A druid can wild shape into the forms listed in Animal Form. According to the description text of Animal Form spell, the battle form becomes Large if heightened to 4th level, and Huge if heightened to 5th level. Wild Shape is a focus spell. Focus spells are automatically heightened to half your level rounded up. Which means I cannot un-heighten Wild Shape and thus my druid PC cannot turn into an animal and get into a narrow space. Can I un-heighten Wild Shape? Or can I retain all the other benefits from the heightened Wild Shape (Animal Form) like 15-foot reach, 20 temporary HP, AC = 18 + my level, attack modifier +18, and so on... and still remain Medium or Large?
By the way, I just found out in this webpage that, the damage bonus for 4th level (+9) is higher than that of 5th level (+7). Perhaps a typo?
|
You can cast it from a spell slot at the lower level.You can't cast a focus spell from a spell slot
Core Rulebook pg. 300 3.0 Focus spells are a special type of spell attained directly from a branch of study, from a deity, or from another specific source. You can learn focus spells only through special class features or feats, rather than choosing them from a spell list. Furthermore, you cast focus spells using a special pool of Focus Points—you can’t prepare a focus spell in a spell slot or use your spell slots to cast focus spells; similarly, you can’t spend your Focus Points to cast spells that aren’t focus spells. Even some classes that don’t normally grant spellcasting, such as the champion and monk, can grant focus spells.Source
Focus spells are automatically heightened to half your level rounded up, just like cantrips are. You can’t cast a focus spell if its minimum level is greater than half your level rounded up, even if you somehow gain access to it.
Casting any of your focus spells costs you 1 Focus Point. You automatically gain a focus pool of 1 Focus Point the first time you gain an ability that gives you a focus spell.
You replenish all the Focus Points in your pool during your daily preparations. You can also use the Refocus activity to pray, study, meditate, or otherwise reattune yourself to the source of your focus magic and regain a Focus Point.
Some abilities allow you to increase the Focus Points in your pool beyond 1. Typically, these are feats that give you a new focus spell and increase the number of points in your pool by 1. Your focus pool can’t have a capacity beyond 3 Focus Points, even if feats that increase your pool would cause it to exceed this number.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It makes absolutely no sense that you can't cast a weaker version of a spell if you want to. The rules don't cover that case because you generally want to get the maximum possible effect, and if the rules covered all the possible cases an encyclopedia wouldn't be enough.
A reasonable DM will check what you are trying to do, and if it doesn't involve some strange shenanigans, they will allow it.
It makes absolutely no sense that you can't cast a weaker version of a spell if you want to. The rules don't cover that case because you generally want to get the maximum possible effect, and if the rules covered all the possible cases an encyclopedia wouldn't be enough.
A reasonable DM will check what you are trying to do, and if it doesn't involve some strange shenanigans, they will allow it.I agree.
But since we are talking about it ( focus spells and cantrips), would there be any gimmick ?
Any reason why this might be forbidden?
Pretty sure that's less "there's an important balance reason to not allow it" and more "no one ever bothered to write a rule addressing it."
It seems pretty obvious that both narratively and mechanically that one should be allowed to undercast Focus Spells (though technically I'd say the spell's the higher level, simply using the lower level option).
Looking at Animal Form, it caps at 5th level. A caster could slot it in a 6th level slot (gaining nothing extra except vs. Dispel etc.) and there'd be no issue. There's no reason to suppose they couldn't as easily say it's the 4th level version using that slot, right? One could say that (if pressed to choose). And a GM kinda has to let Wild Shape cast the 5th level version even when the Focus Spell is at 6th+. Which means the character can already undercast. While it may seem forced as the "only option" to me it's the exact same mechanical reasoning: despite being cast at a higher level, the caster can use a lower level iteration. So why would the even lower level iterations be off limits?
For example, when casting Animal Form as a 7th level spell, it might be the 5th level version Heightened two levels or could just as easily be the 4th level version Heightened three.
And narratively, saying "I'm better at shapeshifting therefore can no longer shift into the shape I've regularly been using" makes no sense.
Personally I'd see disallowing this as a major red flag re: GMing.
