| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another one:
As was recently brought up on reddit and during playtest, the current rules as written make it sound as if the bounded casters can't use all the spell levels in staves as to cast from a staff you need to be able to cast spells of the matching spell level and they eventually lose the ability to cast lower level spells.
Is this intended?
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Another one:
As was recently brought up on reddit and during playtest, the current rules as written make it sound as if the bounded casters can't use all the spell levels in staves as to cast from a staff you need to be able to cast spells of the matching spell level and they eventually lose the ability to cast lower level spells.
Is this intended?
An extremely close read of the way the spell casting class feature works (in basically every class that has it, including the magus and the summoner) reveals that getting more spell slots and increasing the level of spell you can cast are actually separate features of the ability.
As you increase in level as a magus, your number of spell slots and the highest level of spells you can cast from spell slots increase, shown in table 2-2
Note that it says "increase" and not "increases." That means it's a verb with more than one subject. Getting more slots and getting higher spells are distinct things. And nowhere does it say that losing those slots takes away the ability you originally gained to cast spells at that level.
From what I can tell, not having an available slot at that level is not mechanically distinct from having had some at that level but having expended them all - losing spell slots does not take away the basic ability to cast spells of any level up to the highest spell slot you get.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
From what I can tell, not having an available slot at that level is not mechanically distinct from having had some at that level but having expended them all - losing spell slots does not take away the basic ability to cast spells of any level up to the highest spell slot you get.
That in no way answer the question though: To use a staff a requirement is "able to cast spells of the appropriate level". A 100% valid reading of that is 'has slots to cast spells from': IE A high level wave caster is unable to cast a spell using a lower level slot of an "appropriate level". It's something that really should be clarified.
Sorry if this doesn't belong here but I confused on the Twisting Tree Magus' staff traits. I know that it's die get increased and gains agile, and you can elect to two-hand it for a bigger die plus more traits. But if I two-hand it, does it keep the agile trait? My gut says no as there's no 2 handed weapons with agile but I'm unsure.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
That in no way answer the question though: To use a staff a requirement is "able to cast spells of the appropriate level". A 100% valid reading of that is 'has slots to cast spells from': IE A high level wave caster is unable to cast a spell using a lower level slot of an "appropriate level". It's something that really should be clarified.
From what I can tell, not having an available slot at that level is not mechanically distinct from having had some at that level but having expended them all - losing spell slots does not take away the basic ability to cast spells of any level up to the highest spell slot you get.
That reading makes it impossible to use a 4th level spell from a staff if you have already used your 4th level spell slots, as you then are not "able to cast spells of the appropriate level."
That reading makes it impossible to use a 4th level spell from a staff if you have already used your 4th level spell slots, as you then are not "able to cast spells of the appropriate level."
No it doesn't. If you read it as "able to cast spells of the appropriate level", IE has slots of that level, it in no way matters if you have used that slot or not. Having the ability to use slots of an "appropriate level" is in no way impacted by casting spells out of them. You're still a spellcaster even if you currently have no spells you can cast.
Flexible Casting calls out that the only requirement is you have at least one 1st level spell so that you can use all of your slots.
Is that a specific rule for Flexible Casting? IE, is it noted that is it a general rule or is it only noted in the specific swapping of spells for Flexible Casting?
There's nothing I can see that stops Spontaneous casters from using higher level slots on staves for lower level spells either, so I don't see why this is an issue.
I don't know of anything that allows it. Under spontaneous casting it talks about heightening a spell to use in a higher level slot by raising it's level. Do you know of an instance of the rules specifically mentioning being able to slots a lower level spell in a higher one? IE, say a 2nd level spell in a 5th level slot? I don' know of any.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
They might be waiting until the book actually drops before they address any of this issues directly.
|
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
That reading makes it impossible to use a 4th level spell from a staff if you have already used your 4th level spell slots, as you then are not "able to cast spells of the appropriate level."No it doesn't. If you read it as "able to cast spells of the appropriate level", IE has slots of that level, it in no way matters if you have used that slot or not. Having the ability to use slots of an "appropriate level" is in no way impacted by casting spells out of them. You're still a spellcaster even if you currently have no spells you can cast.
