Automatically Heightened vs Casting Cantrips at Specific Levels

[Temperans]

Nah the benefit of Signature spells is that you only need to learn it once. Not that you can downcast it.

Also downcasting implies using a lower spell level. But the situation is "casting a spell" "heightened to max level for whatever reason, usually cause cantrip/focus spell do automatically" "but wanting a lower level effect".

[Squiggit]

I think the "lore" arguments are pretty off base and kind of reaching.

For 90% of spells, there's no reason you wouldn't want them to be heightened, the heightening effect only makes it better.

So it seems pretty likely that either no one really thought about the couple of spells where you'd want to otherwise, or decided it was such an edge case and such a no-brainer to address that it wasn't really worth the page space to clarify, because a GM shutting a player down because they want to turn into a medium animal instead of a large animal is a little bit silly, who even does that?

[TomParker]

Temperans wrote:

Nah the benefit of Signature spells is that you only need to learn it once. Not that you can downcast it.

Also downcasting implies using a lower spell level.

I'm not sure if you're saying that you can't cast lower level versions, but yes, you can downcast signature spells.

Signature Spells wrote:

If you’ve learned a signature spell at a higher level than its minimum, you can also cast all its lower-level versions without learning those separately.

If you couldn't, your highest level signature spell would always be useless.

Quote:

But the situation is "casting a spell" "heightened to max level for whatever reason, usually cause cantrip/focus spell do automatically" "but wanting a lower level effect".

Yes, and as I said, there's nothing in RAW that supports casting a spell of a given level and having the effect be something other than the effect for that heightened level. If there's text somewhere that covers "level effect" as something other than "heightened level," please share it.

[Ravingdork]

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

Deriven Firelion wrote:

tivadar27 wrote:

Yep, I asked this previously, and there's no way to downsize. As for there being "no need" to add this, I completely disagree on that front. PFS is a *huge* part of Pathfinder play. It's not everything, but there, having something that isn't explicitly allowed is kinda a big deal.

Why would you care about doing this? To torture someone?

Extra damage doesn't do anything. There are no negative hit points, so you don't need to pull punches to keep someone alive if that is what you want to do. Whether or not an enemy is outright dead is up to the GM if you wanted to take something alive.

Yeah, using an example based on damage wasn't a good choice. That doesn't invalidate the overall point tividar27 and others are trying to make though. There are plenty of spells where it can make a big practical difference.

Cantrips?

Or one of the many other examples in this thread.

[Temperans]

TomParker wrote:

Temperans wrote:

Nah the benefit of Signature spells is that you only need to learn it once. Not that you can downcast it.

Also downcasting implies using a lower spell level.

I'm not sure if you're saying that you can't cast lower level versions, but yes, you can downcast signature spells.

Signature Spells wrote:

If you’ve learned a signature spell at a higher level than its minimum, you can also cast all its lower-level versions without learning those separately.

If you couldn't, your highest level signature spell would always be useless.

Quote:

But the situation is "casting a spell" "heightened to max level for whatever reason, usually cause cantrip/focus spell do automatically" "but wanting a lower level effect".

Yes, and as I said, there's nothing in RAW that supports casting a spell of a given level and having the effect be something other than the effect for that heightened level. If there's text somewhere that covers "level effect" as something other than "heightened level," please share it.

Maybe you missed the part in my original comment were I literally said it was not possible by RAW.

As for the Signature spell thing I can only imagine that we are using different definitions of "downcasting". When I hear the word it tells me "using a lower level effect". But it sounds to me like you mean "using a lower level spell slot".

In any case Signature spell is not giving you the ability to "downcast". Its letting you heighten spells freely. Its effectively "you know all levels of this spell, similar to prepared casters". Because, a prepared caster can prepare spells at any level, regardless of when they learn the spell.

[TomParker]

Temperans wrote:

In any case Signature spell is not giving you the ability to "downcast". Its letting you heighten spells freely. Its effectively "you know all levels of this spell, similar to prepared casters". Because, a prepared caster can prepare spells at any level, regardless of when they learn the spell.

It absolutely does. I quoted the CRB text in my reply. "If you’ve learned a signature spell at a higher level than its minimum, you can also cast all its lower-level versions without learning those separately." It allows you to heighten freely, "de-heighten" freely.

There's no point in making a 3rd level spell your 3rd-level signature spell if that's the highest spell level you can cast. But you could choose to know a 1st level spell heightened to 3rd, take that as your signature spell, and cast it at 1st, 2nd and 3rd. And it frees up another 1st level slot that you wouldn't normally heighten.

[Ezekieru]

Sooooo... there's a new item in SoM, the Cantrip Deck. Lets you burn up a consumable card to cast a cantrip at Level 1 with a +5 spell attack modifier or spell DC of 15. Two versions of the Level 1 item: 1 that's 5 copies of 1 cantrip card (such as Light), and 1 that is a deck of 24, one of each cantrip in the CRB. Can be used by non-spellcasters.

[Heather F]

I have removed some posts and quoted content. It is okay to have differing opinions, and disagreements can be had without insulting people. Please remember to flag offending posts and move on to avoid large amounts of content being removed.

