| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paizo's clarification falls in line with the rules and with all the other class paradigms.It's a PFS clarification, not a Paizo clarification. Those aren't equivalent things. And as I've said above, I don't thing the 'pay' arguments are really relevant: cost has no bearing on Common Access and that the change would require a tiered/nested Common Trait, say Sort-of-Common, where some Commons are treated differently than other Commons not because of the setting and how common it is but because of it's location in the rules...
It's not what I'd call keeping it simple.
Definitely seems like a PFS type of rule, given their "You must have the book physically/electronically to use that" philosophy. It is too bad they aren't somehow working more closely with the rules side so that the printed books are mostly aligned with PFS as they come off the press, but that could simply be impractical (certainly sounds tough).
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Definitely seems like a PFS type of rule, given their "You must have the book physically/electronically to use that" philosophy. It is too bad they aren't somehow working more closely with the rules side so that the printed books are mostly aligned with PFS as they come off the press, but that could simply be impractical (certainly sounds tough).
Even with PFS, there isn't typically an extra in-game cost to access materials from a non-core book. Fighters don't have to pay 16 gold to then be able to buy a 3rd level splat-book shield at the regular price.
I personally don't care about the extra costs, or the lack of immediate access for new spells for Clerics. I just hate the inelegance of the mechanics and the lore. Rarity tags have little value if you still have to look up other factors to determine how accessible something is. And how does the lore explain this? Deities grant their clerics the ability to cast certain spells. But some smaller number of spells are only available to those clerics who both please their gods AND have exchanged money with the proprietor of Midtown Spell Shack.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey everyone!
It's come to light in the Pathfinder Society due to a rules clarification that Clerics and Druids do not automatically add common spells from books other than the CRB to their list of spells they can prepare and cast, and must instead use Learn a Spell to gain those common spells.
I'd like to steer clear of discussing the RAW in this thread, since the OPM has said that the above is RAI, as in literally the designer intent of the Cleric and Druid classes. I suspect we'll receive an errata to that effect at some point.
Given that this makes them much more like Wizards (though not entirely, as they effectively begin play with all of the CRB spells on their list (in their books to extend the spellbook metaphor)), do you think that they should have been given a Spellbook-like class feature to indicate that learning new prayers and such would likely be a core aspect of the class?
Firstly, I agree with the poster who mentioned that it doesn't seem economical to create a new rule to cover a corner/edge case since not everyone will use non-CRB material.
Secondly, that is a design feature that I didn't know about and is VERY surprising. I was under the impression (possibly from 3.x) that a cleric 'received' their magic from their god/divinity/whatever and as such always had access to every cleric spell that there could be or was.
To me it makes sense that wizards, witches, warlocks, sorcerers, and even oracles and druids to have to 'learn a spell' but not so much for cleric. An interesting bit of trivia.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I personally don't care about the extra costs, or the lack of immediate access for new spells for Clerics. I just hate the inelegance of the mechanics and the lore. Rarity tags have little value if you still have to look up other factors to determine how accessible something is. And how does the lore explain this? Deities grant their clerics the ability to cast certain spells. But some smaller number of spells are only available to those clerics who both please their gods AND have exchanged money with the proprietor of Midtown Spell Shack.
That's what is bothering me also. Going through the appendix of Gods & Magic, there's about 30 deities that grant spells from that book or the APG. It seems wrong to make clerics pay to cast the 'marquee spells' of a faith.
"Welcome to the Church of Sairazul, young initiate! The Crystalline Queen is eager to embrace you in her benevolent family. But before we go any further, let us discuss how you will pay to learn her initial mysteries. We have a very affordable payment plan for..."
|
For poster complaining that this is a 'PFS clarification' and therefore not broadly applicable, remember that the 'Ancient Elf/ Elf Atavism build' clarification was first issued in a PFS-cobtext but is broadly applicable. Neither that nor this issue was the result of the OP team's decision
Kobolds being Common, OTOH, is a PFS-specific rule.
For the record, I hate that all prepared casters, not just Clerics and Druids, need to jump through hoops to learn spells. I don't like this rule at issue at all.
I personally don't care about the extra costs, or the lack of immediate access for new spells for Clerics. I just hate the inelegance of the mechanics and the lore. Rarity tags have little value if you still have to look up other factors to determine how accessible something is. And how does the lore explain this? Deities grant their clerics the ability to cast certain spells. But some smaller number of spells are only available to those clerics who both please their gods AND have exchanged money with the proprietor of Midtown Spell Shack.That's what is bothering me also. Going through the appendix of Gods & Magic, there's about 30 deities that grant spells from that book or the APG. It seems wrong to make clerics pay to cast the 'marquee spells' of a faith.
