Oracle and Imbue with Spell ability

[TriOmegaZero]

ShardRah wrote:

my point is that it's unfair to not allow my other players the option to take their chars to other tables outside out area/our two GMs just because they played with my char.

No one is going to stop your other players from bringing their legal PFS characters to other tables. What will happen is that they will be told "the character that imbued your characters with spells could not do so, and those spells do not carry over between scenarios regardless of legality, so you can play your characters but do not benefit from the imbued spells while doing so".

PFS Roleplaying Guild Guide pg23 wrote:

All spells and effects end at the end of an adventure

with the following exceptions.
• Spells and effects with permanent or instantaneous
duration that heal damage, repair damage, or remove
harmful conditions remain in effect at the end of
the adventure and should be noted on the character’s
Chronicle sheet.
• Afflictions and harmful conditions obtained during
an adventure remain until healed and carry over from
adventure to adventure (except as noted under Conditions,
Death, and Expendables on page 19).
• A character can have one each of the following spells on
an item or items that carries over between adventures:
continual flame, masterwork transformation (Pathfinder RPG
Ultimate Magic 228), secret chest, and secret page.

[Altaica]

Daw wrote:

Altaica,

They aren't lying to you, and they aren't wrong.

I'm not one saying that because I'm right you must be wrong

Quote:

You have come here to ask for advice from experienced if sometimes somewhat unsocialized players, they unanimously agree on what they give you (unanimity being rather rare on the forums) and you still question their advice. Odd.

I keep questioning because I don't follow their logic. I know that is the consensus that you don't get bonus spells at first lvl but it's obviously a problem that people read the rules and think I get bonus spells at first lvl or it wouldn't be in the FAQ. but as thesaurus and a build of a wizard without any explanation of the rules that when into building him doesn't a clarification of the rules it's a quotation of the rules.

A can't think of any explanation other than your guys are griefing the newbies. and so far nether can you.

[TriOmegaZero]

Altaica wrote:

A can't think of any explanation other than your guys are griefing the newbies. and so far nether can you.

The explanation is "the people that wrote the rules said it does not work that way".

Edit: Source.

[Blake's Tiger]

Quote:

Me:i would rather be a helpful jerk then a good intended idiot that ends up hurting those that he's trying to help.

Bluntness is not the same as rudeness.

Bluntness can be rude, intentionally or unintentionally.

Autistic people can appear rude by their difficulty in interpreting social cues.

However, autism does not make a person rude. Being intentionally rude is a choice. You have made multiple intentionally insulting comments. You are choosing to be rude, and you do a disservice to every autistic person I know, treat, have diagnosed, and will diagnose by using the diagnosis as a shield.

[Philippe Lam]

It is not a matter of feeling right and the others being wrong. It's a matter of whether it's feasible for the majority of the players, despite of if it makes some players unhappy or not.

Speaking as someone who has narcolepsia, I don't use the sickness as an excuse to be a D. It's unhelpful, border butterfly effect, to those who try to smooth themselves into a community. Any issue is better explained and more accepted with taking time to explain calmly, rather than taking a bullying approach. I shout at a table ? Not hiding behind that curtain, but trying to behave better later.

I have some autistic and Asperger friends, and they would be appalled if they read that and the now locked topic in the OP section of the forum.

[Ferious Thune]

I’m going to go ahead and hide this conversation, as I don’t think there’s anything else helpful I can contribute. I wish you the best of luck. I mean that sincerely, not as sarcasm. I’ve given the rules advice that I can give, not in an effort to prove you wrong, but in an effort to help you sit at a PFS table without encountering issues with your character. I don’t feel qualified to comment on the rest of the conversation.

[Blake's Tiger]

Altaica wrote:

A can't think of any explanation other than your guys are griefing the newbies.

Why would this public consensus of players be doing that?

Neurotypical people do things to gain something even if that something is feeling good for helping someone.

