Currently in a game and have a situation that I can't precisely tell how to handle the rules. They don't seem to have any direct rulings I can pull from so will explain the scenarios and what I assume is the intended route.
The character in question is a level 17 draconic bloodline sorcerer. They have spells up to level 9 in their repertoire and access to the arcane spell list. They've grabbed the Oracle Dedication with the Tempest bloodline and have grabbed basic spellcasting and minor revelation. Because of this they now have access to level 3 spells of the Divine list.
The character has found a True Healing Staff. They wish to prepare this staff in their next day of preparations.
Now in the staff rules it states
You can Cast a Spell from a staff only if you have that spell on your spell list, are able to cast spells of the appropriate level, and expend a number of charges from the staff equal to the spell’s level. Casting a Spell from a staff requires holding the staff (typically in one hand) and Activating the staff by Casting the Spell, which takes the spell’s normal number of actions.
Use your spell attack roll and spell DC when Casting a Spell from a staff. The spell gains the appropriate trait for your magical tradition (arcane, divine, occult, or primal) and can be affected by any modifications you can normally make when casting spells, such as metamagic feats. You must provide any material components, cost, or focus required by the spell, or you fail to cast it.
Based on this, RAW they can cast the spells in the staff from their Oracle dedication, and their highest level spell is level 9 from sorcerer. However, I cannot tell if they'd gain the trait of Divine or Arcane based on this.
RAI I'd assume they'd have to prepare it as an oracle, which would mean that although they can prepare it they'd only have 3 charges available. Or that they can't prepare it at all because they cannot cast spells of the appropriate level in the staff on the oracle side of their casting.
However, if the sorcerer were to grab the Crossblooded Evolution feat they could then add Heal to their spell list on the arcane side. This would mean that they could prepare the staff with 9 charges and cast Heal from it, giving the spells the arcane trait as well. RAI I'd assume that they could also cast Remove Disease at level 7 from the staff, as similar to a scroll they'd have access to it on their list on the oracle side. This however also doesn't seem to have an exact ruling.
My question is, is this correct? How would you handle this situation? Is there a clarification made anywhere for situations like this?
|
During your daily preparations, you can prepare a staff to add charges to it for free. When you do so, that staff gains a number of charges equal to the level of your highest-level spell slot. You don't need to expend any spells to add charges in this way. No one can prepare more than one staff per day, nor can a staff be prepared by more than one person per day. If the charges aren't used within 24 hours, they're lost, and preparing the staff anew removes any charges previously stored in it. You can prepare a staff only if you have at least one of the staff's spells on your spell list.
You do not prepare spells based on any specific spellcasting tradition or class. So one would not prepare it as an oracle as opposed to sorcerer. They would prepare it as a person. A fighter could prepare a stave, they just wouldn't get any charges or be able to cast anything off of it.
As for the tradition, the trait would be based on which tradition they have that gives them access to that spell. If multiple, i guess they could choose. Though, the DC or whatnot would be based on the tradition used.
So in summary, in the situation, the character would get 9 charges and the spells would be cast as divine spells.
I'm not seeing anything in preparing a staff that makes a distinction between traditions of your spell slots. It simply says that you add charges based on the highest level of spell slot that you have.
Casting from the staff requires that you are capable of casting that spell at that level. So if the character only has 3rd level spell slots of the spells that are on the staff, then that is as high of spells as they can cast from the staff.
If they have the same spell available from another tradition at a higher level, I don't see any reason why they couldn't cast the spells from the staff at that level. Again, staff preparation doesn't seem to make a distinction between traditions. And staff casting also doesn't care about the tradition - just that you have the spell on your spell list at that level.
|
|
You can Cast a Spell from a staff only if you have that spell on your spell list, are able to cast spells of the appropriate level, and expend a number of charges from the staff equal to the spell’s level. Casting a Spell from a staff requires holding the staff (typically in one hand) and Activating the staff by Casting the Spell, which takes the spell’s normal number of actions.
There seems to be possible confusion.
There are specific requirements to casting a spell from a stave. So long as you can meet those requirements, you can cast it.
