My question is: can you use magical lineage with a level 0 spell?yes. FAQ needed? no.
Why? Metamagic at work: end level = [starting level + metamagic level]. Altering part of the equation doesn't alter the end result. [[starting level 0 -1] + metamagic level(min 1)] ends up with a valid result every time. The OP's mistake is focusing on one part and not looking at the formula as a whole. It's a -1 spell ONLY for "the spell’s final adjusted level", so it need not be a valid option outside of the equation.
There was no mistake on my part. It is a valid query. Since you treat the actual spell's level as one less, the question boils down to is: did the DEVs intend for it to be legal to select a 0 level spell with the trait or not? The consensus of people who have posted seem to be of the opinion that is the RAI. Many things that reduce an effective number in PF also includes "to a minimum of 0". It is not unreasonable to ask if the DEV's intention with the trait includes the option of selecting a level 0 spell for the chosen spell.
Attempting to end this...maybe someday we will get official clarification...
I feel like we should find a reason someone would want to take Magical Lineage on a 0-level spell (instead of a different spell, or some other trait) before we expect any official word from the PDT.
That "Can a Magus Whirlwind Attack" got a lot of people hitting FAQ, and as impractical as that is, it's still a lot better idea than "I'm going to take Magical Lineage: Detect Magic."
Amios Valeri, it basically comes down to this:
The dev team aren't lawyers, or language experts or any kind of specialist who would pay that much attention to a single word in a single trait. They wouldn't spend the time it takes to think of every situation that word could be interpreted before publishing a book.
Consider that you're getting hooked on the words "when" and "actual".
These are just 2 words from a 320 page book, which is one of dozens of books they've been working on.
Consider also that while your interpretation COULD be correct ("when" and "actual" meaning your spell counts as level -1 for an instant), it's equally correct to assume they mean something different.
"When" could mean "before", or it could mean "at the same time". "Actual" could mean the "base" spell level, or it could mean the "total" spell level.
And finally, you couldn't decide, so you came to the forums. Since you've asked, and been told you can do it, the only person standing in your way is yourself.
So the final question: DO YOU WANT TO USE THIS TRAIT IN THIS WAY?
If you do you've been given permission by the forums. It's not game-breaking, and it seems (to most) to be playing by the rules.
If you don't, also fine I guess it's time to find a new trait to give your healer.
My question is: can you use magical lineage with a level 0 spell?yes. FAQ needed? no.
Why? Metamagic at work: end level = [starting level + metamagic level]. Altering part of the equation doesn't alter the end result. [[starting level 0 -1] + metamagic level(min 1)] ends up with a valid result every time. The OP's mistake is focusing on one part and not looking at the formula as a whole. It's a -1 spell ONLY for "the spell’s final adjusted level", so it need not be a valid option outside of the equation.
There was no mistake on my part. It is a valid query. Since you treat the actual spell's level as one less, the question boils down to is: did the DEVs intend for it to be legal to select a 0 level spell with the trait or not? The consensus of people who have posted seem to be of the opinion that is the RAI. Many things that reduce an effective number in PF also includes "to a minimum of 0". It is not unreasonable to ask if the DEV's intention with the trait includes the option of selecting a level 0 spell for the chosen spell.
Attempting to end this...maybe someday we will get official clarification...
I don't think an official clarification is needed. The trait only decreases the effective spell level of a spell if metamagic has increased the level of the spell slot needed to cast the spell, correct? So you wouldn't apply the spell level reduction until the spell's spell level was increased.
Therefore, you can never have a -1 level spell, because the reduction applies after the metamagic has increased the spell's level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There was no mistake on my part.
No, it's totally a mistake to look at the level adjustment in a vacuum. By taking it out of context, it looks wrong. When taking as part of the entire metamagic equation there is no issue.
The consensus of people who have posted seem to be of the opinion that is the RAI.
This is another mistake. I'm looking at the RAW and seeing no issue, so I never had to examine the RAI. As I said in my last post, you come up with a valid outcome when using the equation as you add and subtract at the same time: this dilemma of ending up with a negative level is a false one.
It is not unreasonable to ask if the DEV's intention with the trait includes the option of selecting a level 0 spell for the chosen spell.
Nothing wrong with asking whatever you want. I wouldn't hold your breathe waiting on an 'official' reply. This is something I'm 99.999999% sure would NEVER be an issue at any table I ever went to and I wouldn't be surprised that any DEV that wandered in here would think the same. AS such, an official answer would prevent a problem that had a .000001% chance of occurring...
|
I'm going to chime in here with "I don't see a problem here".
