comparison, we have the Sorcerer again ahead by 9 damage with the 3rd level slot, and 12 damage on the 4th level slot. The sorcerer once again has a slew of drawbacks though (no 5th level spells, casting as full round action, no change in damage type).

I hope some of these numbers help. I wasn't sure how they would compare when I started doing this. Is that extra damage boost just too much?


Muser wrote:
It's not the best option, sure, but when you're dropping 175 damage flammenkugels (at level 10 13d6+39 empowered maximized intensified + Varisian Tattoo + Spell Specialization) even damage has a chance.

Muser I am curious what build is able to do this at level 10. even with double metamagic traits, that would be a level 7 spell (Empowered +2, Maximized +3, Intensified +1, Traits -2, Fireball level 3= 7)

The very earliest I could see this happening would be level 14 for the wizard (13 wizard/1 sorcerer) or for the sorcerer.

Venture-Agent, Utah—Provo aka Chess Pwn

Jayder22 wrote:
Muser wrote:
It's not the best option, sure, but when you're dropping 175 damage flammenkugels (at level 10 13d6+39 empowered maximized intensified + Varisian Tattoo + Spell Specialization) even damage has a chance.

Muser I am curious what build is able to do this at level 10. even with double metamagic traits, that would be a level 7 spell (Empowered +2, Maximized +3, Intensified +1, Traits -2, Fireball level 3= 7)

The very earliest I could see this happening would be level 14 for the wizard (13 wizard/1 sorcerer) or for the sorcerer.

metamagic rods?

Shadow Lodge 4/5

Might have misremembered some parts, but you can always use a maximize rod to take off some of the load.


Thomas Hutchins wrote:
Jayder22 wrote:
Muser wrote:
It's not the best option, sure, but when you're dropping 175 damage flammenkugels (at level 10 13d6+39 empowered maximized intensified + Varisian Tattoo + Spell Specialization) even damage has a chance.

Muser I am curious what build is able to do this at level 10. even with double metamagic traits, that would be a level 7 spell (Empowered +2, Maximized +3, Intensified +1, Traits -2, Fireball level 3= 7)

The very earliest I could see this happening would be level 14 for the wizard (13 wizard/1 sorcerer) or for the sorcerer.
metamagic rods?

Aww yes Thomas you are right. I had forgotten about those for a minute. So a rod of Maximize on this combo, it being a 4th level spell, would cost 54k. I guess you could afford that at level 10, and you might have the fame for it. It would require quite a lot of saving though.

If you used a rod of empower instead, casting it as a 5th level spell, it would only cost 32,500. Still quite an investment.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

Yeah, it's more doable with the Master of Trade faction award. 27,000 is possible around level 7-8 I think. Even earlier, if you don't mind crippling your budget entire.

Sovereign Court 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden aka Ascalaphus

Fireball isn't actually the most attractive spell for this. Cramped quarters can cramp your style. Burning Arc is very practical in such cases. It's also one level lower, making it possible to keep the [wayang/lineage] intensified/empowered version inside a level 3 slot and thereby get to use Lesser metamagic rods. You can even use the dazing version as a level 3 spell and then for example apply a Lesser Intensify rod.

Grand Lodge 2/5

Jayder22 wrote:
It can only be fire damage, no options for changing to another element if the target resists or is immune to fire

Are you sure about that?

Sovereign Court 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden aka Ascalaphus

claudekennilol wrote:
Jayder22 wrote:
It can only be fire damage, no options for changing to another element if the target resists or is immune to fire
Are you sure about that?

Interesting find.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
claudekennilol wrote:
Jayder22 wrote:
It can only be fire damage, no options for changing to another element if the target resists or is immune to fire
Are you sure about that?

Lol, I am never 100% sure of any statement in pathfinder. There is always a book with a new item, or a feat, or trait that I have never seen. This is a nifty little item, doubly useful because it doesn't compete with Jingasa for the head slot anymore :). When I mentioned no options, I just meant no in class options. Elemental Spell Metamagic comes to mind, a lesser rod of it would do much the same as this.

