You can use a higher level spell slot to cast a lower level spell if you want. You can use metamagic feats that use a spell slot of a higher level, but the spells are considered the level of the spell to which it is applied. For example, an Empowered Burning Hands casts in a 3rd level slot, takes a full round to cast, but saves and functions as a first level spell. This all seems clear in the rules.
HOWEVER - there is nothing I can find in P1 that says a caster who has spell slots of higher level than their ability score allows could not use the granted spell slots to cast lower level spells or use metamagic feats. For example, a 12 CHR sorcerer of 6th level could use the 3rd level spell slot granted to empower a Burning Hands, or to cast a False Life from their second level spells known, but could not learn or cast a true third level spell.
Am I correct? Some tools I use seems to operate under the default that you don't get the spell slots, not just that you cannot cast 3rd level spells - you don't even get the slots to use at all. But I cannot find support for that concept.
Spell Slots
The various character class tables show how many spells of each level a character can cast per day. These openings for daily spells are called spell slots. a spellcaster always has the option to fill a higher-level spell slot with a lower-level spell. A spellcaster who lacks a high enough ability score to cast spells that would otherwise be his due still gets the slots but must fill them with spells of lower levels.
A lvl6 Sorcerer with 12 Cha cannot cast a 3rd level spell, but he can still gets his 3rd level spell slots, so he can cast his 1st and 2nd level spells from his 3rd level spell slot.
Effects of Metamagic Feats on a Spell: In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast using a higher-level spell slot. Saving throw modifications are not changed unless stated otherwise in the feat description.The modifications made by these feats only apply to spells cast directly by the feat user. A spellcaster can’t use a metamagic feat to alter a spell being cast from a wand, scroll, or other device.
Metamagic feats that eliminate components of a spell don’t eliminate the attack of opportunity provoked by casting a spell while threatened. Casting a spell modified by Quicken Spell does not provoke an attack of opportunity.
Metamagic feats cannot be used with all spells. See the specific feat descriptions for the spells that a particular feat can’t modify.
Yes, you could spontaneously cast an Empowered Burning Hands from a 3rd level spell slot even though you only have a 12 Cha. In all ways, it is a 1st level spell.
Thanks for that - I was going crazy trying to find something to back that up!
Yes, you could spontaneously cast an Empowered Burning Hands from a 3rd level spell slot even though you only have a 12 Cha. In all ways, it is a 1st level spell.
The FAQ on metamagic disagrees with you, unless you can show that a minimum required ability score based on spell level/spell slot level would not be considered a disadvantage.
That said, I personally would not object to allowing a player to use higher level spell slots for metamagic'd lower level spells like that.
|
The FAQ on metamagic disagrees with you, unless you can show that a minimum required ability score based on spell level/spell slot level would not be considered a disadvantage.
Yes, you could spontaneously cast an Empowered Burning Hands from a 3rd level spell slot even though you only have a 12 Cha. In all ways, it is a 1st level spell.
You can use the last two sentences of that FAQ on spell levels
The advantages of the metamagic feat are spelled out in the Benefits section of the feat, and the increased spell slot level is a disadvantage.
Heighten Spell is really the only metamagic feat that makes using a higher-level spell slot an advantage instead of a disadvantage.
The FAQ on metamagic disagrees with you, unless you can show that a minimum required ability score based on spell level/spell slot level would not be considered a disadvantage.
Yes, you could spontaneously cast an Empowered Burning Hands from a 3rd level spell slot even though you only have a 12 Cha. In all ways, it is a 1st level spell.You can use the last two sentences of that FAQ on spell levels
The advantages of the metamagic feat are spelled out in the Benefits section of the feat, and the increased spell slot level is a disadvantage.
Heighten Spell is really the only metamagic feat that makes using a higher-level spell slot an advantage instead of a disadvantage.
I am unclear on what you are pointing out with this statement.
|
|
The line in the FAQ
Heighten Spell is really the only metamagic feat that makes using a higher-level slot an advantage.
has only two possible interpretations.
1) Heighten Spell is really, truly, honestly, the only metamagic feat that makes using a higher-level slot an advantage. So our example 6th-level, 12-Cha sorcerer can cast empowered burning hands in a 3rd-level slot.
2) The FAQ writer didn't consider the edge case of a low-ability-score caster.