Looking at Animal Form, it caps at 5th level. A caster could slot it in a 6th level slot (gaining nothing extra except vs. Dispel etc.) and there'd be no issue. There's no reason to suppose they couldn't as easily say it's the 4th level version using that slot, right? One could say that (if pressed to choose). And a GM kinda has to let Wild Shape cast the 5th level version even when the Focus Spell is at 6th+. Which means the character can already undercast.Not really. It still casts at 6th level, it simply doesn't have a Heightened benefit for that level. It still benefits from being more difficult to counteract or counteracting other morph and polymorph effects as any other 6th level would.
Yes, I thought that was obvious given the context. No spells have an actual hard cap on which slots/level they can use, only their effect.
Point being that one can get the 5th level effect from a 6th level spell, so why wouldn't one be able to choose the 4th level effect from a 6th level spell? Both are simply versions being cast above their norm.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Our game recently ran into this with cantrips. Light at level 4 is a 60 ft radius, which is huge. It can make it more difficult to avoid notice of enemies up ahead.
Our GM said he is 100% ok with undercasting if you choose. I would make the same ruling as a GM. Some limited circumstantial benefit for PCs, no concerns about overpowering. Rewards PCs for thinking of the game as a real setting instead of as a video game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We do have a rule about casting at lower level via Signature Spells. It seems like a similar rule element could be applied to focus spells (if not the default).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Agreeing with the sentiment that there isn't really an exploit here it's just kind of an edge case nobody really covered.
Though on the subject of especially reasonable houserules, imo, it's beter to make the size aspect of form spells optional too. Even with free heightening, it feels pretty bad to have to tank your stats because you're in a smaller room.
I suspect it was never addressed because the developers feel that corner cases such as this should be handled by the individual GMs.
That's kind of what GMs are for anyways.
I don't recall what it was called, but I remember there being a spell that projected an offensive cone. The higher the level, the larger the cone's area. Under asking would be great in that case because you could more easily avoid hitting allies.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I'd see disallowing this as a major red flag re: GMing.
I don't know about *major* but it at the very least shows someone isn't comfortable with the rules and making even basic GM calls.
I would definitely allow it without question.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I disagree with that. A preference for RAW doesn't mean they're uncomfortable with the rules, or making calls when there's no rule available. It just means they paid for/chose a game system and intend to use it.
And it is RAW that you can't cast them at lower: it says automatically heightened to, not automatically heightened to up to. Doing otherwise is a houserule and would require speaking with the GM.
That would be the Major Red Flag, though. Knowingly sticking to hard-line RAW when there's no good reason to while lessening someone's fun makes me want to run for the hills.
Obviously this is a personal taste thing, however.
Yes, it's Heightened, no question, but that doesn't automatically cut one off from lower level versions, otherwise one would technically not be able to cast the 5th level effect with the 6th+ level versions...and that'd be ridiculous. In both cases it's the lower level effect Heightened to the level of the Focus Spell.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personal taste indeed. I find GMs that just say yes to everything to be more of a red flag.
Who said anything about saying 'yes' to everything?
WatersLethe is talking about GMs saying 'yes' to things that make sense, improve fun, and don't cause any game mechanics problems.
But would you allow someone to cast a heightened spell with lesser effect? (That is, it still counts as the increased heighten level, but has a lower level effect.)
For example, casting an 8th-level heightened invisibility, but opting to have the 2nd-level effect so that you can benefit from the longer duration AND counteract resistance (though it would pop upon attack).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why wouldn't you be able to get the 5th level effect at a higher level? That's like saying you don't get the all day effect of Charm if you cast it at 5th, 6th or 7th level, which is preposterous.
Heightening states:
In addition, many spells have additional specific benefits when they are heightened, such as increased damage. These extra benefits are described at the end of the spell’s stat block. Some heightened entries specify one or more levels at which the spell must be prepared or cast to gain these extra advantages. Each of these heightened entries states specifically which aspects of the spell change at the given level. Read the heightened entry only for the spell level you’re using or preparing; if its benefits are meant to include any of the effects of a lower-level heightened entry, those benefits will be included in the entry.At specific levels you get updated effects, and if you get the previous effects as well that will be specified.
The preposterousness was the point.