Grand Lodge 2/5

Jayder22 wrote:
claudekennilol wrote:
Jayder22 wrote:
It can only be fire damage, no options for changing to another element if the target resists or is immune to fire
Are you sure about that?
Lol, I am never 100% sure of any statement in pathfinder. There is always a book with a new item, or a feat, or trait that I have never seen. This is a nifty little item, doubly useful because it doesn't compete with Jingasa for the head slot anymore :). When I mentioned no options, I just meant no in class options. Elemental Spell Metamagic comes to mind, a lesser rod of it would do much the same as this.

I didn't read your post in too much detail. I assumed you were already using some kind of rod to up the damage in your default calculation. The nice thing about the mask is that it can be used in conjunction with a rod.

Sovereign Court 2/5 RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Jayder22 wrote:
2. This only works when casting a sorcerer or bloodrager spell, so it does not work with the popular sorcerer1/wizardx build.

I've seen seen people argue that it does work at level 1 and it does work for other classes. While I don't personally agree with those arguments, that's not a discussion I am interested in holding at the game table.

Quote:
3. This is limited to only spells that the caster has spell focus or is a bloodline spell for.

That's not a limitation. You take a single feat (Spell Focus Evocation) and the problem goes away.

Quote:
Basically this would open up a few archetypes to players that want to be sorcerer blasters with the +2/dice damage option.

I don't think so. Rather, this would encourage cookie-cutter characters.

Although it would be nice if people would play more sorcerers (barring pregens or older characters, I haven't seen anyone at all play a sorc since the arcanist got printed), I don't think this is the way to do that.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kurald Galain wrote:
Jayder22 wrote:
2. This only works when casting a sorcerer or bloodrager spell, so it does not work with the popular sorcerer1/wizardx build.
I've seen seen people argue that it does work at level 1 and it does work for other classes. While I don't personally agree with those arguments, that's not a discussion I am interested in holding at the game table.

It certainly works at level 1, but his point was that people take a level of sorcerer so that they can take advantage of the bloodline arcana with their wizard spells, as the bloodline arcanas don't restrict themselves to only applying to sorcerer spells. Blood Havoc, on the other hand...

Blood Havoc wrote:
Whenever you cast a bloodrager or sorcerer spell that deals damage, add 1 point of damage per die rolled. This benefit applies only to damaging spells that belong to schools you have selected with Spell Focus or that are bloodline spells for your bloodline. This ability replaces the sorcerer’s 1st-level bloodline power or the bloodrager’s 4th-level bloodline power.

The bolded section is the important part; Blood Havoc explicitly only works with bloodrager or sorcerer spells, which has been clarified to mean spells cast using spell slots granted by bloodrager or sorcerer. Blood Havoc will not apply to any spell cast using spell slots from any other class.

3/5 Venture-Agent, Pennsylvania—King of Prussia aka Alexander Augunas

This is a fascinating conversation.

Sovereign Court 2/5 RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

SCPRedMage wrote:
The bolded section is the important part; Blood Havoc explicitly only works with bloodrager or sorcerer spells, which has been clarified to mean spells cast using spell slots granted by bloodrager or sorcerer. Blood Havoc will not apply to any spell cast using spell slots from any other class.

Like I said, while I don't personally agree with those arguments, that's not a discussion I am interested in holding at the game table.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kurald Galain wrote:
SCPRedMage wrote:
The bolded section is the important part; Blood Havoc explicitly only works with bloodrager or sorcerer spells, which has been clarified to mean spells cast using spell slots granted by bloodrager or sorcerer. Blood Havoc will not apply to any spell cast using spell slots from any other class.
Like I said, while I don't personally agree with those arguments, that's not a discussion I am interested in holding at the game table.

Arguments that are flat-out wrong shouldn't be factored into discussions of whether an ability is OP or not.

Sovereign Court 2/5 RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

SCPRedMage wrote:


Arguments that are flat-out wrong shouldn't be factored into discussions of whether an ability is OP or not.