If you go with the second interpretation then you're in RAI territory (which I'm generally fine with, but makes it a lot harder to say that one viewpoint is definitively right or wrong. Especially when the starting point here is "the designers didn't consider this edge case").
The FAQ is about trying to make things easier on yourself by counting only the spell level instead of the level modified by metamagic. "I cast empowered burning hands from a 4th-level slot but because it's only a 1st-level spell I only need to use a 1st-level pearl of power to recall it." "I'm casting empowered burning hands from a 3rd-level slot, but since burning hands is a 1st-level spell, I only need to make a DC 17 concentration check to cast defensively, not DC 21." The FAQ says "nope, you gotta take the negatives of using a higher-level slot."
So you need to ask "why can't our hypothetical 12 Cha sorcerer cast empowered burning hands with a 3rd-level slot?" As long as she's making a DC 21 concentration check, using runestones of power 3 (not 1), and so forth, she's taking exactly the same negatives as any other caster.
|
Metamagic Feats
As a spellcaster’s knowledge of magic grows, he can learn to cast spells in ways slightly different from the norm. Preparing and casting a spell in such a way is harder than normal but, thanks to metamagic feats, is at least possible.
Spells modified by a metamagic feat use a spell slot higher than normal.
This does not change the level of the spell, so the DC for saving throws against it does not go up. Metamagic feats do not affect spell-like abilities.
To learn or cast a spell, a bard must have a Charisma score equal to at least 10 + the spell level. The Difficulty Class for a saving throw against a bard’s spell is 10 + the spell level + the bard’s Charisma modifier.
Every spellcasting class has its variant of that text.
Metamagic: At what spell level does the spell count for concentration DCs, magus spell recall, or a pearl of power?
The spell counts as the level of the spell slot necessary to cast it.
For example, an empowered burning hands uses a 3rd-level spell slot, counts as a 3rd-level spell for making concentration checks, counts as a 3rd-level spell for a magus's spell recall or a pearl of power.
So far the FAQ speaks only of "concentration DCs, magus spell recall, or a pearl of power". Not of the spellcasting stat.
Every spellcasting class has its variant of that text.
In general, use the (normal, lower) spell level or the (higher) spell slot level, whichever is more of a disadvantage for the caster. The advantages of the metamagic feat are spelled out in the Benefits section of the feat, and the increased spell slot level is a disadvantage.
Heighten Spell is really the only metamagic feat that makes using a higher-level spell slot an advantage instead of a disadvantage.
And here it speaks of "spell slot level", not spell level.
The minimum spellcasting stat requirement refers to the level of the spell, not to the level of the slot.
To me. the conclusion seems clear:
to cast a spell you need a spellcasting score equal to at least 10 + the spell level, not of the spell modified by one or more metamagics.
And here it speaks of "spell slot level", not spell level.
Precisely this. The FAQ tells us exactly when we should use spell level and when we should use spell slot level. Whichever is most disadvantgeous to the caster.
The FAQ is in essence saying: Anytime you need to use the spell level to figure out how something works in the rules, with metamagic substitute in the spell slot level as the spell level if that is worse for the caster.
The minimum spellcasting stat requirement refers to the level of the spell, not to the level of the slot.To me. the conclusion seems clear:
to cast a spell you need a spellcasting score equal to at least 10 + the spell level, not of the spell modified by one or more metamagics.
This is the same rational that was used 10 years ago to try and argue that a 1st level pearl of power (or 1 magus arcane point with spell recall) was sufficient to bring back an empowered shocking grasp. The FAQ showed that was incorrect RAI, and made it also incorrect RAW.
The FAQ is about trying to make things easier on yourself by counting only the spell level instead of the level modified by metamagic. "I cast empowered burning hands from a 4th-level slot but because it's only a 1st-level spell I only need to use a 1st-level pearl of power to recall it." "I'm casting empowered burning hands from a 3rd-level slot, but since burning hands is a 1st-level spell, I only need to make a DC 17 concentration check to cast defensively, not DC 21." The FAQ says "nope, you gotta take the negatives of using a higher-level slot."
I'm not sure this conveys what you meant it to convey. Feel free to restate if you intended something different.
If it is an accurate statement of what you meant, I find it confusing. You state "make things easier on yourself by counting only the spell level" then paraphrase the FAQ with "nope, you gotta take the negatives of using a higher-level slot." which is contradictory to your first statement. eg, are you using "only the spell level" or not? If sometimes we are using the spell slot level, then only the spell level is a false claim.