1) Have the spell on your spell list.
2) Able to cast spells of the level of the specific spell.
3) Expend charges from the stave equal to the spell's level
4) You are holding the stave.
So, in the above example..the character is attempting to cast Regenerate
1) Yes (oracle dedication gave divine spell list)
2) Yes (can cast 7th level spells via sorcerer class)
3) Yes (has 9 charges because has 9th level spell slots)
4) Yes (holding is easy)
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, archetypes and staves are a question that we haven't been able to corner the devs on yet. We've tried in the past but no result.
The stave rules ask that you have the spell on your list (check, through oracle) and that you can cast spells of the appropriate level (check, through sorcerer).
The question is whether the devs meant to write "have the spell on your list and be able to cast spells of the appropriate level FROM THAT LIST".
We don't have an official answer. Technically it seems like you could do this, but it seems a bit too good to be true to me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Currently in a game and have a situation that I can't precisely tell how to handle the rules. They don't seem to have any direct rulings I can pull from so will explain the scenarios and what I assume is the intended route.
The character in question is a level 17 draconic bloodline sorcerer. They have spells up to level 9 in their repertoire and access to the arcane spell list. They've grabbed the Oracle Dedication with the Tempest bloodline and have grabbed basic spellcasting and minor revelation. Because of this they now have access to level 3 spells of the Divine list.
The character has found a True Healing Staff. They wish to prepare this staff in their next day of preparations.
Now in the staff rules it states
You can Cast a Spell from a staff only if you have that spell on your spell list, are able to cast spells of the appropriate level, and expend a number of charges from the staff equal to the spell’s level. Casting a Spell from a staff requires holding the staff (typically in one hand) and Activating the staff by Casting the Spell, which takes the spell’s normal number of actions.
Use your spell attack roll and spell DC when Casting a Spell from a staff. The spell gains the appropriate trait for your magical tradition (arcane, divine, occult, or primal) and can be affected by any modifications you can normally make when casting spells, such as metamagic feats. You must provide any material components, cost, or focus required by the spell, or you fail to cast it.
Based on this, RAW they can cast the spells in the staff from their Oracle dedication, and their highest level spell is level 9 from sorcerer. However, I cannot tell if they'd gain the trait of Divine or Arcane based on this.
RAI I'd assume they'd have to prepare it as an oracle, which would mean that although they can prepare it they'd only have 3 charges available. Or that they can't prepare it at all because they cannot cast...
RAW, the character doesn't need full Oracle spellcasting to be able to cast 9th level Heal spells from the staff. They are already able to cast spells of the appropriate level (9th), and the rules don't regard tradition very much, especially for spells that cross traditions; Heal being an example of being on both Primal and Divine, meaning it shouldn't matter if a Cleric or a Druid prepares the staff. If Heal is on their tradition list, and they can cast the appropriate level, it works. It doesn't matter if the tradition is limited to 3rd level spells, for example. (Though if certain magic items are to be ruled in a certain way, spell levels are limited only by available slots and not by character level.)
RAI is much more suspect, since it seems a little unintended for a non-Divine Sorcerer to be able to cast Divine spells from a staff with a mere 2 feat investment that circumvents the traditional means of utilizing such spells. Even if it checks all the boxes of RAW, it doesn't "feel" right to me to allow it unequivocably.
I wouldn't question it with the Crossblooded feat, though, since at that point Heal is now considered an Arcane spell for the purposes of preparation and casting for the character, in which case they would qualify to be able to cast a 9th level Heal spell innately (assuming it's a Signature Spell), which I find to be the main intent behind casting spells from a Staff.
|
|
I find the TGTBT argument a bit hollow considering that any spell on a stave could be cast from a wand or a scroll for the same reasons.
I will also add...
Some archetypes grant you spellcasting abilities, albeit delayed compared to a character from a spellcasting class. In this book, the spellcasting archetypes are bard, cleric, druid, sorcerer, and wizard, but future books might introduce spellcasting archetypes that aren't multiclass archetypes. A spellcasting archetype allows you to use scrolls, staves, and wands in the same way that a member of a spellcasting class can, and the basic spellcasting feat counts as having a spellcasting class feature.
|
|
As an added thing
To cast a spell from a wand, it must be on your spell list. Because you’re the one casting the spell, use your spell attack roll and spell DC. The spell is of your tradition.