Why? Same as most people, but I'm going to quote the PSRD, putting my emphasis on the last clause.
Benefit: Pick one spell when you choose this trait. When you apply metamagic feats to this spell that add at least 1 level to the spell, treat its actual level as 1 lower for determining the spell’s final adjusted level.
The actual spell level doesn't change. This is the same as with any meta magic (apart from heighten spell). The only thing that metamagic changes is the level of the spell slot used. All the other effects happen using the basic unadjusted spell level.
What magical lineage does is reduce the penalty. Note it only reduces the effective spell level for the purposes of determining the spell's final adjusted level.
It won't reduce the effective level of your offensive spells and make the DCs one less.
|
Solar Spell + Light has interesting interactions.I don't want to take the thread off its main point, but in what way is Solar Spell + light an interesting interaction?
I just looked at the feat and it is puzzling to me. For one, 'Note: Spells that do not inflict damage do not benefit from this feat.' seem to indicate to me that Solar Spell metamagic doesn't affect light spells in any way since the spell is not damaging.
The other thing I find puzzling is:
'Level Increase: +1 (a solar spell uses up a spell slot two levels higher than the spell’s actual level.)'
This is D20PFSRD source, so most likely that's a typo or error, I don't know what the actual source says.
Perhaps there are two sources of Solar Spell? Or it's been Eratta'ed and I haven't seen the new one. This is a metamagic from Corhorts and Companions. Solar Spell. +1 level and there are certain aspects of it that have no effect since Light inflicts no damage and doesn't normally cause dazzle or blind effects.
With Light, basically imposes an additional will save that De-buffs undead, oozes, creatures from the shadow plane, and Fungal creatures. Also dazzles everyone (friend or foe) in the AoE with no save. Haven't tried it in PFS, yet, since dazzling everyone in AoE doesn't seem like a great way to make friends.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like trying to find inconsistencies in weird corner cases in the rules, even though in practical terms it would be very easy to fix this for the GM if it comes up, is basically a bad faith way to approach the rules.
There is, after all, a reason that the game requires a person at the table be elevated to a special role in order to (among other things) make rulings. I doubt any GM anywhere would have trouble with "What spell level does a reach guidance require if I have the appropriate magical lineage"? Therefore, there's no official clarification required.
If someone even wanted to house rule "no magical lineage for level 0 spells" I doubt that would even come up.
There was no mistake on my part. It is a valid query. Since you treat the actual spell's level as one less,...My question is: can you use magical lineage with a level 0 spell?yes. FAQ needed? no.
Why? Metamagic at work: end level = [starting level + metamagic level]. Altering part of the equation doesn't alter the end result. [[starting level 0 -1] + metamagic level(min 1)] ends up with a valid result every time. The OP's mistake is focusing on one part and not looking at the formula as a whole. It's a -1 spell ONLY for "the spell’s final adjusted level", so it need not be a valid option outside of the equation.
You don't "treat the actual spell's level as one less." You "treat its actual level as 1 lower for determining the spell’s final adjusted level." There is no other sense in which the level is treated as if it were lowered, so there is no problem with the original spell being 0 level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When doing spells and metamagic, the game doesn't care about the transient state mid formula while the spell is being manipulated. It cares about the before state, if all the conditions are met, correct, and valid, and then only the final state. The game doesn't pause mid "metamagic application" to see if the game just broke. It just cares about the final result.
When you apply metamagic feats to this spell that add at least 1 level to the spell, treat its actual level as 1 lower for determining the spell’s final adjusted level.
You don't do half of the math. You set up the formula then you do it all at once. Then you get the end result. A 0-th level spell with magical lineage and a +1 metamagic will result in a 0th level spell. There is no issue. There is no game breaking. There is no apocalypse.
I always understood no.... not doable.
I always understood no.... not doable.
Because?
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
A more concise question for FAQ eligibility:
For the magical lineage trait, in which it states to treat the actual level of the spell as being 1 lower; is level 0 lowest you can make a spell become before adding the modifiers for the metamagic feats applied to the spell?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that the question of whether or not a floor exists absolutely matters to the OP's question. That the calculation only happens during the act of adding a metamagic feat doesn't change the fact that the existence of a floor creates two very different equations for calculating the spell's final level.
Using the original example, with no floor:
(0 - 1) + 1 = 0 (which would have the effect of unlimited metamagiced uses of the spell)
With a floor:
Max(0-1, 0) + 1 = 1 (which negates the effect of Magical Lineage for 0-level) spells.
I'm personally of the belief that a floor is intentional, but I didn't write the rules. I'd rule for the floor, personally, but that doesn't help answer for PFS.