But we're not discussing whether it's OP; there's different forums for that. We're discussing whether it should be allowed in PFS. Since it (1) causes arguments, (2) encourages cookie-cutter characters, and (3) is a straight power boost at zero cost, I believe the ban was well justified.


I've not really got a horse in PFS. Maybe someday at an event or something or if a friend drags me along I would.

But, this seems like a really cleanly written and straight forwards mutation. I can't imagine why you wouldn't allow it for PFS.

It's only a power boost to blasters, and as far as I know blasters are still the sub-optimal way to play sorcerer. Fun, but sub-optimal and nitch. This is an option that takes them from meh to playable and encourages you not to crossblooded and then switch to a Wizard/Arcanist. It's clearly written so you don't get a bonus with other classes. It makes not going crossblooded an option for blasters since +2 dice off Primal or Draconic or Orc or whatever is still within realm of consideration.

Far as I can tell, this is the kind of slightly more powerful option needed to make a slightly less powerful option come into balance and add more variety into the game.

3/5 Venture-Agent, Pennsylvania—King of Prussia aka Alexander Augunas

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kurald Galain wrote:
SCPRedMage wrote:


Arguments that are flat-out wrong shouldn't be factored into discussions of whether an ability is OP or not.
But we're not discussing whether it's OP; there's different forums for that. We're discussing whether it should be allowed in PFS. Since it (1) causes arguments, (2) encourages cookie-cutter characters, and (3) is a straight power boost at zero cost, I believe the ban was well justified.

Saying its a power increase at zero cost isn't exactly true. The cost is either a bloodline feat or your 3rd-level bloodline power.

As for encouraging cookie-cutter characters, I don't know if that's necessarily true either. I can only speak for my area, but unless someone's playing a kitsune enchanter, there are almost no routinely-played sorcerers in my lodge. (That was part of my pitch for the bloodline mutation mechanic originally, in fact.)

I think it could help to foster an identity for the sorcerer as, "the blastiest caster who ever blasted," but I don't know if that's necessarily true either. I would love to see some evidence that proves me otherwise, however. (I.e. don't just talk it—show it.)

Shadow Lodge

Kurald Galain wrote:
But we're not discussing whether it's OP; there's different forums for that. We're discussing whether it should be allowed in PFS. Since it (1) causes arguments, (2) encourages cookie-cutter characters, and (3) is a straight power boost at zero cost, I believe the ban was well justified.

1. Players argue over literally everything, so I reject that as a reason to ban something. The only potential argument I've seen mentioned here is just straight-up wrong; if someone argued that the fact that their character is trained in the Fly skill meant that they could flap their arms and fly around the battlefield, we wouldn't try to ban the Fly skill. Again: some idiot arguing something that the rules clearly contradict is not a basis for banning something, it's

2. Even if this did "encourage cookie-cutter characters", why does what others play really matter enough for you to call for a ban? The people who would do this already do, just with other options. Again, I reject this as a premise for banning something.

3. A "straight power boost at zero cost" would fall under the heading of "OP", so yeah, we are discussing that here.


Alexander Augunas wrote:

As for encouraging cookie-cutter characters, I don't know if that's necessarily true either. I can only speak for my area, but unless someone's playing a kitsune enchanter, there are almost no routinely-played sorcerers in my lodge. (That was part of my pitch for the bloodline mutation mechanic originally, in fact.)

I think it could help to foster an identity for the sorcerer as, "the blastiest caster who ever blasted," but I don't know if that's necessarily true either. I would love to see some evidence that proves me otherwise, however. (I.e. don't just talk it—show it.)

I just wanted to chime in and say that this is pretty much exactly why I felt obligated to actually enter a PFS thread and support it. I got to talking about it with some friends and we all agreed it was a really cool way to make more of an identity for the Sorcerer as a blaster. Which, is really something it should have as an iconic mythos feel.