Yes, you are. But "has slots of that level" and "can cast spells of that level" are not actually tied together in the rules. That's why you're still a spellcaster even if you have no spell slots available. Because having spell slots and the ability to cast spells are separate things, as described in the class feature itself. And nowhere does it say you lose the ability to cast spells just because you lose spell slots.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, you are. But "has slots of that level" and "can cast spells of that level" are not actually tied together in the rules. That's why you're still a spellcaster even if you have no spell slots available. Because having spell slots and the ability to cast spells are separate things, as described in the class feature itself. And nowhere does it say you lose the ability to cast spells just because you lose spell slots.That reading makes it impossible to use a 4th level spell from a staff if you have already used your 4th level spell slots, as you then are not "able to cast spells of the appropriate level."No it doesn't. If you read it as "able to cast spells of the appropriate level", IE has slots of that level, it in no way matters if you have used that slot or not. Having the ability to use slots of an "appropriate level" is in no way impacted by casting spells out of them. You're still a spellcaster even if you currently have no spells you can cast.
If you go back and look at the spell casting feature of full casters, all casters start with the ability to cast level one spells and the highest level of spell you can cast increases according the various charts. But you never actually lose the ability to cast lower level spells as a bounded caster. That language is not present. Spell slots and highest level of spell you can cast are two separate things.
They might be waiting until the book actually drops before they address any of this issues directly.
They may well be. Myself, I've been asking questions as I don't have the new material yet.
In Flexible Casting it says you HAVE to have one first level spell so that you can use all of your spell slots. You can make the rest whatever you want. They can freely heighten regardless, so every spell slot of equal level or higher will allow you to cast spells if you're a prepared caster.
That reads pretty specific to Flexible to me. Also for the prepared caster, knowing the spell and being able to cast it could be different things.
As to heightened: "When you heighten your spell, the spell’s level increases to match the higher level of the spell slot you’ve prepared it in or used to cast it." This means if you use a 8th level slot to cast a Blur, it's an 8th level spell and is meaningless in figuring out if you can cast 2nd level spells.
It says in the spontaneous section, you can castFeather FallAcid Arrow at second level for example (Feather Fall is an bad example since it just needs a charge) from a staff with a tenth level slot if you so choose.
This doesn't negate the "appropriate level" text: the core is, of course, written with the assumption that casters WILL be able to cast spells lower than the max level they can and that makes "appropriate level" easy. I have no way to know if combining "appropriate level" with "they can expend 1 charge from the staff and one of their spell slots to cast a spell from the staff of the same level (or lower)" means they can or can not use spells of a level they can't normally cast [without the staff] from a staff. So for a bog normal sorcerer, the staff is easy to figure out. For a wave caster though...
It's specific to Flexible Casting only in that it's the only way to run into the issue.
It's clearly not if you're trying to use it to prove something about wave casting...
It's not meaningless in figuring out if you can cast 2nd level spells. It means you can cast any 2nd level spells. To cast a spell you just need an equal level or higher slot.
No, it means you can cast a spell of the level equal to your slot: that is specifically what heightened states. You heighted a spell, it's level is the slots level and NOT the base level.
Same, from this text, for Spontaneous. If you have a slot of equal or higher level, and it's on your list, you can use it to cast a spell from a staff.
AGAIN, that ignores the "appropriate level" text. Nothing in that overrides that.
You never lose the ability to cast lower level spells, only to use lower level spell slots.
Where is that said? Does wave casting say that? Heightening to the level of slot you have doesn't mean you can cast it at it's base level. AGAIN, unless you can explain what "appropriate level" is, you can't say that it doesn't care about the slots you have as "appropriate level" and slot might mean you CAN'T cast spells you do not have slots for.
"Characters of spellcasting classes can cast a certain number of spells each day; the spells you can cast in a day are referred to as spell slots.": this sure seems to say you can't cast spells without slots.