So what is the gain that all these neurotypical people have by, in your words, griefing newbies?

Furthermore, if we were doing something that flagrantly callous to new players and players with a disability for years, someone from the OPF or development would have shown to say that we were misrepresenting the rules and probably banned us from the boards.

[Blake's Tiger]

So let us back up to the beginning. Answer this one question first:

Is it at all possible that you are wrong (and that we neurotypical people are just explaining it poorly)?

[Sara Marie]

I removed some unhelpful comments with generalizations & stereotypes about autism.

This goes for everyone here: I generally recommend that folks read the forums assuming that other posters have also come to the discussion in good faith. Whether a person is asking questions or seeking clarification or providing an answer, opinion, reference or citation, assume they are doing so with good intentions. Arguing with each other does not help questions get resolved.

[Sara Marie]

It can be a frustrating experience to feel like you are explaining something as clearly as you can, but the other party isn't understanding and vice versa. Folks on our site are usually doing their best to be helpful and take time to answer questions. Additionally new players asking questions are likely experiencing the game in a different way and may be looking for different explanations than folks who have been playing for a year or more. There are many different books and rules and FAQs for Pathfinder and if you are not familiar with RPGs, it can be particularly daunting to try to figure out how various things interact. If you are getting frustrated or angry because of communication issues, take a break from the thread or the forums. If you feel like someone is posting here only to intentionally cause problems, please send an email to community at paizo.com. It is not appropriate to accuse other community members of being trolls in the middle of forum conversations.

[willuwontu]

From the CRB -> Rules for magic

Quote:

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.

You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question, and all level-dependent features must be based on the same caster level.

In the event that a class feature or other special ability provides an adjustment to your caster level, that adjustment applies not only to effects based on caster level (such as range, duration, and damage dealt), but also to your caster level check to overcome your target’s spell resistance and to the caster level used in dispel checks (both the dispel check and the DC of the check).

At level 1 you do not have a high enough caster level to cast those spells, therefore you can't cast them.

[Magicdealer]

Ok. I'm going to use the archives of nethys and paizo sources.

The archives of nethys is the official PRD for pathfinder. Announcement. The pathfinder rules apply to pathfinder society except where a pathfinder society resource specifically notes otherwise. You can also see some of the society specific rules there. Additionally, faq's and errata are binding for PFS.

With that established, let's break it down.

"Like other spellcasters, an oracle can cast only a certain number of spells per day of each spell level. Her base daily spell allotment is given on Table 2–5. In addition, she receives bonus spells per day if she has a high Charisma score **(see Table 1–3 of the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook)**."

Luckily, we can reference that section on the archives - and it'll be the most updated rules as well.

"In addition to having a high ability score, a spellcaster must be of a high enough class level to be able to cast spells or use spell slots of a given spell level. See the class descriptions in Chapter 3 for details."

Back to the class page. Here, we need to reference the chart shown under class features.

Here you can see that at level 1, the oracle only has 1st level spells per day. This is important because it feed up into what we've already looked at.

The oracle only gets those bonus spell slots from a high ability score if they have a high enough class level to cast spells or use spell slots of that level. At level one, the class level is only providing cantrips and 1st level slots. Because the class level is only providing 1st level spell slots at the highest, they can not use anything above 1st level spell slots. They won't receive their 2nd level spell slots (and thus be able to benefit from the bonus 2nd level spell slots from a high ability score) until they reach fourth level in oracle.

Now, we can look at that faq everyone has been tossing around.