This is all as basic as saying "I'm casting a 4th level spell version Heightened to 8th", and the GM okaying that rather than saying what seems silly to me "No, you must cast the 5th level version Heightened to 8th instead."Quote: At specific levels you get updated effects, and if you get the previous effects as well that will be specified.
Citation needed for bold portion.
As for Invisibility, what's wrong with saying this is the 2nd level version Heightened past 4th? I could see an argument made for choosing when memorized, but saying there's no way of getting a hard-to-dispel (or more likely resist True Seeing) Invisibility w/ one's higher level slots seems absurd.
Like I said, red flags, and I mean within PFS, not just looser games.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
P.S. I personally dislike the reasoning of "oh its meant
to be house ruled", that just feels like a cop out.
I agree though this case is sufficiently edge I don't think it is unreasonable for there to be no base rule about this.
House rules should be for changing how the game plays, not to fix bad rules.
Should, I agree, but actually it is for both. Because bad rules are inevitable, and Paizo's errata policy is too slow to be practical for the bulk of its customers.
Further the bulk of rules problems exist only in the mind of the reader, rather than in the book. Though the book could be written and organised better, Paizo's solution of don't be afraid to just go with what makes sense to you is the right approach.
But would you allow someone to cast a heightened spell with lesser effect? (That is, it still counts as the increased heighten level, but has a lower level effect.)
For example, casting an 8th-level heightened invisibility, but opting to have the 2nd-level effect so that you can benefit from the longer duration AND counteract resistance (though it would pop upon attack).
For many characters, I would not. If a Wizard deliberately prepares invisibility in an 8th level spell slot, then they are getting the 4th level effects. Similarly if a Druid prepares Animal Form in a 5th level spell slot, they are getting the 5th level version with no adjustments available.
The reason is because those types of characters have an option when preparing spells or putting spells in repertoire to do it at specific levels.
For focus spells such as Wild Shape, cantrips such as Light, and Wave casters such as Summoner I am willing to be more flexible. Because they otherwise don't have any choice in the matter and that doesn't make sense. You shouldn't lose abilities to do things when you level up. Including the ability to cast a lower level version of a spell than your maximum.
IMO it's not so much an issue with focus spells as it is something that likely fell through the cracks when writing the rules for heightening spells in the first place.
It seems as though it's generally assumed that the heightened effects will be better than the non-heightened effects, so when you pump more spell juice into the spell you get a better effect, which makes sense, but as mentioned there are times where you may want a lesser effect. I'll be the first to admit this isn't RAW based on what we have right now, but in my game if it ever came up I would definitely house rule it that the heighten effects aren't automatic but rather are optional, so no matter what you do you can't unheighten a focus spell, the spell will always be your level/2 rounded up, but you can choose any heighten effect equal to or lower than the spell's level.
For many characters, I would not. If a Wizard deliberately prepares invisibility in an 8th level spell slot, then they are getting the 4th level effects. Similarly if a Druid prepares Animal Form in a 5th level spell slot, they are getting the 5th level version with no adjustments available.
The reason is because those types of characters have an option when preparing spells or putting spells in repertoire to do it at specific levels.
-----
I'd allow it for sure, just so long as by using it at a lower level then they are taking 100% of the mechanics involved with casting it at that level such as for counteracts, effects, and duration, no mix-matching the end results of the spell to get the best of both worlds.
I still don't get what you intend to accomplish with this kind of limitations.
Just discovered this interesting bit in the description of the Cantrip "Protect Companion":
Heightened (+2) The reaction reduces the damage by another 10, and you lose 5 more Hit Points. If you want to lose fewer Hit Points, you can choose to lower the damage reduction and HP lost to what any lower-level version of the spell could do without lowering the spell’s actual level.
So this cantrip specifically allows you to cast it at a lower level than that to which it is currently heightened. It seems to me that if you could do that by default, this wouldn't need to be there.
On the other hand, if unheightening was a default ability then the text in Protect Companion would just be reminder text.
While reminder text isn't all that common in the PF2 rulebooks, it does still exist.
And since we are discussing something that has implications that can very significantly cause problems for certain builds and ideas, a specific bit of text in one spell shouldn't be the entire basis of ruling on a bit of ambiguity on a general rule for all focus spells and cantrips.