So you can't cast 6th level spells from a staff if you only have 5th level slots, but nothing stops you from casting 1st level spells if your lowest slot is 2nd level or higher.
I'd love for the rules to actual state that that in tangible terms I could point to: as of now, I can't.
You don't need to be able to cast it at its base level, you just need to be able to cast it.
Then you aren't casting spells of that level and to some that means they are NOT an "appropriate level". It's kind of the whole reason I asked. What you are describing is casting spells at a higher level and in no way shows that you can cast the spells at lower levels.
Nothing there says you need to be able to cast 2nd level spells with 2nd level slots.
Some DM's I've played under read "appropriate level" and to them that was EXACTLY what you needed and I have nothing to point to to disagree with.
The rules in very tangible terms state that Spontaneous casters can cast a lower level spell from a staff with a higher level slot.
AND ONCE AGAIN, that in NO way overcomes "appropriate level" that is needed to use the staff to cast any spell. The fact that staves allow you to use a higher level spell slot to use their spells in no way proves that you can use a staff to cast a spell of a level that the caster in unable to cast without the staff: that is up to "appropriate level" to figure out.
With that, I'm out. #1 we're going in circles [you see a clear answer and I do not], #2 this is a thread about collecting questions and not a debate thread and #3 I'd like to read the source material for these issues.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fundamental question: What, exactly, is a spell? The great druid Bonewits said "A spell is a process, not a thing" — but he didn't live on Golarion, and it's possible that on Golarion, he was wrong. Either way, followup question: is a first level spell heightened to some higher level the same spell, or a different one? Why?
|
|
Fundamental question: What, exactly, is a spell? The great druid Bonewits said "A spell is a process, not a thing" — but he didn't live on Golarion, and it's possible that on Golarion, he was wrong. Either way, followup question: is a first level spell heightened to some higher level the same spell, or a different one? Why?
It is a different spell, as a spontaneous caster cannot automatically cast different versions. If they were the same spell, rather than similar spells, they would be able to.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Quick example:
Staff of protection
- protection lvl 1
- circle of protection lvl 3
- circle of protection, heightened lvl 4Now, the possible outcomes:
1) the character knows the lvl 3 circle of protection spell but not the heightened version( a sorcerer, for example).
The sorcerer would then be just able to cast the lvl 3 version of circle or protection.
He won't be able to cast protection, since he hasn't got it as a spell.
He won't also be able to cast the lvl 4 circle of protection because he neither doesn't know that spell as a lvl 4 spell nor has that specific spell as a signature spell.
2) the character knows all spells of the appropriate level ( a wizard, for example, or a sorcerer who managed to learn either protection and circle of protection, in addition to the heightened version of the latter, whether it's from a signature or a lvl 4 spell. Not that if it's from a lvl 4 spell he needs to have either lvl 3 and lvl 4 spell to be able to cast both of them).
Magus is no different from a wizard.
Given a spellbook and the fact he knows the spell, he'll be able to cast any spell from the staff.
He'll be expending a higher level spell slots to cast those spells, at some point, but that's it.
A summoner, on the other hand, is going to have hard time dealing with them, because of the limited spell repertoire.
Note: staves rules have been written 2 years ago, not with wave spellcasting into account.
Last one, I am not sure about ring of wizardry working on a Magus, but I guess it could even if it talks about "additional spells" And the Magus doesn't have spells of that level at some point, to begin with.
But would be strange for him being able to benefit at a certain level range and then be unable to do so.
Anyway, apart from some clarification, I hope paizo would consider add the equivalent for the other traditions.
Are you saying a spontaneous caster can only cast spells from a staff that are in their spell repertoire? That wasn't my understanding. I thought they just have to be on their spell list aka in their tradition.
|
|
Are you saying a spontaneous caster can only cast spells from a staff that are in their spell...Quick example:
Staff of protection
- protection lvl 1
- circle of protection lvl 3
- circle of protection, heightened lvl 4Now, the possible outcomes:
1) the character knows the lvl 3 circle of protection spell but not the heightened version( a sorcerer, for example).