"No. You only get the bonus spells if your class level grants you access to those spell levels. You can't even use them for lower-level spells. See page 16, Abilities and Spellcasters section: "In addition to having a high ability score, a spellcaster must be of a high enough class level to be able to cast spells of a given spell level. "

For example, a 1st-level wizard with 18 Intelligence has (according to table 1–3: Ability Modifiers and Bonus Spells) 1 bonus spell at spell levels 1, 2, and 3. However, he can only use the 1st-level bonus spell because as a 1st-level wizard he only has access to 1st-level spells (his class-based number of 2nd- and 3rd-level spells per day are "—", meaning "no access to spells of this level"). As soon as he becomes a 3rd-level wizard, he gains access to his 2nd-level spell slots and can use that bonus 2nd-level spell slot from his high Intelligence, and likewise for 3rd-level spells and bonus spells at wizard level 5.

Basically, ignore the columns for higher-level spells on table 1–3: Ability Modifiers and Bonus Spells until your class grants you access to those spell levels."

It's a big chunk of text, but let's break it down a bit.

"You only get the bonus spells if your class level grants you access to those spell levels." This reinforces what I showed above.

"However, he can only use the 1st-level bonus spell because as a 1st-level wizard he only has access to 1st-level spells (his class-based number of 2nd- and 3rd-level spells per day are "—", meaning "no access to spells of this level")."

This sentence is actually very important. It's telling you how to interpret the table - sections with those dashes mean no access to spells of this level.

Since the oracle at first level has dashes through all the 2nd to 9th level entries (reference my earlier screenshot) they have no access to spells of those levels. Because they don't have access to those spell levels through their class they can't use the bonus spells from having a high ability score for those slots.

Combine it together and you have your answer. Hopefully, the step-by-step here is helpful to you. :)

[Altaica]

Andre Roy wrote:

We have demonstrated that you are incorrect.

your only demonstration was a a build of a Wizard that didn't have bonus spell slots With out any explanation of the rules that When into making those decisions. I gave a build of a oracle that did have them. check.

Quote:

We have quoted the core book and the FAQ which are both PFS legal.[/url] What lvl do you think people Where giving the bonus spell slots on? Since you clearly stated that I'm the only one that made the mistake of reading the Core book and assuming that you get your bonus spell slots at lvl one because it says, "In addition, he receives bonus spells per day if he

has a high Intelligence score (see Table 1–3)" in fact every class with spell I've looked at used the exact same sentence with stat name changes

Quote:

But, despite this, you insist that you are right.

yes, but not about the spell slots. I'm right that you need to do more that give a pregen without bonus spells to issue a clarification that the commonly help view that you get your bonus spell slots at fist lvl and but don't get high lvl spells to put in them. THe commplete rules for on when you get you bonus spell slots, is "In addition, he receives bonus spells per day if he

has a high Intelligence score (see Table 1–3)" & "In addition to having a
high ability score, a spellcaster must be of a high enough
class level to be able to cast spells of a given spell level"

I find it hard to believe that your incapable of seeing that the rules on when you get your bonus spells slots aren't RAw.

Quote:

When the Organize play GM will refuse you at his or her table because your character is illegal and when the Venture-officer (be it Agent, Lieutenant or Captain)

There in no VO over Regional Venture-Coordinators :P its goes straight to paizo. But I doubt I could get the anyone that high up the totem pole attention. If I have a chance to make my case to some the doesn't assume that their is only one valid interpretation that is RAw. The bonus spells is completely rules as everyone else is doing it. and that the Core book is confuzing, which Paizo acknowledged is a problem in the FAQ, so their need to be better job is they want to not be lying when they say PFS is RAw only.

Quote:

will support the GM and tell you your character is not legal and therefore cannot be accepted on any tables.

I'm pretty sure group would choose to go non PFS than to kick me out of it. THou I'm not sure if the GM would choose me other being RVC which is possible is paizo don't allow my groups adventure to count towards his mandatory PFS sessions.

Quote:

when the Regional Venture-Coordinator will tell you the same thing..

the RVC checked my char sheet and oked except to having Ra as my deity.

Quote:

maybe you will accept that you are incorrect in this instance.

I doubt that even a RVC interpreting that you get you bonus spell slots at first level but don't get your higher level spells unless something other that your bonus slot makes them available to you is enough to get you to acknowledge that the current descriptions of bonus spell slots are inadequate.

