The Shadowcaster archetype has the Prerequisite "ability to cast spells".
- Would a feat providing the ability to cast an innate spell, such as the Fetchling's Shrouded Magic feat, meet this requirement?
- Would a feat providing ability to cast a focus spell, such as the Monk's Ki Rush feat, meet this requirement?
This is for PFS so I want to be sure before I spend the Achievement Points on the required Boons to create the character. Thank you in advance for your help.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, that is how I am reading it too. The archetype is clearly designed for characters that have spell slots, but that is not actually required for the dedication feat.
For comparison, Shadow Reservoir does require having spell slots - innate spells and focus spells wouldn't qualify. So the wording for that requirement is already well established.
|
Please note, that every Casting class/Archetype says something like "You gain the Cast a Spell activity". I see this as the prerequisite for Shadowcaster.
Innate Spells have the rule stating: "You can cast your innate spells even if you aren't a member of a spellcasting class."
This does not give you access to the Cast a Spell activity, and in my opinion, does not meet the Shadowcaster's Prerequisite.
Focus Spells also don't give you the Cast a Spell activity, but also don't explicitly say you can cast them without being a spellcaster, only that "Even some classes that don’t normally grant spellcasting, such as the champion and monk, can grant focus spells." This can be inferred as meaning that you can always cast focus spells, even if you aren't a spellcaster.
But as Innate Spells, it doesn't give you the Cast a Spell activity.
What should happen is that Shadowcaster's Prerequisite be updated to say you need Spell Slots, or say something like "You can cast spells from Spell Slots, or have Focus Spells." to make it clear which spell types qualify, as simply being able to "cast spells" is too vague.
Please note, that every Casting class/Archetype says something like "You gain the Cast a Spell activity". I see this as the prerequisite for Shadowcaster.
Innate Spells have the rule stating: "You can cast your innate spells even if you aren't a member of a spellcasting class."
This does not give you access to the Cast a Spell activity, and in my opinion, does not meet the Shadowcaster's Prerequisite.
Focus Spells also don't give you the Cast a Spell activity, but also don't explicitly say you can cast them without being a spellcaster, only that "Even some classes that don’t normally grant spellcasting, such as the champion and monk, can grant focus spells." This can be inferred as meaning that you can always cast focus spells, even if you aren't a spellcaster.
But as Innate Spells, it doesn't give you the Cast a Spell activity.
What should happen is that Shadowcaster's Prerequisite be updated to say you need Spell Slots, or say something like "You can cast spells from Spell Slots, or have Focus Spells." to make it clear which spell types qualify, as simply being able to "cast spells" is too vague.
If innate spells don't use Cast a Spell, they are then unusable: For instance, where a spell lists actions, that is "The number of actions required to Cast the Spell are listed here": this means that there are no listed actions required for an innate spell as the listed action cost is only for Cast a Spell. Also, costs, requirements, and/or triggers are only for Cast a Spell, so they also would not apply. And you wouldn't have to worry about components either: "A spell description lists the components required to Cast the Spell." This means you wouldn't NEED to provide them, as only Cast a Spell requires them.
I hope you can see how Cast a Spell is integral to actually casting a spell. :P
I literally pointed to the rule saying you can still cast innate spells even without being a member of a spellcasting class.
But it doesn't say HOW you would do so without Cast a spell: please point out what action/activity they use to cast spells and how they adjudicate things WITHOUT the Cast a Spell action... Please, point out that rule and out where it explains how to cast a spell without Cast a Spell.
|
|
Please don't conflate what you think the dedication should say, with what it does say. Especially absent any indication that it may be written incorrectly from the development team. While it is true that Focus and Innate spells don't make you a spellcaster, they are are most certainly spells and definitely use the Cast a Spell activity.
I can infer intent based on evidence, that's not "conflating" anything. Just because they use the activity doesn't mean you can use it in general. In fact, the rules state that you are able to use the activity explicitly for the innate/focus spells, and nothing else.
We have plenty of instances of archetypes which preface needing a 'spellcasting class feature,' (Hellknight Signifer) or 'ability to cast focus spells,' (e.g. Spellmaster, Magic Warrior) or 'ability to cast spells from spell slots' (e.g. Cathartic Mage, Geomancer}. Some of these are from the exact same book as Shadowcaster.
Books aren't written by a single person. It's common that certain wording that means the same thing are written differently, even in the same book.