Even then, I feel like Sorcerer could really use an archetype that compliments blasting to be able to get away with this. I have some ideas on that actually I wrote down.

Scarab Sages

SCPRedMage wrote:
Blood Havoc wrote:
Whenever you cast a bloodrager or sorcerer spell that deals damage, add 1 point of damage per die rolled. This benefit applies only to damaging spells that belong to schools you have selected with Spell Focus or that are bloodline spells for your bloodline. This ability replaces the sorcerer’s 1st-level bloodline power or the bloodrager’s 4th-level bloodline power.
The bolded section is the important part; Blood Havoc explicitly only works with bloodrager or sorcerer spells, which has been clarified to mean spells cast using spell slots granted by bloodrager or sorcerer. Blood Havoc will not apply to any spell cast using spell slots from any other class.

If that was the case, would it have been worded similar to the Arcane Discoveries?

Alchemical Affinity wrote:
Having studied alongside alchemists, you’ve learned to use their methodologies to enhance your spellcraft. Whenever you cast a spell that appears on both the wizard and alchemist spell lists, you treat your caster level as 1 higher than normal and the save DC of such spells increases by 1. Additionally, you may copy spells from an alchemist’s formula book into your spellbook just as you could with another wizard’s spellbook. You must be at least a 5th-level wizard to select this discovery.
Yuelral's Blessing wrote:
You cast any spells that appear on both the wizard and druid spell lists at +1 caster level and with +1 to the save DC. In addition, you may replace the material component of any arcane spell with gems of the same value. You must be at least a 5th-level wizard to select this discovery.

3/5 Venture-Agent, Pennsylvania—King of Prussia aka Alexander Augunas

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cao Phen wrote:
SCPRedMage wrote:
Blood Havoc wrote:
Whenever you cast a bloodrager or sorcerer spell that deals damage, add 1 point of damage per die rolled. This benefit applies only to damaging spells that belong to schools you have selected with Spell Focus or that are bloodline spells for your bloodline. This ability replaces the sorcerer’s 1st-level bloodline power or the bloodrager’s 4th-level bloodline power.
The bolded section is the important part; Blood Havoc explicitly only works with bloodrager or sorcerer spells, which has been clarified to mean spells cast using spell slots granted by bloodrager or sorcerer. Blood Havoc will not apply to any spell cast using spell slots from any other class.

If that was the case, would it have been worded similar to the Arcane Discoveries?

Alchemical Affinity wrote:
Having studied alongside alchemists, you’ve learned to use their methodologies to enhance your spellcraft. Whenever you cast a spell that appears on both the wizard and alchemist spell lists, you treat your caster level as 1 higher than normal and the save DC of such spells increases by 1. Additionally, you may copy spells from an alchemist’s formula book into your spellbook just as you could with another wizard’s spellbook. You must be at least a 5th-level wizard to select this discovery.
Yuelral's Blessing wrote:
You cast any spells that appear on both the wizard and druid spell lists at +1 caster level and with +1 to the save DC. In addition, you may replace the material component of any arcane spell with gems of the same value. You must be at least a 5th-level wizard to select this discovery.

Actually, your post proves an excellent point in the subtly of design.

Note blood havoc: bloodrager or sorcerer spell. This phrase means, "a spell cast in a bloodrager or sorcerer spell slot."

Note the other two abilities: "spell that appears on both the wizard and druid spell list" / "spell that appears on both the wizard and alchemsit spell list." This phrase means, "any spell that appears on one of those two lists."

You can be from a spell list but not cast as a spell from that class. For example, cure light wounds is on the witch spell list, but it is only a witch spell if cast by a witch.

Shadow Lodge

Alexander Augunas wrote:

Actually, your post proves an excellent point in the subtly of design.

Note blood havoc: bloodrager or sorcerer spell. This phrase means, "a spell cast in a bloodrager or sorcerer spell slot."

Note the other two abilities: "spell that appears on both the wizard and druid spell list" / "spell that appears on both the wizard and alchemsit spell list." This phrase means, "any spell that appears on one of those two lists."