I agree the FAQ intended to make the rules on when to use spell level vs spell slot level easier - use whatever is most disadvantageous. But if we then turn around and claim that sometimes we do not use the most disadvantageous, then we haven't really made it easier - we've made it harder to remember when we should apply the most disadvantageous rule and when we should not apply the rule.
1) Heighten Spell is really, truly, honestly, the only metamagic feat that makes using a higher-level slot an advantage. So our example 6th-level, 12-Cha sorcerer can cast empowered burning hands in a 3rd-level slot.
2) The FAQ writer didn't consider the edge case of a low-ability-score caster.If you go with the second interpretation then you're in RAI territory (which I'm generally fine with, but makes it a lot harder to say that one viewpoint is definitively right or wrong. Especially when the starting point here is "the designers didn't consider this edge case").
Given we do not know if they considered it, all we have to go by is what was actually written (RAW). We either take RAW at face value or not. We could apply the "maybe they did not consider, or maybe they did not mean, or maybe they did not think about, etc." argument to any part of the rules to try and make the rules mean something other than what they say - but that's not particularly productive in understanding what the rules actually say.
Tbh, the only time this would ever come up is if a Sorcerer had their Cha debuffed, such as by a Touch of Idiocy spell, because let's be honest, nobody is going to make a caster with 12 as their primary casting ability score.
So, hypothetical but very real possible scenario: let's say our level 6 Sorc actually has an 18 Cha, but he gets a -6 Int/Wis/Cha Penalty for 10min/level from being affected by a Touch of Idiocy with a max roll on the 1d6, so his Cha is now 12. He can no longer cast 3rd level spells, but he can cast 1st and 2nd level spells from his 3rd level spell slots. He attempts to cast an Empowered Burning Hands out of a 3rd level slot while he's threatened by another creature, so he has to make a Conc check to Cast Defensively, and the Conc check would be calculated using the 3rd level spell slot.
He attempts to cast an Empowered Burning Hands out of a 3rd level slot while he's threatened by another creatureExcept he cannot attempt to do so, since it counts as a 3rd-level spell for this (most disadvantageous for the caster) and he lacks the 13 cha necessary to be able to cast 3rd-level spell.
He could instead cast Burning Hands without any metamagics (or a metamagic that only increases the spell level by 1) in a 3rd-level slot, since it would count as a 1st-level (or 2nd-level) spell.
He can still cast 1st level spells using higher level slots.
A spellcaster who lacks a high enough ability score to cast spells that would otherwise be his due still gets the slots but must fill them with spells of lower levels.
Effects of Metamagic Feats on a Spell wrote:
Effects of Metamagic Feats on a Spell: In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast using a higher-level spell slot.
Even though he's casting out of a 3rd level spell slot, it is still a 1st level spell for all other purposes.
Spell level =/= Spell Slot
|
|
t is worse for the caster.
The minimum spellcasting stat requirement refers to the level of the spell, not to the level of the slot.To me. the conclusion seems clear:
to cast a spell you need a spellcasting score equal to at least 10 + the spell level, not of the spell modified by one or more metamagics.This is the same rational that was used 10 years ago to try and argue that a 1st level pearl of power (or 1 magus arcane point with spell recall) was sufficient to bring back an empowered shocking grasp. The FAQ showed that was incorrect RAI, and made it also incorrect RAW.
You were trying to refill a 3rd-level slot with a pearl that refills a 1st-level slot. I don't get how you can see it as the same thing.
|
|
Tbh, the only time this would ever come up is if a Sorcerer had their Cha debuffed, such as by a Touch of Idiocy spell, because let's be honest, nobody is going to make a caster with 12 as their primary casting ability score.
So, hypothetical but very real possible scenario: let's say our level 6 Sorc actually has an 18 Cha, but he gets a -6 Int/Wis/Cha Penalty for 10min/level from being affected by a Touch of Idiocy with a max roll on the 1d6, so his Cha is now 12. He can no longer cast 3rd level spells, but he can cast 1st and 2nd level spells from his 3rd level spell slots. He attempts to cast an Empowered Burning Hands out of a 3rd level slot while he's threatened by another creature, so he has to make a Conc check to Cast Defensively, and the Conc check would be calculated using the 3rd level spell slot.