To Cast a Spell from a scroll, the spell must appear on your spell list. Because you’re the one Casting the Spell, use your spell attack roll and spell DC. The spell also gains the appropriate trait for your tradition (arcane, divine, occult, or primal).
Nope, scrolls and wands aren't staves. Saying they're the same thing and therefore what works for the first two also works for the last one is absurd and incorrect.
No point in arguing anything else, though, the forums seem so keen on trying to break spellcasters again by any means necessary, even though this was an edition meant to put them in their place.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I find the TGTBT argument a bit hollow considering that any spell on a stave could be cast from a wand or a scroll for the same reasons.
I also think it is too good to be true that characters can cast from scrolls and wands without regard to what spell slots they are able to use.
For base class spellcasters the monetary cost of such items prevents them from getting out of hand. But being able to cast on-level scrolls at high level play with nothing more than a spellcasting dedication feat or both the dedication feat and Basic Spellcasting depending on what side of that particular debate your table lands on - well, that just seems unbalanced.
I'm not going to contest that it is what the rules currently say. I'm just saying that I don't like it.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Seems like the assumptions people are making about spell levels is a bit generous and I'm not sure it's as clear cut as people are trying to suggest it is. The design seems to suggest that tradition is meant to matter here.
No point in arguing anything else, though, the forums seem so keen on trying to break spellcasters again by any means necessary, even though this was an edition meant to put them in their place.
Man someone is still really salty that rings of wizardry exist.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
RAI is always up to interpretation where things are vague until clarification is issued, and therefore meaningless in this sub-forum in my view.
If a rule doesn't state it applies to a Staff, it doesn't. We have no way of knowing the intent of the developers unless they come out with official statements and clarifications and trying to pretend we can assume intent is akin to trying to assure a crowd we can read minds.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seems like the assumptions people are making about spell levels is a bit generous and I'm not sure it's as clear cut as people are trying to suggest it is. The design seems to suggest that tradition is meant to matter here.
Man someone is still really salty that rings of wizardry exist.
No point in arguing anything else, though, the forums seem so keen on trying to break spellcasters again by any means necessary, even though this was an edition meant to put them in their place.
Tradition as well as spell level. Tradition only matters for wands and scrolls, but staves also have a spell level caveat to them. If spell level didn't matter for staves, then a clarification for what "appropriate spell level" actually meant when operating them wouldn't have been warranted with a response. The question becomes if both matter simultaneously or separately, and while RAW permits separate allowance, it's a question if it meant simultaneous allowance. If I could cast 3rd level spells of one tradition, and 9th level spells of another, is that enough to fulfill staff casting requirements for higher level spells of the original tradition? The rules didn't assume cross-tradition casting with staves, and the clarification only refers to downcasting (and not upcasting), so the idea that it was permissible the whole time isn't a very substantiated one.
Enough with the strawmen. Finding obvious attempts to cheese a deliberately limited casting method does not mean I hate the Ring of Wizardry or am upset that it exists, because prior to Bounded Spellcasting, I didn't have any issues with its existence or how it was ran. Feel free to check my post history to know for sure.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
IMO:
RAW: Yes you can. You meet the requirements "you have that spell on your spell list, are able to cast spells of the appropriate level, and expend a number of charges from the staff equal to the spell’s level".
RAI: No. Even meeting the requirements you don't have access to such spells in you currently tradition and you are forcing the rules to allow this because you met the similar situation using another spellcasting tradition that don't have such spell but meet the general staff rules to cast it. But if you have access to that spell by other means like for example Crossblooded Evolution I would allow it. You can also try to use it using Trick Magic Item action.