You can be from a spell list but not cast as a spell from that class. For example, cure light wounds is on the witch spell list, but it is only a witch spell if cast using a spell slot from the witch class.

Pretty much what you said, but the bolded correction is important; a sorcerer 1/witch 10 is certainly a witch and a sorcerer, but a spell is only a "witch spell" if cast using the witch class, and a spell is only a "sorcerer spell" if cast using the sorcerer class.

I know this is what you were getting at, but there was enough ambiguity in the way you phrased that last sentence that I thought a clarification was in order.

3/5

SCPRedMage wrote:
Blood Havoc explicitly only works with bloodrager or sorcerer spells, which has been clarified to mean spells cast using spell slots granted by bloodrager or sorcerer. Blood Havoc will not apply to any spell cast using spell slots from any other class.

Where was this clarified?

In general when I see text that says things like "a sorcerer spell" I assume it's referring to a spell which is on the spell lists for sorcerers & wizards as traditionally this type of text is written assuming that wizard / sorcerer spells are pretty much the same thing. While I can understand your interpretation, I'd like to see where it was clarified to see if that clarification will apply to other areas of the PF rules.


TimD wrote:
SCPRedMage wrote:
Blood Havoc explicitly only works with bloodrager or sorcerer spells, which has been clarified to mean spells cast using spell slots granted by bloodrager or sorcerer. Blood Havoc will not apply to any spell cast using spell slots from any other class.

Where was this clarified?

In general when I see text that says things like "a sorcerer spell" I assume it's referring to a spell which is on the spell lists for sorcerers & wizards as traditionally this type of text is written assuming that wizard / sorcerer spells are pretty much the same thing. While I can understand your interpretation, I'd like to see where it was clarified to see if that clarification will apply to other areas of the PF rules.

There is a FAQ that states:

faq wrote:
General rule: If a class ability modifies your spellcasting, it applies to your spells from all classes, not just spells from the class that grants the ability. (The exception is if the class ability specifically says it only applies to spells from that class.)

The ability here says, (and I am paraphrasing)

"Whenever you cast a sorcerer spell that deals damage, add 1 point of damage per die rolled."

It doesn't say, whenever you cast a spell that deals damage, or whenever you cast a spell on the sorcerer's spell list, it specifically calls out sorcerer spells. To me, that is cut and dry. If there is dissenting opinion on that though, Perhaps it is worthy of taking to the rules discussion, getting consensus or even a faq on it.

If people think with that faq and the wording of the ability, it works with a dip, than I can see that causing contention at tables, so it is definitely an argument against allowing it. To me, maybe not enough in and of itself to bar entry, but I respect that viewpoint.

Venture-Agent, Utah—Provo aka Chess Pwn

same with arcanists,
"In addition, the arcanist can expend 1 point from her arcane reservoir as a free action whenever she casts an arcanist spell."

"An arcanist casts arcane spells drawn from the sorcerer/wizard spell list."

We've been shown many times that "arcanist spell" needs to come from an arcanist spell slot. Because there is no "arcanist spell list" as he uses the wizard/sorcerer list.

3/5

I could see that argument.
I misunderstood the original point and thought that a clarification had been made for that specific ability.

I would have expected it to be written in an exclusive manner in the second sentence of the ability which notes the ways in which the ability is restricted, rather than in the sentence where the listing the two spell lists for which the ability will function is found - again, probably because almost everything is sorcerer / wizard.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I see blood havoc as making it far easier to justify making a blaster sorc that doesn't have the draconic or orc bloodline. It evens out the power differential.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Evie Smith wrote:
Personally, I see blood havoc as making it far easier to justify making a blaster sorc that doesn't have the draconic or orc bloodline. It evens out the power differential.

Perhaps a campaign clarification? One that either keeps it off characters with one of those bloodlines, or (my preferred choice) keeping it off of crossblooded characters?

I'd rather let draconic sorcerers play with it, and I think the crossblooded interaction is the main issue.