The sorcerer would then be just able to cast the lvl 3 version of circle or protection.
He won't be able to cast protection, since he hasn't got it as a spell.
He won't also be able to cast the lvl 4 circle of protection because he neither doesn't know that spell as a lvl 4 spell nor has that specific spell as a signature spell.
2) the character knows all spells of the appropriate level ( a wizard, for example, or a sorcerer who managed to learn either protection and circle of protection, in addition to the heightened version of the latter, whether it's from a signature or a lvl 4 spell. Not that if it's from a lvl 4 spell he needs to have either lvl 3 and lvl 4 spell to be able to cast both of them).
Magus is no different from a wizard.
Given a spellbook and the fact he knows the spell, he'll be able to cast any spell from the staff.
He'll be expending a higher level spell slots to cast those spells, at some point, but that's it.
A summoner, on the other hand, is going to have hard time dealing with them, because of the limited spell repertoire.
Note: staves rules have been written 2 years ago, not with wave spellcasting into account.
Last one, I am not sure about ring of wizardry working on a Magus, but I guess it could even if it talks about "additional spells" And the Magus doesn't have spells of that level at some point, to begin with.
But would be strange for him being able to benefit at a certain level range and then be unable to do so.
Anyway, apart from some clarification, I hope paizo would consider add the equivalent for the other traditions.
That is what Nethys says. Casting and recharging only needs the spells to be on your spell list, not in your spellbook or repetoire.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Are you saying a spontaneous caster can only cast spells from a staff that are in their spell repertoire? That wasn't my understanding. I thought they just have to be on their spell list aka in their tradition.Not sure either, to be honest.
Took part into a discussion few weeks ago where it was also pointed out that it was referred to spells obtained through a different tradition, like the ones a cleric gets from his deity or the one a sorcerer might get from crossblooded evolution ( seems a good point, though I admit I am not entirely convinced because of balance ).
Also, the "tradition" stuff to me falls into the "too good to be true" group ( as well as being able to cast anything from that tradition, from wands/staves to scrolls, by simply having a basic dedication which gives that specific tradition ).
I really hoped they said something in SoM, but akaif they didn't.
Sure, I think those additions make sense in the cleric's case and others. However, given your framework staves would be extremely limited in utility because it would be rare for all the spells on a staff to match the ones in their repertoire/prepared for the day/in spellbook. My understanding of scrolls/wands/staves is that they’re there to expand the spells a caster has available, not merely add more casts of their prepared/repertoire spells. If they wanted it limited to spell repertoire, prepared spells, or spells in spellbook, I think they would have used that language. From what I’ve seen, the consensus seems to be the tradition list, but I’d be interested in the views of other people.
|
I think the numbers for the base version of the Five-Feather Wreath spellheart are off.
Base version is a spell attack of +8 and a DC of 18, it should be +7 and 17 respectfully, as the overall math for spellhearts should put them 2 behind an on-level caster.
______
Page 31 - Time Traveler background. Calls the bend time ability a reaction but the ability has the Free action icon instead.
p110: Healing Well
The listed range is 30 ft, but the text says that the well appears in a square you touch. That text should be excised or updated to reflect the 30 ft range; or else the range in the spell block should be updated to match the text.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Runelord: The archetype says
you lose the ability to prepare or cast any spell from your school's prohibited schools. You remove all spells of those schools from your spell list
This needs some clarification on how it interacts with spellcasting archetypes. What does "your spell list" mean exactly?
Can you
- not cast those spells as wizard spells, but you could cast them from an arcane spellcasting archetype like rune witch or magus?
- not cast spells of those schools as arcane spells, but you could cast those spells from a non-arcane archetype like cleric or druid?
- not cast any spells that belong to those schools and are on the arcane list, no matter how you cast them? (So you could cast heal from your cleric archetype, but not vampiric touch)
- never ever under any circumstance cast spells from those schools, no matter which tradition you use?