Touch of idiocy doesn't change a statistic, it applies a penalty to it. Changing the statistic need something that changes the actual score, like the monster's abilityes that drains it.
|
|
You were trying to refill a 3rd-level slot with a pearl that refills a 1st-level slot. I don't get how you can see it as the same thing.t is worse for the caster.
The minimum spellcasting stat requirement refers to the level of the spell, not to the level of the slot.To me. the conclusion seems clear:
to cast a spell you need a spellcasting score equal to at least 10 + the spell level, not of the spell modified by one or more metamagics.This is the same rational that was used 10 years ago to try and argue that a 1st level pearl of power (or 1 magus arcane point with spell recall) was sufficient to bring back an empowered shocking grasp. The FAQ showed that was incorrect RAI, and made it also incorrect RAW.
Yes. You are trying to extend the FAQ farther than its subject area.
Even if you’re willing to ignore the intention of the FAQ, you can’t choose to treat one sentence as exactly correct:
In general, use the (normal, lower) spell level or the (higher) spell slot level, whichever is more of a disadvantage for the caster.
and then ignore another sentence
Heighten Spell is really the only metamagic feat that makes using a higher-level spell slot an advantage instead of a disadvantage.
Not sure what you're saying here or what you and bbangerter are arguing over, but yes, a heightened spell counts as a spell of it's level + the adjustment from heighten for all intents and purposes.
I'm still not even clear what Belafon is trying to argue here by pointing out the heighten text in the FAQ. I'm trying to get clarity on what his argument is.
In general, use the (normal, lower) spell level or the (higher) spell slot level, whichever is more of a disadvantage for the caster.Heighten Spell is really the only metamagic feat that makes using a higher-level spell slot an advantage instead of a disadvantage.
Note the distinction here that I have bolded. These lines of text in the FAQ are not at odds with each other. They are referencing two separate opposite things.
All the text regarding heighten is pointing out is that you don't take the most disadvantagous for every aspect of a heightened spell. You get the save DC and effective spell level for other things that are dependent on spell level (globe of invulnerability for example) instead of taking the most disadvantageous like you would for all other metamagic applcations.
I'm not ignoring the heighten text in the FAQ. Heighten works exactly like it says it works regarding the advantages of using heighten. The FAQ simply reiterates that. That last line of the FAQ and the heighten metamagic description do not address the disadvantages.
You were trying to refill a 3rd-level slot with a pearl that refills a 1st-level slot. I don't get how you can see it as the same thing.
This seemingly normal pearl of average size and luster is a potent aid to all spellcasters who prepare spells. Once per day on command, a pearl of power enables the possessor to recall any one spell that she had prepared and then cast that day. The spell is then prepared again, just as if it had not been cast. The spell must be of a particular level, depending on the pearl. Different pearls exist for recalling one spell per day of each level from 1st through 9th and for the recall of two spells per day (each of a different level, 6th or lower).
Pearls of Power are not based on spell slot level, they are based on spell level. That is why there was disagreement in the first place about whether a pearl of power or magus spell recall could be used based on the unadjusted spell level from metamagic.
(This is different from runestones of power for spontaneous casters that specify spell slots)
Touch of idiocy doesn't change a statistic, it applies a penalty to it. Changing the statistic need something that changes the actual score, like the monster's abilityes that drains it.Tbh, the only time this would ever come up is if a Sorcerer had their Cha debuffed, such as by a Touch of Idiocy spell, because let's be honest, nobody is going to make a caster with 12 as their primary casting ability score.
So, hypothetical but very real possible scenario: let's say our level 6 Sorc actually has an 18 Cha, but he gets a for 10min/level from being affected by a Touch of Idiocy with a max roll on the 1d6, so his Cha is now 12. He can no longer cast 3rd level spells, but he can cast 1st and 2nd level spells from his 3rd level spell slots. He attempts to cast an Empowered Burning Hands out of a 3rd level slot while he's threatened by another creature, so he has to make a Conc check to Cast Defensively, and the Conc check would be calculated using the 3rd level spell slot.
I know that and I was careful to phrase it that way. May I suggest that you stop looking for stupid stuff to nitpick?
|
|
Touch of idiocy doesn't change a statistic, it applies a penalty to it. Changing the statistic need something that changes the actual score, like the monster's abilityes that drains it.Tbh, the only time this would ever come up is if a Sorcerer had their Cha debuffed, such as by a Touch of Idiocy spell, because let's be honest, nobody is going to make a caster with 12 as their primary casting ability score.
