Simple Question:
Can a Spellslinger, A Wizard who does not know any 0 level spells (Besides Detect & Read Magic), use a 0 Level Spell Trigger item on the Wizard Spell List(Besides Detect & Read Magic) Without using a UMD Check?
Yes. Spell Trigger and Spell Completion items require that the spell is on your spell list. A spell slinger has no 0-level slots, but still has the spells on his list.
EDIT: From the Use Magic Device skill section:
"Normally, to use a wand, you must have the wand’s spell on your class spell list. This use of the skill allows you to use a wand as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list. "
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since spellslinger wizards can't cast other zero level spells no.
Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell.
the archetype modifying your class needs to be taken into account when evaluating what your "class" is. Otherwise it screws over every archetype that lets you cast spells from a different class.
So, let me try to understand your points, starting with Dairfaron:
Spell Trigger and Spell Completion items require that the spell is on your spell list. A spell slinger has no 0-level slots, but still has the spells on his list.
So, your claim, as far as I understand, is the removal of the Cantrip Class Feature keeps intact the 0 level spells in the spell list, but the Spellslinger has no way of accessing them.
As for LordKailas' Point:
Since spellslinger wizards can't cast other zero level spells no.(...)The archetype modifying your class needs to be taken into account when evaluating what your "class" is. Otherwise it screws over every archetype that lets you cast spells from a different class.
So, your claim is removing the Cantrip Class Feature also Removes the spells from the spell list... I've taken some time to think about screwing over archetypes with a similar ruling, but I'm coming up blank, and I would like an example. Also, the loophole with classes not being able to cast the spells being able to use spell trigger items may apply, noted here:
Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell. This is the case even for a character who can’t actually cast spells, such as a 3rd-level paladin.
So, from my understanding, it seems like it comes down to whether or not Removing the Cantrip/Orison Class Feature removes 0 level spells from the list, or if this counts towards the "Can't cast spells, but in the right class" Loophole. So, here's the wording:
Wizards can prepare a number of cantrips, or 0-level spells, each day, as noted on Table: Wizard under “Spells per Day.” These spells are cast like any other spell, but they are not expended when cast and may be used again. A wizard can prepare a cantrip from an opposition school, but it uses up two of his available slots
So, thoughts?
So, your claim is removing the Cantrip Class Feature also Removes the spells from the spell list...
That's not exactly what im saying. I'm saying that loss of the cantrip feature prevents the class (not the specific character) from casting the other 0 level spells. Whether or not the specific character can cast the spell is irrelevant. Maybe they are too low level, maybe thier casting stat is too low it doesn't matter. All that matters is that the class is capable of casting the spell. Maybe the character can cast the spells, but it's because of a feat that is unrelated to the class. The character still can't use the related spell trigger items.
I've taken some time to think about screwing over archetypes with a similar ruling, but I'm coming up blank, and I would like an example.
ok, fair enough.
eldritch scoundrel is a rogue that gets wizard spells. If we base it purely on rogue they cant use any spell trigger items.nature bonded magus gets druid spells. The magus would be denied using spell trigger items even though those spells are added to their class list.
dandy (ranger) gets bard spells instead of ranger spells. they would be able to use spell trigger items for ranger only spells and unable to use spell trigger items for bard only spells.
trapper (ranger) cant cast spells at all but would still be able to use ranger spell trigger items.
feyspeaker (druid) adds wizard spells. The druid would be denied using spell trigger items even though those spells are added to their class list.
There are more, but i think it illustrates what im saying. It matters what the "class" can cast which includes any modifications from archetypes.
|
Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell. This is the case even for a character who can’t actually cast spells, such as a 3rd-level paladin.So, from my understanding, it seems like it comes down to whether or not Removing the Cantrip/Orison Class Feature removes 0 level spells from the list, or if this counts towards the "Can't cast spells, but in the right class" Loophole.
Somewhere there should be a statement on classes that trade away Spellcasting not qualifying for that. So, like, a 3rd level Paladin that has taken an archetype that trades away Spellcasting can't use spell-trigger items.
Spellslinger completely replaces cantrips, then get two back as 1st level spells. I think it's a fair interpretation that they have replaced that class feature, so they can no longer activate spell trigger items for those spells.
Or to put it another way, the only cantrips they can specifically prep as 1st level spells are detect magic and read magic. If the other cantrips were really still on their spell list, then they would be able to prep any of them in a higher level slot.
That's different than their opposition school spells, which are still on their spell list and just take two spell slots to prep.
The core problem seems to be that there is no clear statement about what requirement you have to fulfil in order to use a want.
The Wand description reads (as correctly quoted by LordKailas):
"Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell. "
Meanwhile the Description under Use Magic Device Reads:
"Normally, to use a wand, you must have the wand’s spell on your class spell list. This use of the skill allows you to use a wand as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list. "
Okay, so for the most straightforward case those wordings don't contradict each other: If a regular Wizard uses a wand of a spell he can't cast YET, he has to emulate a higher caster level and that's it. Meaning that having the spell on your list and being able to cast it is generally regarded as identical.
Now in the case presented by jedi_pika that isn't all that obvious. Let's look as what the Spellslinger archetype reads:
"This ability replaces cantrips, but the spellslinger gains the detect magic and read magic cantrips and places them in his spellbook. He can cast either of these as 1st-level spells."
From the regular Wizard class:
"Cantrips
Wizards can prepare a number of cantrips, or 0-level spells, each day, as noted on Table: Wizard under “Spells per Day.” These spells are cast like any other spell, but they are not expended when cast and may be used again. A wizard can prepare a cantrip from an opposition school, but it uses up two of his available slots (see below)."