[Temperans]

TomParker wrote:

Temperans wrote:

In any case Signature spell is not giving you the ability to "downcast". Its letting you heighten spells freely. Its effectively "you know all levels of this spell, similar to prepared casters". Because, a prepared caster can prepare spells at any level, regardless of when they learn the spell.

It absolutely does. I quoted the CRB text in my reply. "If you’ve learned a signature spell at a higher level than its minimum, you can also cast all its lower-level versions without learning those separately." It allows you to heighten freely, "de-heighten" freely.

There's no point in making a 3rd level spell your 3rd-level signature spell if that's the highest spell level you can cast. But you could choose to know a 1st level spell heightened to 3rd, take that as your signature spell, and cast it at 1st, 2nd and 3rd. And it frees up another 1st level slot that you wouldn't normally heighten.

I am saying that you are answering the wrong question. Signature spell is about letting spontaneous casters do what prepared casters can already do.

The question however, is about whether casters can lower the effective level of a spell cast at a high spell slot or automatically hightened. Such that:

Spell Slot level > Spell Effect level.

Not about casting an spontaneous spell known using a lower level spell slot. Which is: Spell Slot level = Spell Effect level.

[Cordell Kintner]

Temperans wrote:

The question however, is about whether casters can lower the effective level of a spell cast at a high spell slot or automatically hightened.

As I have mentioned before, there's absolutely no rules even remotely suggesting that this might be possible. If anything, Secrets of Magic confirms that it's not possible with the intro of classes that only have high level spell slots. For example, a level 20 Summoner only has 8th and 9th level spell slots.

I don't have the book with me, but they might explicitly be able to choose lower level effects since they don't have access to the low level slots. I will check when I get home tonight, or if someone else could check that would be great so we can finally shut down this argument.

[Aw3som3-117]

Even though I disagree with the conclusion, I have to admit that Cordell Kinter's correct in saying that the cantrip deck isn't a confirmation that cantrips you know can be "downcast" so to speak. It's an item that works a specific way. Nothing about it changes how a class's features work.

[Temperans]

Cordell Kintner wrote:

Temperans wrote:

The question however, is about whether casters can lower the effective level of a spell cast at a high spell slot or automatically hightened.

As I have mentioned before, there's absolutely no rules even remotely suggesting that this might be possible. If anything, Secrets of Magic confirms that it's not possible with the intro of classes that only have high level spell slots. For example, a level 20 Summoner only has 8th and 9th level spell slots.

I don't have the book with me, but they might explicitly be able to choose lower level effects since they don't have access to the low level slots. I will check when I get home tonight, or if someone else could check that would be great so we can finally shut down this argument.

....

Maybe you missed that I also said it was not possible given RAW? You know I did only say it multiple times, starting from my first post in this thread.

[Ravingdork]

It may be worth noting that Secrets of Magic has a number of spells that can potentially benefit from being "downcast."

[Cordell Kintner]

Sure, but they don't explicitly say that they can be downcast do they? Enlarge for example allows you to choose which effect you want, the level 2 or level 4 effect, and apply it to up to 10 targets.

If you want a lower effect from a spell, cast it with the lower spell slot, it's that simple. Focus spells and cantrips are designed to only become better as they increase in level, so casting they at a lower level doesn't really make sense.

And for those pointing at Wild Shape, again I point you at all the other possibilities that you can wild shape into:
Insect Shape
Ferocious Shape
Soaring Shape
Elemental Shape
Plant Shape
Dragon Shape
Monstrosity Shape
True Shapeshifter

As well as Form Control which lowers the level of Wild Shape while giving a longer duration.

[Aw3som3-117]

The way I see it cantrips are most definitely heightened to their highest level possible, but then the question is, can a 5th level casting of animal form ONLY use it's "heightened 5th" entry, or can it choose an entry there or lower. I would argue the latter makes more sense. For my reasoning, let's hop on over to "Heightened Spells"

Heightened Spells wrote:

In addition, many spells have additional specific benefits when they are heightened, such as increased damage. These extra benefits are described at the end of the spell’s stat block. Some heightened entries specify one or more levels at which the spell must be prepared or cast to gain these extra advantages. Each of these heightened entries states specifically which aspects of the spell change at the given level. Read the heightened entry only for the spell level you’re using or preparing; if its benefits are meant to include any of the effects of a lower-level heightened entry, those benefits will be included in the entry.

I know this is in no way conclusive, and probably not RAW, but the fact that heightening a spell is consistently seen as a benefit and not a drawback makes me, as a GM, never want to punish my players for doing it. If they see a heightened spell as a negative thing for any reason whatsoever, then in my mind heightening is not working properly.

[Ravingdork]

Cordell Kintner wrote:

If you want a lower effect from a spell, cast it with the lower spell slot, it's that simple.

Not so simple if you're a spontaneous caster and it isn't a signature spell.

In my experience it's 50/50 whether or not a given GM is going to let you do that.

[Guntermench]

At that point you made a choice not to make it a signature spell or take it at a lower level.