Further, the Shadowcaster archetype includes spells which explicitly call out needing a focus pool or spell slots suggests that there are controls in place to guide different kinds of characters into this archetype. The details around the archetype even support this more general access state for the archetype since it's wrapped up with Shadow Companions (familiars and animals) as well. At present, the only way a Ranger could access these companions in PFS is via the archetype, which your ruling would prevent.
It also includes Shadow Spells, which has no additional prerequisite, and adds spells to your spell list. How would that work if you don't have one? Rangers aren't the only class able to get an AC. There's Druids, and any spellcaster can get Beastmaster for one. Just because a class can get an AC doesn't mean it should automatically qualify for the dedication.
Given that context, I find it very difficult to argue that casting one of these spells does not meet the seemingly intentional general definition of 'able to cast spells.' If a player bought this archetype for use with focus spells and it was later clarified / errata'd to only be available to those with the spellcasting class feature, I'd say that player would have a pretty good case for a refund/rebuild with the OPF environment.
It's not clear what "able to cast spells" means, as evidence of OP even making this thread in the first place. It needs to be clarified. I personally think it needs a spellcasting class feature, but I wouldn't care if Focus and Innate spells qualified too. All I want is it to be explicit which spells qualify you for the dedication.
If you get focus spells from a class or other source that doesn’t grant spellcasting ability (for example, if you’re a monk with the Ki Strike feat), the ability that gives you focus spells also provides your proficiency rank for spell attack rolls and spell DCs, as well as the magical tradition of your focus spells. You gain the ability to Cast a Spell and use any spellcasting actions necessary to cast your focus spells (see below). However, you don’t qualify for feats and other rules that require you to be a spellcaster.
Thanks for finding this, it actually reinforces my initial views. You literally can only Cast a Spell for your focus spells, and no other spells.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I literally pointed to the rule saying you can still cast innate spells even without being a member of a spellcasting class.But it doesn't say HOW you would do so without Cast a spell: please point out what action/activity they use to cast spells and how they adjudicate things WITHOUT the Cast a Spell action... Please, point out that rule and out where it explains how to cast a spell without Cast a Spell.
Agreed. Kind of hard to cast a spell without using Cast a Spell
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Please note, that every Casting class/Archetype says something like "You gain the Cast a Spell activity". I see this as the prerequisite for Shadowcaster.
Innate Spells have the rule stating: "You can cast your innate spells even if you aren't a member of a spellcasting class."
This does not give you access to the Cast a Spell activity, and in my opinion, does not meet the Shadowcaster's Prerequisite.
Focus Spells also don't give you the Cast a Spell activity, but also don't explicitly say you can cast them without being a spellcaster, only that "Even some classes that don’t normally grant spellcasting, such as the champion and monk, can grant focus spells." This can be inferred as meaning that you can always cast focus spells, even if you aren't a spellcaster.
But as Innate Spells, it doesn't give you the Cast a Spell activity.
What should happen is that Shadowcaster's Prerequisite be updated to say you need Spell Slots, or say something like "You can cast spells from Spell Slots, or have Focus Spells." to make it clear which spell types qualify, as simply being able to "cast spells" is too vague.
Note that the description of Innate spells mentions spell components and even links on AoN to the description of spell components.
Since spell components' description mentions the Cast a Spell activity right away, I feel it is yet another strong clue that Innate spells, like all other spells, use the Cast a Spell activity, with exceptions explicitly mentioned (such as the point about material components).
Seems the simplest take on Innate Spells actually. And indeed quite different from PF1's SLAs. But then in PF2 we do not have Supernatural abilities anymore either.
And my point is that, with the existence of the Shadow Spells feat, it's not intended to allow that, and should be made explicitly clear which type of spells qualify you for the dedication.
For myself, and I think others here, we've been debating this from a RAW standpoint. I have no idea what the RAI is: out of 13 feats, only 2 rely on spell slots so it's perfectly viable for use without slots.
If I had to guess though, I'd say it is intended as every spellcasting archetype from SoM is pretty clear in it's requirements: Geomancer requires spells cast from slots, Flexible Spellcaster requires slots, Elementalist must have the spellcasting class feature, wellspring requires a spell repertoire, ect. Then you have ones like Shadowcaster and Soulforger that only require the casting of spells so IMO it looks like a deliberate choice to do so instead of somehow forgetting to mention another requirement like the spellcasting class feature and requiring casting from slots.
What requirement do you think it should have if all it requires is you cast [any] spells? What wording would satisfy you?