Balance: No. Use of a lvl 2 dedication feat to workaround a high level spell access in a staff don't feels right and correctly balanced.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a permissive GM and I wouldn't allow it. Spell list poaching is pretty well restricted, and this would give you unrealistically high tier off-list spell access for not much investment.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for the discourse. I wish we could have a clearer answer but the rules I've gone with are:
With crossblooded you gain full access to the staff, it uses arcane trait
Without crossblooded you gain 9 charges but can't cast anything above level 3 on the staff, it gains the divine trait
Figured it'd be a good middle ground as right now they're using the oracle dedication to cast divine scrolls and not much more.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That seems like a reasonable ruling from a practical and 'rule of cool' standpoint. Which is mostly what I hope people take away from these rules discussions - that they can make rulings in their own games with full understanding of the results.
|
|
That seems like a reasonable ruling from a practical and 'rule of cool' standpoint. Which is mostly what I hope people take away from these rules discussions - that they can make rulings in their own games with full understanding of the results.
Agreed
I think I understand people's opinions on this but I'm a little confused how casting a spell from a stave is any different than casting from a scroll or wand. Or am I missing that that is an objection too?
After thinking about it more, any character, regardless of class can pick up Trick Magic Item, Assurance (Arcana), and Unified Theory. This gives access to use a scroll or wand of any spell level up to two lower than a full caster can cast at your level.
...with 3 skill feats...any tradition...
You aren’t counting the skill increases required. Unified Theory requires Legendary in Arcana.
Most would be better off getting trained in all the magic skills since it is so much easier to get Trained than it is to advance beyond that proficiency.
|
|
After thinking about it more, any character, regardless of class can pick up Trick Magic Item, Assurance (Arcana), and Unified Theory. This gives access to use a scroll or wand of any spell level up to two lower than a full caster can cast at your level.
...with 3 skill feats...any tradition...
You aren’t counting the skill increases required. Unified Theory requires Legendary in Arcana.
Most would be better off getting trained in all the magic skills since it is so much easier to get Trained than it is to advance beyond that proficiency.
Sure, 3 skill increases as well. I don't know if that really changes my point. People were concerned about access to different traditions being a balance issue. With 3 skill feats (2 really) and 3 skill increases, you can cast any spell (except lvl 10) from any tradition.
Edit:OH! And! If your GM is stingy about the spell level - tradition thing, you can just get Trick Magic Item. Retrain out of the multiclass class feats because you can just use your base class slots to determine how many charges the stave has and then Trick Magic Item to use whatever stave you want. You'll be able to cast any spell on any stave.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Edit:OH! And! If your GM is stingy about the spell level - tradition thing, you can just get Trick Magic Item. Retrain out of the multiclass class feats because you can just use your base class slots to determine how many charges the stave has and then Trick Magic Item to use whatever stave you want. You'll be able to cast any spell on any stave.
Not quite, but it is pretty close. You do need at least one spell from the staff on your spell list.
You can prepare a staff only if you have at least one of the staff's spells on your spell list.
|
|
Edit:OH! And! If your GM is stingy about the spell level - tradition thing, you can just get Trick Magic Item. Retrain out of the multiclass class feats because you can just use your base class slots to determine how many charges the stave has and then Trick Magic Item to use whatever stave you want. You'll be able to cast any spell on any stave.Not quite, but it is pretty close. You do need at least one spell from the staff on your spell list.
You can prepare a staff only if you have at least one of the staff's spells on your spell list.
Fair enough. So don't retrain out of the initial dedication. Noted. And pick up a third tradition via dedication if you can (especially if you're human at 9th level).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or the various spell poaching feats like Crossblooded Evolution, Divine Access, Witch Lessons, or at high level Bard - Impossible Polymath.
Remember too that Trick Magic Item is very good but have it's self imposed limitations too.
Basically you can only cast up 2-action spells and it add one more action to "cast" and also has a good chance of failure .
|
|
You are right, only 1-2 action spells can be cast with TMI. That is a seriously balancing thing, there aren't many spells that are 1-2 action casts...
"Good chance of failure"
....? What?
If your trying to cast at-level spells maybe. When it comes to TMI, the DC is dependent on the item level of the thing you are trying to activate.
An 8th level scroll and 7th level wand both are 15th level items, which have a DC of 34.