Just adding my voice to the throng that says this obviously works and no FAQ is needed. This is neither corporate law nor computer code.
I'll be hiding this from my feed going forward as I think the thread hit its wall early on page 1.
If you *do* ever get a Dev response, I'd be flabbergasted if it was anything other than "No FAQ needed."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's no floor cause it doesn't say there's a floor, just that the end result can't be lower than the start. SO there's no rules problem here.
Like seriously, having a -1 effective spell level HAS NO RULES SAYING IT CAN'T HAPPEN. So why are you asking about it?
There's NO RULES that stop this from working. And we have rules to do it cause this says to do it. Thus we CAN do it and there are no rules saying we CANNOT. That means one can do it.
All the places that prevent negatives state they prevent negatives. If there's a situation that doesn't state they prevent negatives then they don't prevent negatives. Since this tells you to do something and doesn't restrict it at all, and no other rule restricts it at all, you're welcome to do it by the rules.
Because the last paragraph of my last post could have been what the DEV decided to print (which would give the same end effect of how (nearly) everyone treats magical lineage as any regarding selecting a level 0 spell with magical lineage, the question is why did the DEVs decide to go with the other version instead?
The possible correct answers are:
They chose the wording they did because they specifically do not want a level 0 to be a valid (effective) choice for the spell chosen.
They were unaware there is a better way to word the trait to prevent confusion and their intent that a level 0 spell can be (effectively) chosen for the spell chosen. It is because of their choice of wording, that makes the question of 'may you legally treat the level of a spell as being lower than the lowest-level spells in the game?' be a valid question.
I always understood no.... not doable.
Thank you, doc.
It has seemed that the majority of the posters on here thought I was alone.
Could you please be kind enough to explain why you always understood that it is not legally allowed to select a level 0 spell with the trait?
Note (to nearly everyone else): I am not pro-No regarding this. My intention is for us as a community to get an actual clarification regarding how the trait interacts with level 0 spells.
I personally want it to be 'yes'. It is because the RAW are technically ambiguous (yes, they are...) regarding the wording of the trait. See my above two posts if you are still in doubt about this.
I think that the question of whether or not a floor exists absolutely matters to the OP's question. That the calculation only happens during the act of adding a metamagic feat doesn't change the fact that the existence of a floor creates two very different equations for calculating the spell's final level.
Using the original example, with no floor:
(0 - 1) + 1 = 0 (which would have the effect of unlimited metamagiced uses of the spell)
With a floor:
Max(0-1, 0) + 1 = 1 (which negates the effect of Magical Lineage for 0-level) spells.I'm personally of the belief that a floor is intentional, but I didn't write the rules. I'd rule for the floor, personally, but that doesn't help answer for PFS.
Again, point to the rules that enforce a floor for determining the spell's final adjusted level.
It does not exist.
It might exist:
The next line of a spell description gives the spell's level, a number between 0 and 9 that defines the spell's relative power.
If a spell level must be between 0 and 9, then the value of -1, however temporary, does not exist.
But it could be true that this doesn't apply during the final level calculation.
Just as a scimitar does not become a piercing weapon, the spell level isn't actually -1. Therefore that rule doesn't apply.I think that the question of whether or not a floor exists absolutely matters to the OP's question. That the calculation only happens during the act of adding a metamagic feat doesn't change the fact that the existence of a floor creates two very different equations for calculating the spell's final level.
Using the original example, with no floor:
(0 - 1) + 1 = 0 (which would have the effect of unlimited metamagiced uses of the spell)
With a floor:
Max(0-1, 0) + 1 = 1 (which negates the effect of Magical Lineage for 0-level) spells.I'm personally of the belief that a floor is intentional, but I didn't write the rules. I'd rule for the floor, personally, but that doesn't help answer for PFS.
Again, point to the rules that enforce a floor for determining the spell's final adjusted level.
It does not exist.
It might exist:
The next line of a spell description gives the spell's level, a number between 0 and 9 that defines the spell's relative power.If a spell level must be between 0 and 9, then the value of -1, however temporary, does not exist.
But it could be true that this doesn't apply during the final level calculation.
It's true that the spell level is never actually -1, but during the process, the spell level is treated as -1, which rewords the question to "can a spell level be treated as a number not between 0 and 9?". The scimitar, in your example, is being treated as another valid weapon type, but the -1 spell level is potentially invalid.
I never commit to a decision on a post until AM BARBARIAN settles it for all.Though, thinking about it, I think the result will just be caster smash, problem solved, no further inquiry needed.
AM BARBARIAN is awesome. Everything is so simple with him.