|
In discussing the feat recognize spell, it came up that you can’t use recognize spell if you have it prepared. This doesn’t seem like it would be the intent, and I’m curious if this is the feats actual intent or was it meant to allow the use on prepared spells to potentially get the +1 bonus?
specifically
> Trigger A creature within line of sight casts a spell **that you don’t have prepared or in your spell repertoire,** or a trap or similar object casts such a spell. You must be aware of the casting.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You automatically recognize any spell you have prepared or in your spell repertoire. No check or action of any kind required. That's why Recognize Spell only triggers on spells you don't have prepared or in your repertoire.
|
|
You automatically recognize any spell you have prepared or in your spell repertoire. No check or action of any kind required. That's why Recognize Spell only triggers on spells you don't have prepared or in your repertoire.
I think you’re missing my point. You don’t get the chance to crit success and get the +1 bonus against the attack.
In PF2 we generally try to avoid trap options and encourage optimal play. The game is hard enough as it is.
So if I was GM and a player really wanted to spend their reaction to identify a spell that they already identified - hoping to crit succeed at a check in order to get a +1 bonus against it... I would probably let them. But would warn them that it seems like a misuse of resources.
That definitely seems like an unintended side effect of the RAW of the feat and the quick fix Finoan suggested is how I've seen this issue handled at the table. (It also doesn't waste your reaction if you take Quick Recognition)
On the other hand, I can't recall anyone ever actually getting a critical success on Recognize Spell at a table I've played at. There's several ancestries (ancient blooded dwarf for sure) that can get a bonus against magic, no check required, if that's what you're looking for.
|
|
Well it came up more looking at a wizard that may not have much else to use their reactions on in between turns anyhow so it seemed like it should be allowed. I agree that I’ve definitely ruled you could use it that way. I’m more curious about why they chose to write the rule as though you can’t do that.
I’m more curious about why they chose to write the rule as though you can’t do that.
Probably because writing rules like this and foreseeing all of the possible ways that it could be used is a very hard thing to do.
There are plenty of other rules that have had to be fixed after they were first written.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I imagine the process went along the lines of "How do we allow people to identify spells as they're being cast they don't know?" Then they decided to make it a skill feat and realized they should give some sort of bonus for crit succeeding the check.