It would also be nice to know if the loss of those schools also prevents you from using innate spells and focus spells of those schools.
I also assume the inability to cast those spells does not prevent you from using them as scrolls or wands if you use Trick Magic Item. But that might be worth clearing up as well.
|
|
The other spellhearts are +7 and DC of 17, but they are lvl 3 items. The Five-Feather Wreath is a lvl 4 item, so 1 higher DC/Spell Attack seems right.I think the numbers for the base version of the Five-Feather Wreath spellheart are off.
Base version is a spell attack of +8 and a DC of 18, it should be +7 and 17 respectfully, as the overall math for spellhearts should put them 2 behind an on-level caster.
Good catch! I missed it was a 4th level item.
|
|
Runelord: The archetype says
you lose the ability to prepare or cast any spell from your school's prohibited schools. You remove all spells of those schools from your spell listThis needs some clarification on how it interacts with spellcasting archetypes. What does "your spell list" mean exactly?
Class archetypes affect your base class only. ("Class archetypes always alter or replace some of a class's static class features," PF core pg 219.) So they shouldn't affect other multiclass archetypes you may gain at all.
While I could see an argument that it might affect which innate spells you have access to - I think that's not the intention, but I can see the argument - focus spells are never on any spell list, so they aren't affected either.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Runelord: The archetype says
you lose the ability to prepare or cast any spell from your school's prohibited schools. You remove all spells of those schools from your spell listThis needs some clarification on how it interacts with spellcasting archetypes. What does "your spell list" mean exactly?
"Spell List" is the informal and functional term used for the spells you have access to.
It doesn't so much matter about tradition or where the spells come from, as there are lots of ways to add spells to your spell list even if they are outside of your tradition.
For example, the definition of the tradition trait reads:
Tradition This entry lists the magical traditions the spell belongs to. Some feats or other abilities might add a spell to your spell list even if you don't follow the listed traditions.
In addition, look at the new Elementalist Spell List
Elementalist Adjustments: Replace your spell list with the elemental spell list. Your actual magical tradition is unchanged, but you choose your spells from the elemental list instead.
So a spell list is simply that, a list of spells you can access.
Having a spell removed from your spell list simply means, then, that is the spell would be on your spell list from any source, remove it. Simple!
- not cast those spells as wizard spells, but you could cast them from an arcane spellcasting archetype like rune witch or magus?
I would say no, as your list is your list, regardless of source.
- not cast spells of those schools as arcane spells, but you could cast those spells from a non-arcane archetype like cleric or druid?
Same as above.
- never ever under any circumstance cast spells from those schools, no matter which tradition you use?
Looks like it.
I also assume the inability to cast those spells does not prevent you from using them as scrolls or wands if you use Trick Magic Item. But that might be worth clearing up as well.
Trick Magic Item would work just fine. You basically treat them as if they aren't there at all and can use other abilties accordingly.
It would also be nice to know if the loss of those schools also prevents you from using innate spells and focus spells of those schools.
Focus spells aren't on the school lists themselves. Tradition spell lists and tradition traits are different. Just because a focus spell you have has, say, the Evocation trait and evocation is one of your prohibited schools, because that focus spell isn't on the spell list, you won't be effected (though I doubt this would come up often).
Innate spells are a tricker one.
There is a question of specific vs general and how that would apply.
I'm not so sure on how to treat a later ability which gives you access to a specific spell (the runescarred archetype for instance) and how that would jive here.
I feel like the overall rule of "specific beats general" would apply, but I'm not certain would work in all cases.
Giving you the ability to cast a spell is not the same as adding it to your spell list. As, being on a spell list, generally has additional parts to it when it comes to prepared casting. An ability that just lets you cast the spell and can't otherwise interacted with feels like a different case.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for all the input so far. But I think making part of the rules quote bold in my last post might have been a mistake. Lots of focus on the spell list issue, but no mention of the fact that the archetype outright says
you lose the ability to prepare or cast any spell from your school's prohibited schools
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Spell lists and casting ability for any class you MCD into are kept separate from each other and from your base class (see the Spellcasting Archetypes rules found in the core book). Change wrought by a class archetype should have no impact on your multiclass spellcasting. Likewise, spellcasting from other sources, such as ancestry feats, is distinct from any casting you might or might not get from your class.