[TriOmegaZero]

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

Seriously, folks:

1) The Abilities and Spellcasters section on page 16 says, "In addition to having a high ability score, a spellcaster must be of a high enough class level to be able to cast spells of a given spell level."

2) The wizard section on Spells on page 78 says, "A wizard can cast only a certain number of spells of each spell level per day. His base daily spell allotment is given on Table: Wizard." Other spellcasting classes have a similar entry.

So even if your Int is 44 (giving you bonus spells of level 1 through 9), you can't use those bonus spell slots until your class level is such that your class table grants you access to the appropriate level of spells.

Think of Table 1-3 as having a + in front of all those numerical values, so the 16-17 row's bonus spells per day columns read as follows:

0 —, 1st +1, 2nd +1, 3rd +1, 4th —, 5th —, 6th —, 7th —, 8th —, 9th —

If the listing in your class table is a number, you can add the value from Table 1-3 to that to see how many total spells of that level you can cast per day. If the listing is NOT a number (i.e., it's a dash), you can't add the value from Table 1-3 because you can't add numbers to dashes.

It's two rules in the book that work together, and it's clear unless you're deliberately trying to read it in a way that gives you something you shouldn't get.

Source.

[Oxzu]

If your group is willing to go non-PFS, there is still options for your GM to get credit. Perhaps you can convince your GM to run an adventure path in campaign mode for you?

[R. Sweet]

Altaica wrote:

There in no VO over Regional Venture-Coordinators :P its goes straight to paizo. But I doubt I could get the anyone that high up the totem pole attention. If I have a chance to make my case to some the doesn't assume that their is only one valid interpretation

...

In that detail, you are correct sir. There is an Organized Play Manager (or coordinator) that is over the RVC. I'm not sure of the title off hand.

Then later:

Altaica wrote:

the RVC checked my char sheet...

I'm curious. What part of the world are you in? May I ask which RVC ok'ed your PC with the higher level spell slots?

I've read enough of your posts to glean your thought process. I'd like to touch base with the RVC you spoke with to get his/her thought process on OKing a level 1 caster being able to cast Level 2, 3, 4, or greater level spells.

[Altaica]

Ferious Thune wrote:

Altaica wrote:

Or look at any spell caster stat block in any Paizo product.

Paizo know how the rules and supost to work so use rules as indented PFS in rules as written and Pazio is tarrable at writing clear rules. it's clear that it's a a commonly interpreted that " In addition, he receives bonus spells per day if he

has a high Intelligence score (see Table 1–3)." means that you get then as a base class feature to mean or "Bonus Spells from a High Ability Score: Can I use these even if my spellcasting class level isn't high enough to give me access to those spell levels?" wouldn't be in the Core FAQ
I shocked that you still find it unievivable that a newbie would read it that way.

[TriOmegaZero]

"Altaica” wrote:

I shocked that you still find it unievivable that a newbie would read it that way.

We all expect newbies to make mistakes like that. All of us make mistakes even after a decade of play. We do expect newbies to listen when corrected however.

[Warped Savant]

Altaica wrote:

I shocked that you still find it unievivable that a newbie would read it that way.

I think he's more shocked that after what everyone has said you're still trying to say that you're right and therefore everyone on here trying to help you with the rules is wrong.

The "-" on the chart of spells per day means that you don't have access to those spells and therefore you don't get extra spells for that level until you have access to those spells.

If it were to say "0" on the chart then you would get our extra spells for that level. (See Paladin or Ranger classes for an example of a class getting "0" on the chart for spells per day instead of a "-")

Also, Magicdealer laid everything out for you very well RIGHT HERE but you seem to be completely ignoring that.

I'm sorry that this is hard for you to understand, but you are wrong.
You don't get access to level 5 spell slots as a level 1 oracle.