Seeing this, the core question of the argument boils down to the following question:
Does the Cantrip class feature only add slots for 0-level spells that are on your list anyway or does the wizard spell list not include 0-level spells per deafault and they are added to the spell list by the Cantrips class feature?
Since the Cantrips class feature doesn't say that it adds the spells to your list, I would assume that option 1 is correct and you could indeed use wands of cantrips without UMD on a spellslinger.
However, as Ferious Thune states, the way that two cantrips are "posthumously" added to your list of 1st-level spells suggests that the Spellslinger removes all 0-level spells from his class list.
That being said, ask your GM. The Spellslinger ( I have played one) is an extremely specific archetype that excels at one trick (massively increasing spell DCs and sometimes dealing 50% more damage on a nat20) while sacrificing A LOT of good stuff, not to mention the extra feats you will have to take to make your gunslinging effective when you run out of spells (and handle misfires). My GM thought it was stupid to lose cantrips and let me keep them, maybe you can persuade your GM to do the same.
|
|
Okay, so for the most straightforward case those wordings don't contradict each other: If a regular Wizard uses a wand of a spell he can't cast YET, he has to emulate a higher caster level and that's it. Meaning that having the spell on your list and being able to cast it is generally regarded as identical.This is incorrect. When using a wand there is only one check involved, whether the spell is on your class list or not. You never need to emulate a caster level when using one.
Also, a wizard doesn’t need a umd roll or caster level check at all for a wand of a spell that is on their list, whether it’s higher level than they can cast or not.
The issue with spellslinger is that it’s written in a way that you can never cast those cantrips, no matter how many levels you take in Wizard. Which is generally interpreted as removing them from your list.
Something comparable would be Thassilonian mage, which can’t cast spells from their opposition schools at all. They wouldn’t be able to use a wand of those spells either without UMD, because they are no longer on their spell list.
Sorry I confused wands with scrolls. But I guess that doesn't hurt the point of my post.
|
|
Just saying that they're comparable, not that they are exactly the same. Thassilonian Specialist is definitely more clearly written in that respect. It does come down to the las line you quoted and how a GM interprets that. To me, if it's no longer a spell you could prep (provided you have a high enough level slot), then it's not a spell that's on your spell list anymore. It's the whole Paladins and Rangers who trade out spell casting can't use wands thing again. I wish I could track down where that was stated, as it would make this a lot easier.
Both the warrior of holy light and the skirmisher offer exact wording stating that the removal of their spellcasting also removes their ability to use wands and scrolls of their respective classes' original spells, though.
So, once again, it just comes down to Exhibit A is written like hot garbage, Exhibit B is written well enough to understand. Both are written in purple crayon, and some of the vowels are backwards in both... but you kind of just have to assume that Exhibit A is supposed to be the same as Exhibit B.
Exhibit A:
This ability replaces cantrips, but the spellslinger gains the detect magic and read magic cantrips and places them in his spellbook. He can cast either of these as 1st-level spells.
Exhibit B1:
This class feature replaces the paladin’s spells class feature. A warrior of the holy light does not gain any spells or spellcasting abilities, does not have a caster level, and cannot use spell trigger or spell completion magic items.
Exhibit B2:
This ability replaces the Ranger’s spells class feature. Skirmishers do not gain any spells or spellcasting ability, do not have a caster level, and cannot use spell trigger and spell completion magic items.
I personally believe that the Spellslinger Wizard treats all Wizard Cantrips as if they were removed from the Wizard list... except the very two specific exclusions listed. Granted, it isn't worded like the other archetypes, so maybe it isn't supposed to be like the other archetypes.
Who knows? If only there was some sort of standard we could fall back on.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wands are spell trigger items.
Spell Trigger: Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it’s even simpler. No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell. This is the case even for a character who can’t actually cast spells, such as a 3rd-level paladin. The user must still determine what spell is stored in the item before she can activate it. Activating a spell
trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.
A class is modified by the archetype we take, so we must look at the modified class, not the base one.
A Spellslinger can cast cantrips besides Detect magic and Read Magic?
No, never.
It fulfills the Spell trigger requirements? No, as the requirement is that your class will allow you to cast the spell.
The requirement doesn't care if it is or isn't in your spell list, it case about your ability to cast the spell with your class abilities.
I don't think it'd work, but do people really use wands of cantrips? They seem - not quite useless, but unlikely to be worth getting in PF1.
At low levels I like to drop 0-level wands with various degrees of uses left... things like Detect X, or Mending, or Light, or Sift, or Mage Hand, or Create Water, or Know Direction... they generally get used. Anyone with UMD can make the check, and they fill in little, out of combat roles.
Never seen anyone ask for one or spend money on one, though.
|
|
I’ve seen wands of detect magic for investigators before, since they can boost spellcraft pretty high, but can’t identify items without some way to cast it. I could see wanting one of those on a spellslinger, which fortunately should still work, as that’s one of the two cantrips they can prep, but spending a 1st level slot to cast detect magic once is pretty harsh.
|
|
Probably PCs aren't interested in them, but several cantrips wands would be worth the gold for adventurers.
Think of how many explorers in our world would have been saved by a wand of Purify food and drink or one of Detect poison. The latter would be a godsend for a botanist studying new species. Detect magic and Detect poison for forensic work. That kind of wands has plenty of uses, the only limit is that people using them for professional use in a life long career would prefer a permanent item with limited uses in a day to a wand.