A 17th level character with legendary in Arcana, Assurance in Arcana, and Unified Theory gets an auto....35! (no intelligence necessary)
(In case you are doubting my math...10+17+8=35)
..psssst! A true staff of healing is item level....16...DC 35...
9th level wand : item level 19 : DC 39
Legendary Assurance at lvl 18 : 36
After being inspired to look into the possibilities of Trick Magic Item, I'm even less convinced that the RAW in question is a balance issue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am not really sure how TMI interact with staves though:
TMI [too much information] is always bad. ;)
For many different reasons you cannot use TMI to prepare a staff only to use it.
So a Fighter is unable to use a staff without some spellcasting dedication. But any caster can prepare a staff so if it prepares a staff that have spells that are not present in it's tradition it can use TMI to try to cast that spell.
You are right, only 1-2 action spells can be cast with TMI. That is a seriously balancing thing, there aren't many spells that are 1-2 action casts...
"Good chance of failure"
....? What?
If your trying to cast at-level spells maybe. When it comes to TMI, the DC is dependent on the item level of the thing you are trying to activate.An 8th level scroll and 7th level wand both are 15th level items, which have a DC of 34.
A 17th level character with legendary in Arcana, Assurance in Arcana, and Unified Theory gets an auto....35! (no intelligence necessary)
(In case you are doubting my math...10+17+8=35)
..psssst! A true staff of healing is item level....16...DC 35...
** spoiler omitted **
After being inspired to look into the possibilities of Trick Magic Item, I'm even less convinced that the RAW in question is a balance issue.
You are paying fo this to avoid failure using 3 skill feats a lvl 1 assurance, lvl 1 TMI and a lvl 15 Unified Theory. So make sense once you are using 3 limited feat slots as resource "just" to allow you to use another tradition itens without failure and without have to train to legendary in other skills.
Many people underestimate this forgetting how good skill feats are. For example to have Unified Theory at level 15 you cannot take another good feat like Scare to Death in this level.
|
|
You are right, I focused too hard on making it easier. Unified Theory distracted from my point.
With just TMI and trained in another traditions skill...
Level 17
With no other bonuses you've got a +19 which non-1 autos 2nd level spell scrolls. On 1 you just fail.
The point is, with a level 1 skill feat and trained in 3 of the 4 tradition skills you can get access to cast almost any spell. I'm honestly not seeing the balance issue with the RAW in question. It uses a class feat, which I would posit is more valuable than a skill feat.
Mostly I find it strange that you can use items higher than you are even capable of casting based on your character level. A 5th level Wizard casting 7th level scrolls and such like that. This one does feel like a balance problem.
In most games that will be prevented by the cost of the items. But it feels like a bit of a trap option on the GM.
And for archetype characters it is mostly for narrative reasons rather than game balance. If the Wizard couldn't cast 7th level scrolls when they only had 3rd level spell slots, why can the 15th level Fighter who archetypes to Wizard do so when they also only have 3rd level spell slots?
You are right, I focused too hard on making it easier. Unified Theory distracted from my point.
With just TMI and trained in another traditions skill...
Level 17
With no other bonuses you've got a +19 which non-1 autos 2nd level spell scrolls. On 1 you just fail.The point is, with a level 1 skill feat and trained in 3 of the 4 tradition skills you can get access to cast almost any spell. I'm honestly not seeing the balance issue with the RAW in question. It uses a class feat, which I would posit is more valuable than a skill feat.
You have a point but I still feels that just one level 2 class feat (that you can also take via heritage or lvl 9 ancestry feat if you are an ancient elf or human or any other ancestry with Adopted Ancestry) can substitute an entire requirement of many skill training and feats to basically use any staff (if you take your "opposite" tradition via dedication feat you basically is able to use 99% of spellcasting itens of the game without any additional restriction).
It's RAW I know so it's completely acceptable and in a large view it won't break the game but still feels too good to be true. So I perfectly understand a GM that wan't to restrict or other that want to allow it.