[Altaica]

Warped Savant wrote:

As written, no, you can't transfer a spell to someone as an Oracle isn't a prepared caster but I would assum... wait.. you said you didn't want opinions so I won't bother giving mine.

Read the thread title I don't want opinions about if 1lvl oracles get bonus spells. That was just backstory the question was do oracles with IwSA

From the oracle desc "Unlike a cleric, an oracle need not prepare her spells
in advance."

from the core book, "Divine spellcasters prepare their spells in largely the same
manner as wizards do, but with a few d ifferences."

Oracles are devine spellcasters so they prepare spells, it just that is the don't do it they still get to cast them.

[Andre Roy]

So basically, you ask for advice here and in the Organized play Forum.

Everyone, in both subforum, agrees that your reading the rule is inaccurate. In support we cite:
- the Core rulebook - you refuse to accept this;
- the relevant FAQ - you refuse to accept this;
- the PF Oracle Iconic - you refuse to accept this
- Sean K. Reynolds' explanation - you refuse to accept this.

You asked for our advice, we gave it. And you refuse to accept it.

At this point nothing more can be said, you will persist in insisting that you are reading this correctly an unless we say that you are correct, you will refuse to listen to our advice.

Might as well just drop it as you will not get the rule validation that you are seeking.

[Oxzu]

Oracles does not prepare spells. that is what is written "Unlike a cleric, an oracle need not prepare her spells in advance." this is a specific rule for this class, that overrides the general rule "divine spellcaster prepare their spells".

combine this with the rule for IwSA, it makes IwSA incompatible with spells cast by an oracle.

[Warped Savant]

Altaica wrote:

Warped Savant wrote:

As written, no, you can't transfer a spell to someone as an Oracle isn't a prepared caster but I would assum... wait.. you said you didn't want opinions so I won't bother giving mine.

Read the thread title I don't want opinions about if 1lvl oracles get bonus spells. That was just backstory the question was do oracles with IwSA

From the oracle desc "Unlike a cleric, an oracle need not prepare her spells
in advance."

from the core book, "Divine spellcasters prepare their spells in largely the same
manner as wizards do, but with a few d ifferences."

Oracles are devine spellcasters so they prepare spells, it just that is the don't do it they still get to cast them.

As I said, as written, oracles are not prepared casters and since they don't prepare spells they can't transfer a prepared spell.

My opinion is that I would suspect any GM would allow you to transfer your oracle spells and it would count as using one spell from the slot of the level of the spell even though they aren't prepared spells.
But you come across as incredibly rude and didn't want opinions, just RAW. So again, I point out that RAW says that IwSA transfers prepared spells, of which an oracle will have none.

[Blake's Tiger]

Posts appear to have been removed, so I will try again more succinctly.

The original poster has claimed that the Gulf Region RVC is the GM who confirmed his belief that bonus spells gained from high ability scores grant Oracles early access.

Since a person of authority supported his belief, from his perspective, forum users are not going to be able to change that belief. It is something that has the best chance of being corrected locally.

[Philippe Lam]

Then there's another problem : Coming into a public place without any open-mindedness about being possibly wrong and refusing any debate, then there shouldn't be any posting from the OP. This is directly infringing some aspects of the "social contract".

[Blake's Tiger]

There might be one misconception I can clear up for the original poster:

Quote:

From the oracle desc "Unlike a cleric, an oracle need not prepare her spells

in advance."

from the core book, "Divine spellcasters prepare their spells in largely the same
manner as wizards do, but with a few d ifferences."

Oracles are devine spellcasters so they prepare spells, it just that is the don't do it they still get to cast them.

You have reversed the order of application.

The Core Rulebook was written first. The Advanced Player's Guide was written later.

At the time the CRB was written, the only divine casters were Cleric, Druid, Ranger, and Paladin.

These four divine classes all prepared their spells in advance. Their spellcasting corollary is the wizard.

The Oracle was introduced afterwards.

