
wraithstrike |
7 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |

A prepared caster such as a wizard or cleric can prepared a lower level spell in a higher level slot.
A spontaneous caster can use a higher level slot to cast a slot level spell.
A spellcaster always has the option to fill a higher-level spell slot with a lower-level spell.
Can the arcanist cast a spell prepared as a 3rd level spell using one of his higher level daily allotment of spells. As an example could I cast fireball(3rd level spell) with one of my daily slots that is assigned to 4th level spells?

Johnny_Devo |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Arcanists essentially follow the rules of prepared casters then they prepare their spells each day, and the rules of spontaneous casters when they actually cast them.
So, in this example, they prepare fireball in a third level spell slot. When they are actually casting that fireball, they follow spontaneous spellcaster rules. So the spontaneous caster that knows fireball as a third level spell can cast fireball at any time, and may spend any spell slot of third or higher level to do so.
If he chooses at the time of casting to apply metemagic, the spontaneous caster raises the casting time of the spell appropriately.
The only weirdness this creates is when the arcanists specifically prepares a metamagic spell, but this interaction is outlined already. In this case, it essentially treats the "empowered fireball" as a 5th level known spell before metamagic to the spontaneous caster. He can cast it with any of his 5th level or higher spell slots, and if he wants to apply any metamagic(except empower) to it, raise the casting time and minimum spell slot as normal.

wraithstrike |

Rules seem pretty cut and dried on this one. Is there a reasonable argument that Johnny Devo's summary is somehow incorrect?
Not in my opinion, but I can see something like "there is no way they are allowed to get the best of both classes" if someone is arguing from a point of what I would consider emotion, but if everyone is in agreement then I am satisfied.

Saethori |

Yeah, I think no FAQ is needed.
An arcanist can prepare a third level spell but cast it in a fourth level slot.
In theory, he could even prepare a third level spell as a fourth level spell, as wizards and other prepared casters can, but I suspect in this case it still requires a minimum of a fourth level spell slot to use.

wraithstrike |

Preemptively FAQ'ing something that hasn't actually come up strikes me as rude to the PDT.
I think that being reactionary instead of proactive is a bad way of doing things, and since they are more active with the FAQ's for now I figure now is a good time to get as many in as we can before we get into a situation where we don't get an FAQ for a few months.

Johnny_Devo |

Yeah, I think no FAQ is needed.
An arcanist can prepare a third level spell but cast it in a fourth level slot.
In theory, he could even prepare a third level spell as a fourth level spell, as wizards and other prepared casters can, but I suspect in this case it still requires a minimum of a fourth level spell slot to use.
Actually, I think we have all the precedents we need, already.
The prepared arcanist decides, for whatever reason, to prepare an un-metamagic'd fireball in a 4th level spell slot.
As per the rules of using a higher level spell slot, it retains all of its third level spell properties in terms of damage, spell resistance, saves, etc.
The spontaneous arcanist, at the time of casting, can now cast it as a 4th-or-higher level spell, with all the effects of a third level fireball. The spontaneous arcanist, if he so chooses, may apply metamagic to the inflated-slot fireball. This empowered 4th-level fireball now takes up a 6th-or-higher level spell slot, but deals damage and has saves as a normal 3rd-level fireball with the empowered alteration.
EDIT:
It's worth noting that the arcanist entry on spells actually prevents using spontaneous metamagic on a spell prepared with metamagic unless you have the appropriate exploit, but I think my examples still stand when those rules, I think.

dragonhunterq |

Actually, the question has merit, and answering it before it causes problems is thoughtful and a good thing.
What merit is there in FAQing a question where the answer is this straight forward? What possible counter-argument is there?
If someone can show me any reasonable ambiguity in the rules, then I will gladly FAQ.