Just discovered this interesting bit in the description of the Cantrip "Protect Companion":
Heightened (+2) The reaction reduces the damage by another 10, and you lose 5 more Hit Points. If you want to lose fewer Hit Points, you can choose to lower the damage reduction and HP lost to what any lower-level version of the spell could do without lowering the spell’s actual level.
So this cantrip specifically allows you to cast it at a lower level than that to which it is currently heightened. It seems to me that if you could do that by default, this wouldn't need to be there.
Personally I don't really see that as proof it shouldn't be allowed to be done for other spells as much as it is proof that at least one of the people working on the wording for this spell realized that it's either not RAW or unclear RAW whether this is allowed and that this spell in particular really needs it to be allowed to function as intended. So, to clear up any possible confusion, and to make sure no matter how people read heightening this spell still works, they made sure to include it in the spells description.
The way I see it it could be read as overwriting the current rules, reminder text, or something in between where they want to force one interpretation of unclear rules for this specific spell because they see that it could cause problems.
Who said "proof"? Not I. It's an indicator.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yup. Just like it was very clear RAW for a long time that once you cast Animal Form you could no longer escape a grapple.
And it is current RAW that you can't even attempt to attack a Ghost with a Ghost Touch Greatsword, but you can punch them since the attack is Agile and you can use your Dex bonus instead.
That doesn't mean that we should be casting shade on people who want to actually play a game that makes sense.
But would you allow someone to cast a heightened spell with lesser effect? (That is, it still counts as the increased heighten level, but has a lower level effect.)
For example, casting an 8th-level heightened invisibility, but opting to have the 2nd-level effect so that you can benefit from the longer duration AND counteract resistance (though it would pop upon attack).
For many characters, I would not. If a Wizard deliberately prepares invisibility in an 8th level spell slot, then they are getting the 4th level effects. Similarly if a Druid prepares Animal Form in a 5th level spell slot, they are getting the 5th level version with no adjustments available.
The reason is because those types of characters have an option when preparing spells or putting spells in repertoire to do it at specific levels.
For focus spells such as Wild Shape, cantrips such as Light, and Wave casters such as Summoner I am willing to be more flexible. Because they otherwise don't have any choice in the matter and that doesn't make sense. You shouldn't lose abilities to do things when you level up. Including the ability to cast a lower level version of a spell than your maximum.
Since you're so keen on not changing the heightening rules, it should be pointed out that nothing in the heightened rules says that spells that get benefits at specific levels continue to get those benefits at levels the spell is heightened to beyond that. It only says you get the benefits if it is cast at that level.
In addition, many spells have additional specific benefits when they are heightened, such as increased damage. These extra benefits are described at the end of the spell’s stat block. Some heightened entries specify one or more levels at which the spell must be prepared or cast to gain these extra advantages. Each of these heightened entries states specifically which aspects of the spell change at the given level. Read the heightened entry only for the spell level you’re using or preparing; if its benefits are meant to include any of the effects of a lower-level heightened entry, those benefits will be included in the entry.
It doesn't say read read the highest heightened entry for the spell you're using or preparing, but instead to read it just for the specific level. It also says that if it were to use the effects of a lower heightened entry, it'd say so. Since invisibility only says 4th, technically if you're going to stick with exactly what the rules say on heightening, your argument should instead be that "you can't cast invisibility at 8th level with the 4th level benefits, it'd have to be at the base benefits"
Which is of course ridiculous. I doubt anyone actually adheres strictly to what the heightening rules say about this. Gotta make those GM judgment calls since the rules aren't perfect!
And it is current RAW that you can't even attempt to attack a Ghost with a Ghost Touch Greatsword, but you can punch them since the attack is Agile and you can use your Dex bonus instead.
Please if you are going to make such point then get them right. It is Dex based checks so Finesse not Agile.
Ghost Touch does work even against a RAW version of Incorporeal. The wording likewise is enough to get the meaning across. But yes I see how some could read it otherwise.
That doesn't mean that we should be casting shade on people who want to actually play a game that makes sense.
Definitely. Play the game that works for you.