For example, Merisiel is a thief rogue, and therefore cannot prepare or cast spells. Nothing, however, prevents her from taking Otherworldly Magic and getting an arcane cantrip, even though her class does not allow her any casting capability.
Class archetypes affect your base class. That's it.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Page 105
The spell's Duration is one minute but in the text of the spell it says "You isolate the two targets for 1 round." Sustaining the spell is not mentioned anywhere.
On a note to other people, Paizo staff have posted before that they do find these threads useful but what they care about is that somebody found something confusing enough to post it. Additional Discussion as to whether a particular errata is justified is irrelevant to them and just clogs the thread and makes the things the staff does care about harder to find.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The eidolon trait states that the eidolon can ONLY use items with that trait, but all other text - including in the same trait - implies that only refers to magic items. Can this be clarified either way?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While working to add this book to TOS 2nd PRO edition, I noticed that for the 'Heightened (9th)' for the Angel Form, they say the forms are Large.. does this ALSO apply to the Choral which specifically starts 'small'?
TOS Admin
The Only Sheet
The Tattoo Artist feat says you get formulas for four magical tattoos of 2nd level or lower.... correct me if I'm wrong, but there aren't four magical tattoos of second level anywhere I can find.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
They are coming in Grand Bazaar next month.
Page 197
Under the Pride Emotion in Cathartic Magic, the Emotional Fallout Entry has "Spell: mirror image." I assume this is an artifact from an earlier version of the rules as no other emotion has a spell for Emotional Fallout.
Page 200-201
In the Crushing Ground Focus spell the Failure condition mentions a -10 ft. penalty to speed, but no duration is listed.
Page 213
The Terrain Shield feat doesn't have an action symbol but should probably be a Reaction.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not a typo per se, but the auditory trait can only effect creatures that can hear, which means Haunting Hymn's crit effect makes enemies immune to itself and that feels kind of weird.
Not exactly a true errata concern - more like something that seems odd to me:
p. 99/100 - demon form/devil form - the damage on some of these attacks seems really off. For example for the barbazu you have the glaive(deadly d8, forceful and reach)with 2d8+10 slashing +1d6 evil +1d6 persistent bleed. The second attack is the beard, which does 3d8 piercing+1d6 evil and that's it, nothing else.
Or the Babau with a longspear attack that does 2d8+10+1d6 and has reach vs the jaw that only does 2d10+1d6 of the same damage types. That one in particular doesn't even have the excuse of dealing a different damage type, it's just 100% useless.
I expect some of this is internal balancing due to having several attacks, but it still seems off.
Runelord Archetype:
- Does School Counterspell work without identifying the spell being cast? Unlike Clever Counterspell, it doesn't require Quick Recognition. You could learn it without having the option to identify an enemy spell. At least not without spending the reaction you'd need to actually use it.
- Tattoo Artist as an archetype feat seems ... redundant? It's exactly the same as the regular skill feat, so you could just get that one instead. The only advantage from getting the archetype-version is the ability to pay off the Dedication a bit faster.
The eidolon trait states that the eidolon can ONLY use items with that trait, but all other text - including in the same trait - implies that only refers to magic items. Can this be clarified either way?
This is what I want clarified as well, since with one version an Eidolon can use nonmagical items (like tools), and with the other one it can't.
Both of them mention investing, so it seems like both mean magical items, but it's not very clear.
Eidolon: A creature with this trait is an eidolon. An action or spell with this trait can be performed by an eidolon only. An item with this trait can be used or worn by an eidolon only, and an eidolon can't use items that don't have this trait. (An eidolon can have up to two items invested.)
Your eidolon can't wear or use magic items, except for items with the eidolon trait. An eidolon can have up to two items invested.