"Welcome to the Church of Sairazul, young initiate! The Crystalline Queen is eager to embrace you in her benevolent family. But before we go any further, let us discuss how you will pay to learn her initial mysteries. We have a very affordable payment plan for..."
Really, this seems much easier handled with, yes that spell Whirling Scarves in gods in magic sounds like something you would have taught you, so yes you can have that in your spells known for free.
It actually seems less reasonable to consider the alternative of above, where all clerics are supposed to access everything anyone might consider common somewhere immediately.
"Welcome to the Church of Sairazul, young initiate! The Crystalline Queen is eager to embrace you in her benevolent family. But before we go any further, let us start going over all those tricks all the other faiths teach before we delve into our lady's own mysteries. Well, by your your goblin friends grandchildren's birth I suspect we should be ready to begin... her studies."
The cost is perfectly relevant. Wizards have a spellbook, which they get 2 spells each level they advance for free, as long as it fits a requirement. Clerics get everything common from the core rulebook for free, and have the capability to learn anything else common in their tradition as long as they get a copy of the spell. (purchase, finding, accessing from patron, etc)
It is perfectly relevant for a Priestess of Desna being taught by another who you knows has access to a scroll of dancing scarves, to either be given it for free, or give them the free opportunity to roll a Learn a Spell check.
I much prefer that spells be allowed to be common, in additional books without having to immediately retroactively have these spells taught to all clerics/druids/etc.
But as a GM, yes I imagine being willing to be lenient on things that fit with a character concept. And past that would try to be reasonable with availability of scrolls of spells, which would be a purchasable method of learning, less immediately relevant seeming spells.
Note, I love that the faiths have domains, that grant non-divine spells to divine casters to grant some extra variety. But this opens the door for more variety, so I'm for it. I'd hate to have all those spells gated behind Uncommon and potentially require feat expenditure to get.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh no, clerics and druids don’t get everything for free. /s
Some characters get free items at creation, everyone has to pay for more items. Clerics and druids get a nice number of free spells known at creation, everyone has to pay for more spells known.
it has nothing to do with free. its about the logical consistency and coherence of the rules and the lore.
| 15 people marked this as a favorite. |
Really, this seems much easier handled with, yes that spell Whirling Scarves in gods in magic sounds like something you would have taught you, so yes you can have that in your spells known for free.
Isn't that exactly what the "Uncommon" tag is for?
Uncommon: Something of uncommon rarity requires special training or comes from a particular culture or part of the world. Some character choices give access to uncommon options, and the GM can choose to allow access for anyone.
Check with your GM. Maybe you can have it as just one of your standard options. Maybe you can buy it. Maybe you haven't made the right choices to have or buy it. Maybe the whole party can get access to it because of that thing they did. That's "Uncommon".
Calling a spell "common", but then saying you need to access it in a different way, though maybe for free if you ask your GM is clunky, and again doesn't fit well with lore.
Calling a spell "common", but then saying you need to access it in a different way, though maybe for free if you ask your GM is clunky, and again doesn't fit well with lore.
I genuinely don't think it is intended to fit within the lore, and is simply a rules construct. But since I don't particularly agree with the decision, that may be coloring my read. I'd have preferred them to keep things consistent and arbitrarily declare anything outside of core as uncommon, but that the only Access requirement is the Learn a Spell activity instead of a feat or achievement of some sort. This "common, but only sort of" designation they've chosen instead is a bit weird.
The only thing I like to add is this ruling imo makes Wizards/Witches better than Druids and Clerics for spells known.
Yes clerics and druids get a lot of spells known for free but so many are just so situational and will probably never be used.
It is odd that Cleric/Druid "better" spells known will actually be a hindrance since as time goes there will be more interesting spells and I feel Wizard/Witch being able to just choose what they want is actually better.
So by the "new" ruling I actually would rather my Druid/Cleric have a spellbook now than their current casting which just feels worse to me. Originally I thought Druid/Cleric knowing spells was great but now it feels worse than every other class.
Druid/Cleric of course have a lot going for them though but the spending gold to learn any new spells just feels bad to me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Definitely a bummer. My druid went to the lodge and pre-ordered the scrolls, but it sounds like they won't even be shipping until Neth or Kuthona.