So, hypothetical but very real possible scenario: let's say our level 6 Sorc actually has an 18 Cha, but he gets a for 10min/level from being affected by a Touch of Idiocy with a max roll on the 1d6, so his Cha is now 12. He can no longer cast 3rd level spells, but he can cast 1st and 2nd level spells from his 3rd level spell slots. He attempts to cast an Empowered Burning Hands out of a 3rd level slot while he's threatened by another creature, so he has to make a Conc check to Cast Defensively, and the Conc check would be calculated using the 3rd level spell slot.
I know that and I was careful to phrase it that way. May I suggest that you stop looking for stupid stuff to nitpick?
You don't know how penalties work in Pathfinder. They don't change the statistic.
Some spells and abilities cause you to take an ability penalty for a limited amount of time. While in effect, these penalties function just like ability damage, but they cannot cause you to fall unconscious or die. In essence, penalties cannot decrease your ability score to less than 1.
Ability Score Damage, Penalty, and Drain Diseases, poisons, spells, and other abilities can all deal damage directly to your ability scores. This damage does not actually reduce an ability, but it does apply a penalty to the skills and statistics that are based on that ability.
For every 2 points of damage you take to a single ability, apply a –1 penalty to skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability. If the amount of ability damage you have taken equals or exceeds your ability score, you immediately fall unconscious until the damage is less than your ability score. The only exception to this is your Constitution score.
If the damage to your Constitution is equal to or greater than your Constitution score, you die. Unless otherwise noted, damage to your ability scores is healed at the rate of 1 per day to each ability score that has been damaged. Ability damage can be healed through the use of spells, such as lesser restoration.
The end result is that a -6 penalty to charisma effect is to give a -3 modifier to all charisma-based abilities, but the stat is still 18.
The -6 penalty is the equivalent of 6 points of temporary damage to charisma, with a duration of 10 minutes/level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Touch of Idiocy
School enchantment (compulsion) [mind-affecting]; Level bloodrager 2, medium 2, mesmerist 2, psychic 2, sorcerer/wizard 2, spiritualist 2, witch 2; Domain madness 2; Subdomain lust 2; Bloodline accursed 2, daemon 2, div 2
CASTING
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, SEFFECT
Range touch
Target living creature touched
Duration 10 min./level
Saving Throw no; Spell Resistance yesDESCRIPTION
With a touch, you reduce the target’s mental faculties. Your successful melee touch attack applies a 1d6 penalty to the target’s Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scores. This penalty can’t reduce any of these scores below 1.
Can you read this last line in the Touch of Idiocy spell for me? My eyesight just isn't what it was.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You don't know how penalties work in Pathfinder.
Tbh, I think I do. You're the one who's confused.
|
|
Can you read this last line in the Touch of Idiocy spell for me? My eyesight just isn't what it was.Touch of Idiocy
School enchantment (compulsion) [mind-affecting]; Level bloodrager 2, medium 2, mesmerist 2, psychic 2, sorcerer/wizard 2, spiritualist 2, witch 2; Domain madness 2; Subdomain lust 2; Bloodline accursed 2, daemon 2, div 2
CASTING
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, SEFFECT
Range touch
Target living creature touched
Duration 10 min./level
Saving Throw no; Spell Resistance yesDESCRIPTION
With a touch, you reduce the target’s mental faculties. Your successful melee touch attack applies a 1d6 penalty to the target’s Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scores. This penalty can’t reduce any of these scores below 1.
The comment on the last line in Touch of idiocy is valid. For that spell. I should have checked the spell and not only the general rule.
How penalties to stat work is spelled in the rules, and they work as ability damage. Ability damage doesn't lower a stat. So, barring specific text in the spell, a penalty to a stat doesn't change the stat value.
You don't know how penalties work in Pathfinder. They don't change the statistic.
It really seems like you don't understand how Specific Rules > General Rules in Pathfinder, tbh.
=====================================================
The comment on the last line in Touch of idiocy is valid. For that spell. I should have checked the spell and not only the general rule.
How penalties to stat work is spelled in the rules, and they work as ability damage. Ability damage doesn't lower a stat. So, barring specific text in the spell, a penalty to a stat doesn't change the stat value.
Well, let me explain to you how the game is played then.