Is there wording that allows it to stack with crossblooded? after all crossblooded doesn't stack with wildblooded because it alters bloodline abilities I would have thought that would apply here as well.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Abraham spalding wrote:
Is there wording that allows it to stack with crossblooded? after all crossblooded doesn't stack with wildblooded because it alters bloodline abilities I would have thought that would apply here as well.

Since it's not an archetype, and the ability has rules text detailing its interactions with archetypes, I'm pretty sure they can be legally combined.

Magic Tactics Toolbox wrote:

Although heirs to similar arcane bloodlines may share commonalities, the unique circumstances in which a bloodline enters a bloodrager or sorcerer’s lineage can result in the manifestation of particularly strange or unusual bloodline powers known as mutations. Whenever a bloodrager or a sorcerer gains a new bloodline power, she can swap her bloodline power for a bloodline mutation whose prerequisites she meets. Once this choice is made, it cannot be changed, and a bloodrager or sorcerer cannot swap a bloodline power that she has altered or replaced with an archetype for a bloodline mutation. A bloodrager need not be in a bloodrage to use her bloodline mutation powers.

Alternatively, a bloodrager or sorcerer can select a bloodline mutation in place of a bloodline bonus feat, provided her class level is at least equal to the level of the bloodline ability the mutation normally replaces.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kalindlara wrote:
Evie Smith wrote:
Personally, I see blood havoc as making it far easier to justify making a blaster sorc that doesn't have the draconic or orc bloodline. It evens out the power differential.

Perhaps a campaign clarification? One that either keeps it off characters with one of those bloodlines, or (my preferred choice) keeping it off of crossblooded characters?

I'd rather let draconic sorcerers play with it, and I think the crossblooded interaction is the main issue.

That's my thinking as well! Absolutely agree.


Thread might be 6 months old but maybe someone will read it:

An easy way to get rid of all the cross-blooding might be a ruling, that identical bonuses of different bloodline arcana don't stack (that is, the +1 bonus per dmg die rolled on several arcana).

This, in combination with a clarification in form of an FAQ/errata that changes the wording to

"Whenever you cast a bloodrager or sorcerer spell known that deals damage"

or

"Whenever you cast a bloodrager or sorcerer spell using one of your bloodrager/sorcerer spell slots that deals damage",

might just do the trick to empower blasters a little by limiting the almost retarded potential +3 on dmg dice for anyone dipping crossblooded to +1 and giving blasters a +2 bonus.

I am planning to start PFS play soon (but i have digged deep into the rule system in all its imperfection ;-) ) and building a blaster right now (that will not use crossblooded, because it would screw up his roleplay personality, and therefore would like to use blood havoc), so an official ruling would be nice .

Venture-Agent, Utah—Provo aka Chess Pwn

blood havoc is officially not allowed in PFS


Thomas Hutchins wrote:
blood havoc is officially not allowed in PFS

I know, but from what was posted above, i concluded, that this ban might be in order to take power from wizards dipping into crossblooded Orc/Draconic and taking Blood havoc.

Thus, a rules clarification might remove the reason to have Blood Havoc banned.

As it is now, it practically encourages people to go wizard and dip crossblooded without any serious drawbacks, while "true" blaster Sorcs, who want to deal damage are limited to the Orc OR Draconic Bloodline since crossblooded would cripple their casting ability (dipping wizards don't give a shi** about the spells known malus since they only take one level).

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Agent, Kentucky—Lexington

Jumping into this, as it is similar to the "magus spell" discussion. When the Magus said it did something to magus spells, that meant from slots on your magus spell slots and didn't apply to multiclass spells cast from other slots. This is a similar issue. It says sorcerer/bloodrager spells. That means spells cast from slots, not spells on the class spell list from other classes.

Venture-Agent, Utah—Provo aka Chess Pwn

yes, blood havoc was confirmed by author to be just actual sorcerer spells from sorcerer slots. That the blood arcanist didn't qualify.

Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / A discussion on Blood Havoc, and if you think it should be allowed. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.