|
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
As the title asks. By a strict RAW reading, the benefits of Spell Gem Understanding don’t say they do not apply when using a spell gem “legitimately” via having levels in an actual casting class. However, it also dosen’t by RAW say that the effective caster level equal to your envoy level also dosen’t apply if using your legitimate Spellcasting ability to use a spell gem.
So if, say, an Envoy 1/Witchwarper X with Spell Gem Understanding tried to use a spell gem the normal way from their Witchwarper CL, what would happen? Would their CL for the Gem be 1 due to only having 1 envoy level even if it was a gem of a spell on the Witchwarper list normally due to Spell Gem Understanding not turning off when they use a spell gem the normal way? If using an off-list Gem with Spell Gem Understanding, would they automatically be forced to use the effective CL equal to envoy level of 1 from Spell Gem Understanding, or could they use the fact Spell Gem Understanding dosen’t specify that it’s benefits (such as counting all spells from the techno, mystic, and WW as being your class spell list when using a spell gem) don’t apply/“turn off” when using a gem the “normal” way to cast the off-list gem using their Witchwarper CL instead of their effective CL from Spell Gem Understanding? Would the multiclass CL-stacking rules just overwrite the other rules at play here and let the Envoy and Witchwarper levels stack for spell gem CL, but not your normal Witchwarper Spellcasting CL?
Clarity on this would be most appreciated!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would rule as they use the better of all options.
So a WW9/E1 would use witchwarper spellgems at CL9. Non-witchwarper gems at CL1. A WW1/E9 would just use all spellgems at CL9.
|
|
I would rule as they use the better of all options.
So a WW9/E1 would use witchwarper spellgems at CL9. Non-witchwarper gems at CL1. A WW1/E9 would just use all spellgems at CL9.
Sadly that’s entirely a GM Fiat ruling which wound require a GM eratta to the RAW and not how they’d actually interact by strict RAW. While that might have been RAI, that’s just not how the RAW reads. I’m looking strictly for which of your Witchwarper CL or effective CL from Spell Gem Understanding would “override” the other when using a spell gem as an Envoy 1/Witchwarper X the “legit” way by RAW, not a suggestion for a GM eratta that fixes the unclear nature of the RAW. Regardless, thanks for the suggestion, it’s at least useful if I ever am GM side and have a player asking about this, but as a player wanting to know if something is or is not possible by RAW a suggested GM eratta is sadly not useful.
I think you're being a bit too... literal? pessimistic? on your reading of the rules.
You can use spell gems as if you were a spellcaster. For purposes of using spell gems, you treat all spells on the mystic, technomancer, and witchwarper spell lists as your class’s spell list, and you use Charisma as your key ability score for your spellcasting. Your effective caster level for any spell gems you use is equal to your envoy level
Only spellcasters are capable of using Spell gems—if you aren’t a spellcaster, you’re unable to make use of the knowledge that the gem unlocks. You don’t need to know the Spell within a Spell gem to use it, but the Spell must be on your class’s Spell list (or have otherwise been added to your Spell list) and you must have a high enough key ability score to cast it. If the Spell gem’s item level is higher than your caster level, once you’ve spent the full casting time of the Spell, you must succeed at a caster level check with a DC equal to the Spell gem’s item level + 1 or you fail to cast the Spell. If you fail to cast a Spell from a Spell gem, the Spell remains within the gem and you can attempt to use it again.
You don't really choose which class you're using to cast the spell, you just go through the following steps.
Say you're a character attempting to use a spell gem. Let's say, explosive blast.
You're a witchwarper 9, envoy 1.
1) Explosive blast is on your spell list. From both classes.
2) You have that 13 charisma because... well... duh. So that's another check.
3) So now, is explosive blast's CL higher than your caster level? Yes for envoy, no for witchwarper. Which means your caster level is high enough, so you don't need to make a check. It's an OR logic gate, not a AND logic gate.
4) you can use the spell with no check.
The same holds true if you were a technomancer 1/witchwarper 9
Now, you're still a witchwarper 9/envoy 1, and you're trying to cast mind thrust 3.
1) It's on your envoy spell list, not your witchwarper spell list.
2) Key ability is the thing you use, so your 8 wisdom isn't stopping you.
3) However, your CL from witchwarper doesn't count now. Only your envoy levels do, so you have to make the caster level check.
4) If you succeed you cast, if you don't you waste the spell gem.
You can;t do this if you were a technomancer 1/witchwarper 9, but it works exactly the same if you were a mystic 1/witchwarper 9.
Other way around. Now you're an envoy 9/witchwarper 1. Well... in both cases the envoy levels matter and the witchwarper one doesn't. You just use the envoy ability.
Logic gates, just in case:
A = true/false, B = true/false then (logic gate) C = true/false. Where A is class A's caster level, B is class B's caster level, and C is 'does the player have enough CL to bypass the CL check'.
A B then C
OR
f f then f
t f then t
f t then t
t t then t
AND
f f then f
t f then f
f t then f
t t then t
|
If you are a Mystic 2/Technomancer 7 and use a spell gem of fog cloud, what is your caster level?
It's on both classes spell list. Your Technomancer caster level is 7. Having a Mystic caster level of 2 doesn't "overwrite" the technomancer caster level, so why should the envoy ability? If they wanted it to overwrite other classes' abilities it would have been explicit.
Why is it not a choice instead of a logic equation? You can choose to cast as an envoy or you can choose to cast as a witchwarper. Just make a choice.
Typically you would always choose the higher caster level. Purposefully casting at a lower caster level with a spell gem is the kind of thing that might come up... once total among all players in the whole lifetime of this system?
Though to me it's actually an interesting rules conundrum even if, in play, I would just say 'sure, that sounds good, do that'. As an abstract rules argument though?
Say you're an envoy 1/technomancer 9, and you have an NPC with the party that you want to backstab. So, you cast invisibility on them, but you want it to run out too soon. Can you actually choose to cast invisibility from a spell gem as a caster level 1 envoy, or are you forced into the whole 'you have a sufficient caster level to cast invisibility, cast it as if it were a spell from your spell slots' schtick from a normal caster casting from a spell gem?