The text in the class description of spellcasting overrules the general rule of divine spellcasters originally written in the CRB:

"She can cast any spell she knows without preparing it ahead of time." APG pg. 42

and

"Unlike other divine spellcasters, an oracle’s selection of spells is extremely limited." APG pg. 43

So the Oracle does not prepare spells. They are a spntaneous casting class. The Oracle's spellcasting corollary is the sorcerer.

So Imbue with Spell Ability cannot be cast to any effect by an oracle as written.

[MrCharisma]

Hi all,

I just found this thread, late to the party I know, but here I am.

Altaica I have an idea: Why don't you ask your GM to read this thread, look up all the rules, and make a ruling about everything discussed here. This way you get a ruling from someone you trust, and regardless of which way the ruling goes you can then use the rules as you both understand it in your games.

(This is a good idea for anyone asking about rules, as there are frankly too many rules for any one person to know them all. This means the GM can look up the relevant rules and make sure they understand everything that'll be used at their table.)

[Sebastian Hirsch]

Blake's Tiger wrote:

There might be one misconception I can clear up for the original poster:

Quote:

From the oracle desc "Unlike a cleric, an oracle need not prepare her spells

in advance."

from the core book, "Divine spellcasters prepare their spells in largely the same
manner as wizards do, but with a few d ifferences."

Oracles are devine spellcasters so they prepare spells, it just that is the don't do it they still get to cast them.

You have reversed the order of application.

The Core Rulebook was written first. The Advanced Player's Guide was written later.

At the time the CRB was written, the only divine casters were Cleric, Druid, Ranger, and Paladin.

These four divine classes all prepared their spells in advance. Their spellcasting corollary is the wizard.

The Oracle was introduced afterwards.

The text in the class description of spellcasting overrules the general rule of divine spellcasters originally written in the CRB:

"She can cast any spell she knows without preparing it ahead of time." APG pg. 42

and

"Unlike other divine spellcasters, an oracle’s selection of spells is extremely limited." APG pg. 43

So the Oracle does not prepare spells. They are a spontaneous casting class. The Oracle's spellcasting corollary is the sorcerer.

So Imbue with Spell Ability cannot be cast to any effect by an oracle as written.

Great way to rephrase the issue ^^

MrCharisma wrote:

Hi all,

I just found this thread, late to the party I know, but here I am.

Altaica I have an idea: Why don't you ask your GM to read this thread, look up all the rules, and make a ruling about everything discussed here. This way you get a ruling from someone you trust, and regardless of which way the ruling goes you can then use the rules as you both understand it in your games.

(This is a good idea for anyone asking about rules, as there are frankly too many rules for any one person to know them all. This means the GM can look up the relevant rules and make sure they understand everything that'll be used at their table.)

Since what the OP has been talking about is Organized Play tables, things are a bit more complicated, not that I disagree with you, I personally think that letting any GM get access to all the information he or she needs is a good thing.

[DCII]

Andre Roy wrote:

So basically, you ask for advice here and in the Organized play Forum.

Everyone, in both subforum, agrees that your reading the rule is inaccurate. In support we cite:
- the Core rulebook - you refuse to accept this;
- the relevant FAQ - you refuse to accept this;
- the PF Oracle Iconic - you refuse to accept this
- Sean K. Reynolds' explanation - you refuse to accept this.

You asked for our advice, we gave it. And you refuse to accept it.

At this point nothing more can be said, you will persist in insisting that you are reading this correctly an unless we say that you are correct, you will refuse to listen to our advice.

Might as well just drop it as you will not get the rule validation that you are seeking.

I'm not sure who you got your initial advice from and I cannot see an RVC getting this incorrect (having said that I did find a 5th star VC ruling that bard's inspire courage and bless do not stack in combat - so anything is possible) but the folks here are accurate and are giving you good guidance. So I would ignore the original direction you were provided and follow their correct information.