[David knott 242]

Ravingdork wrote:

Cordell Kintner wrote:

If you want a lower effect from a spell, cast it with the lower spell slot, it's that simple.

Not so simple if you're a spontaneous caster and it isn't a signature spell.

Also not so simple if you are a summoner who doesn't have any lower level spell slots.

[Guntermench]

Meh.

[Ravingdork]

David knott 242 wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

Cordell Kintner wrote:

If you want a lower effect from a spell, cast it with the lower spell slot, it's that simple.

Not so simple if you're a spontaneous caster and it isn't a signature spell.

Also not so simple if you are a summoner who doesn't have any lower level spell slots.

Oof.

[Guntermench]

Heightened Spells wrote:

Each of these heightened entries states specifically which aspects of the spell change at the given level.

This sentence reads to me that when you cast a spell at a certain level you get the effect of that level, not lower. Summoners and Magus would have to grab spell scrolls/wands/staves to use lower level spells.

[Cordell Kintner]

Ravingdork wrote:

Cordell Kintner wrote:

If you want a lower effect from a spell, cast it with the lower spell slot, it's that simple.

Not so simple if you're a spontaneous caster and it isn't a signature spell.

In my experience it's 50/50 whether or not a given GM is going to let you do that.

You can easily know the spell at a lower level to cast it at that level. It's your choice to not make it a signature spell, so don't act like you're the one being punished here.

[Ravingdork]

Cordell Kintner wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

Cordell Kintner wrote:

If you want a lower effect from a spell, cast it with the lower spell slot, it's that simple.

Not so simple if you're a spontaneous caster and it isn't a signature spell.

In my experience it's 50/50 whether or not a given GM is going to let you do that.

You can easily know the spell at a lower level to cast it at that level. It's your choice to not make it a signature spell, so don't act like you're the one being punished here.

Not me. All spontaneous casters.

Who said anything about punishment? It's merely a great area in the rules that has the potential to make many casters less sustainable.

[cheezeofjustice]

The mention of the Form Control feat does lessen the sting of the no downcasting thing. I had honestly overlooked that originally. I may not agree with the feat being necessary to control your form, but lowering it 2 levels does, for example, make it so Animal Form doesn't force the cumbersome Huge for an extra 3 levels. Even though in turn at that 9th character level spot when you first need it to not be locked out of Animal Shape that would knock you down an extra tier of the spell that downcasting would not (costing 5 THP, +1 AC, and 4 damage that just downcasting 1 level would not cost you). But I digress.

It also doesn't help other things that change in ways that could impede their use when they heighten such as Light.

I will personally be houseruling that you can downcast cantrips and focus spells that change in such a way. It doesn't invalidate Form Control, as a feat to get an added benefit if you downcast at least 2 levels is still pretty solid.

[Ravingdork]

Ravingdork wrote:

Cordell Kintner wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

Cordell Kintner wrote:

If you want a lower effect from a spell, cast it with the lower spell slot, it's that simple.

Not so simple if you're a spontaneous caster and it isn't a signature spell.

In my experience it's 50/50 whether or not a given GM is going to let you do that.

You can easily know the spell at a lower level to cast it at that level. It's your choice to not make it a signature spell, so don't act like you're the one being punished here.

Not me. All spontaneous casters.

Who said anything about punishment? It's merely a gray area in the rules that has the potential to make many casters less sustainable.

Stupid autocorrect. Typed in "gray" and it switched it on me to "great" completely changing the meaning behind my post. >:(

[Cordell Kintner]

Ravingdork wrote:

Cordell Kintner wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

Cordell Kintner wrote:

If you want a lower effect from a spell, cast it with the lower spell slot, it's that simple.

Not so simple if you're a spontaneous caster and it isn't a signature spell.

In my experience it's 50/50 whether or not a given GM is going to let you do that.

You can easily know the spell at a lower level to cast it at that level. It's your choice to not make it a signature spell, so don't act like you're the one being punished here.

Not me. All spontaneous casters.

Who said anything about punishment? It's merely a gray area in the rules that has the potential to make many casters less sustainable.

They aren't "less sustainable", they are intentionally designed that way. It's the perfect amount of sustainable. You're just comparing them to a version that can do what you want, which isn't how they're designed, and then saying "See! They're bad when you take this ability away!"

Stop thinking about it as a nerf. Look at the baseline, where casters cast spells at the level of the slot, and compare that to how much power increase someone would get if they could choose any lower level effect. Sure it's not a huge buff, but it's still a buff. So just say what you're really trying to do here; you're just trying to bend the rules to power up spellcasters.

And I understood that it was a typo, saying "great" there didn't really make sense.

[graystone]

Ravingdork wrote:

Typed in "gray" and it switched it on me to "great" completely changing the meaning behind my post. >:(

Hey, are you saying I'm not great? ;)

[Ravingdork]

graystone wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

Typed in "gray" and it switched it on me to "great" completely changing the meaning behind my post. >:(

Hey, are you saying I'm not great? ;)

Nah, you're pretty cool, Greatstone.

Edit: Dagnabbit!