In the end an Ancient Elf Staff Nexus Wizard with a Cleric/Oracle/Divine Sorcerer dedication will could use a full powered Staff of Healing with up to 36 charges. This is just strange. It's looks like that absurd multiclass interactions of D&D 5e.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mostly I find it strange that you can use items higher than you are even capable of casting based on your character level. A 5th level Wizard casting 7th level scrolls and such like that. This one does feel like a balance problem.
In most games that will be prevented by the cost of the items. But it feels like a bit of a trap option on the GM.
As a GM it's the opposite, it's a supremely useful tool! I have complete control over the level of items players acquire, so I know when they are getting higher than normal level scrolls. It lets me give them an effect that's important for a story reason, but slightly out of their current reach, without worrying about them having it all the time.
As a GM it's the opposite, it's a supremely useful tool! I have complete control over the level of items players acquire, so I know when they are getting higher than normal level scrolls. It lets me give them an effect that's important for a story reason, but slightly out of their current reach, without worrying about them having it all the time.
Yeah. Though not all GMs are that experienced.
And that could also be done by GM Fiat too. I remember a particular not-scroll at the beginning of Age of Ashes that was used by an NPC. Similar could be done for the PCs too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
GM: OK. I have looked through Agents of Edgewatch, and I don't want you to all feel like you have to bully the townsfolk all the time, so we are running with ABP.
Player1: Cool. How about consumables?
GM: Hmm... Well, there is also the wealth by level tables that list consumables, so how about we just have consumable slots that you can fill between days by requisitioning stuff from the office.
Player2: Awesome. Absalom is at least a level 12 settlement, so we can load up on scrolls of 6th level spells.
Player3: Sweet. Well, I know what I am using my 2nd level class feat on then.
GM: Wait, hold on. What?
|
|
As a GM it's the opposite, it's a supremely useful tool! I have complete control over the level of items players acquire, so I know when they are getting higher than normal level scrolls. It lets me give them an effect that's important for a story reason, but slightly out of their current reach, without worrying about them having it all the time.Yeah. Though not all GMs are that experienced.
And that could also be done by GM Fiat too. I remember a particular not-scroll at the beginning of Age of Ashes that was used by an NPC. Similar could be done for the PCs too.
How much GM experience do you need to realize that an item with a significantly different level than the PCs might be wacky?
And with scrolls it's even more obvious. "Hey, this item lets you use a spell that's higher level than you could do with your own abilities. Is that powerful?"
How much GM experience do you need to realize that an item with a significantly different level than the PCs might be wacky?
I don't know. Do you?
Also, did you read my immediately previous post? It isn't always as simple as a GM saying, "OK, here have some high level scrolls for the lols."
How experienced does a GM need to be in order to recognize that houserule A will lead to location B and NPC C giving a high level item to the PCs?
How much social fortitude is needed in order for a GM to stand up to their friends or strangers and walk back a houserule that has been in place for many sessions?
I don't know the answers to those questions either, so I would rather err on the side of caution and put in item level casting and usage limits that an experienced GM can houserule away or bypass with specific custom items created for plot reasons.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I believe you're overthinking it. GM control over item level access is fundamental to running the game and is incredibly easy to grasp.
Yeah, I believe you're overthinking it.
That is very possible. I do tend to do that.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
GM: OK. I have looked through Agents of Edgewatch, and I don't want you to all feel like you have to bully the townsfolk all the time, so we are running with ABP.
Player1: Cool. How about consumables?
GM: Hmm... Well, there is also the wealth by level tables that list consumables, so how about we just have consumable slots that you can fill between days by requisitioning stuff from the office.
Player2: Awesome. Absalom is at least a level 12 settlement, so we can load up on scrolls of 6th level spells.
Player3: Sweet. Well, I know what I am using my 2nd level class feat on then.
GM: Wait, hold on. What?
GM: Ha, ha..thanks for pointing that out. Your consumables access will be limited by either character level or settlement level, whichever is lower.
Problem solved.
GM: Ha, ha..thanks for pointing that out. Your consumables access will be limited by either character level or settlement level, whichever is lower.
Problem solved.
Indeed. Which is why I am all for making that the standard ruling more explicitly.