In Pathfinder, Specific Rules > General Rules. Normally, Penalties and Ability Damage don't actually lower the score, they apply penalties that are specifically outlined in each ability score's section (located on this page):
Ability Damage: Damage to your Strength score causes you to take penalties on Strength-based skill checks, melee attack rolls, and weapon damage rolls (if they rely on Strength). The Ability Damage penalty also applies to your Combat Maneuver Bonus (if you are Small or larger) and your Combat Maneuver Defense. See Ability Score Damage below.
Damage to your Dexterity score causes you to take penalties on Dexterity-based skill checks, ranged attack rolls, initiative checks, and Reflex saving throws. The Ability Damage penalty also applies to your Armor Class, your Combat Maneuver Bonus (if you are Tiny or smaller), and to your Combat Maneuver Defense. See Ability Score Damage below.
Ability Damage: Damage to your Constitution score causes you to take penalties on your Fortitude saving throws. In addition, multiply your total Hit Dice by the Ability Damage penalty and subtract that amount from your current and total hit points. Lost hit points are restored when the damage to your Constitution is healed. See Ability Score Damage below.
Ability Damage: Damage to your Intelligence score causes you to take penalties on Intelligence-based skill checks. The Ability Damage penalty also applies to any spell DCs based on Intelligence. See Ability Score Damage below.
Ability Damage: Damage to your Wisdom score causes you to take penalties on Wisdom-based skill checks and Will saving throws. The Ability Damage penalty also applies to any spell DCs based on Wisdom. See Ability Score Damage below.
Ability Damage: Damage to your Charisma score causes you to take penalties on Charisma-based skill checks. The Ability Damage penalty also applies to any spell DCs based off Charisma and the DC to resist your channeled energy. See Ability Score Damage below.
^---- These are General Rules, if you take ability damage or receive an ability score penalty, this is what would generally happen to your character depending on which ability score was damaged/penalized.
However, in this example, we're talking about a 2nd level spell called Touch of Idiocy, and it has a Specific Rule that override these ---^ General Rules. And remember now, Specific Rules > General Rules.
This spell’s effect may make it impossible for the target to cast some or all of its spells, if the requisite ability score drops below the minimum required to cast spells of that level.
So in this case, Touch of Idiocy functions a lot like Ability Drain, because the penalty from Touch of Idiocy can actually make it impossible to cast certain levels of spells. When you get Ability Drain, it actually DOES lower the ability score. And generally speaking, if you receive Ability Drain, then it can render your character unable to cast spells, or nullify certain feats, such as if your Strength gets Ability Drained below 13 Strength, then you can no longer Power Attack.
Does this all make sense? Hopefully, this explanation of how Specific Rules override General Rules wasn't too confusing.
I had already acknowledged that you are right for Touch of Idiocy.
The comment on the last line in Touch of idiocy is valid. For that spell. I should have checked the spell and not only the general rule.
Yeah but you kept on talking like these rules for penalties and ability damage---v are somehow relevant to the discussion, as a part of your Red Herring strategy to muddy the waters and escape the conversation to save face after doing your nitpicking thing and realizing that you were horribly wrong.
How penalties to stat work is spelled in the rules, and they work as ability damage. Ability damage doesn't lower a stat. So, barring specific text in the spell, a penalty to a stat doesn't change the stat value.
=============================================
And you got my response deleted by an Admin, so now you get a much more thought out response. If you can't handle the heat, then stay out of the kitchen.
The easiest way to get Ryze agro is saying something like this...
You don't know how penalties work in Pathfinder.
...after I've already told you to beat it. You picked this fight, not me.
|
|
And you got my first post deleted by an Admin, so now you get a much more thought out response. If you can't handle the heat, then stay out of the kitchen.
The easiest way to get Ryze agro is saying something like this...
You don't know how penalties work in Pathfinder....after I've already told you to beat it. You picked this fight, not me.
Do you want to know the fun part?
I haven't reported any of your posts in this thread.When we get deleted by the Administrators, we do that to ourselves, as it is a consequence of what we post.
Yeah but you kept on talking like these rules for penalties and ability damage---v is somehow relevant to the discussion, as a part of your Red Herring strategy to muddy the waters and escape the conversation to save face after doing your nitpicking thing and realizing that you were horribly wrong.
How penalty work is related to how having a low casting stat happens, so it is relevant to this thread.
Some specific penalties effect reduce the ability scores, but generic penalties don't.BTW, you have introduced the argument, so saying that it is not relevant is a bit strange.