Pathfinder 1E Can a multi-class cleric/wizard lose a wizard spell in order to "Spontaneously" cast cure?

[Mon]

It's tied up in the multi-classing section.

class abilities, most of which are based on the total number of class levels that a character possesses of that particular class.

Emphasis mine.

Cleric spontaneous casting is derived from cleric levels and is therefore based on the character's total number of cleric levels, as explicitly called out in the PRD quote above. Cleric spell slots come from cleric levels.

Wizard spell slots are derived from wizard levels, not cleric levels.

Nothing mentioned in the PRD section on multiclassing about class abilities being based on other class levels at all.

Spontaneous casting is based on cleric levels not wizard levels. So slots from wizard levels are outside the scope of spontaneous casting. As per the PRD.

 

[Elf Witch]

If you're worrying about balance whilst happily allowing people to play full-casters in 3.XE/PF, you are probably running the wrong game. 3.XE/PF have many many merits. Being "balanced", though, is no more one of them than "having an accessible, reliable skill system" was for 1E.

I think it really depends on the group, personally. If they have ample sources of healing, I wouldn't allow it, because, yeah, it's probably not intended and doesn't necessarily make complete sense. If this guy was the only healer, though, I'd probably allow it - after all, from a DM's perspective, the chances are he's burning a spell for healing now that would actually prevent a lot of need for healing later...

Really you had to go there. Just because 3E/Pathfinder are not as finely balanced as other editions does not mean that it it is a good idea to just say anything goes. I like 3E quite a lot and you can completely unbalance the game to make it unplayable if you don't carefully consider house rules and changing the RAW.

I might allow this if the party was really lacking on healing and the party did not have access to a lot of wands, potions and scrolls. With the magic economy of 3E/Pathfinder allowing a multiclassed wizard/cleric to use wizard spells to channel healing might not be the limitation you think it is. Not if they have access to ways to get more wizard spells through items.

 

[andreww]

Imagine a Wizard 19/Cleric 1 gaining access to all cure spells.

I really dont see the problem with this. It's not as if the cure spells are actually any good. Oh noes, I could lose a prepared Teleport spell to cast Mass Cure Light Wounds. Seriously, cure spells are pretty awful during combat and barely worth it over very cheap wands out of combat. Also you are giving up a level of wizard in order to do this, that is an enormous cost.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I like 3E quite a lot and you can completely unbalance the game to make it unplayable if you don't carefully consider house rules and changing the RAW.

By RAW, the game is extremely unbalanced in favour of casters (particularly single-class or PrC-using wizards and clerics), certainly post-6 or 10, and indeed some would consider it "unplayable", RAW (I would disagree, but it's not exactly un-heard-of as an opinion - it's the main reason the E6 and E10 rules exist, which were once very popular). Obviously, one should consider the consequences of rules, but this one is very straightforward - it robs the more-powerful wizard part of power to help the cleric part heal up the party. That is not going to unbalance the game nor make it unplayable.

I might allow this if the party was really lacking on healing and the party did not have access to a lot of wands, potions and scrolls. With the magic economy of 3E/Pathfinder allowing a multiclassed wizard/cleric to use wizard spells to channel healing might not be the limitation you think it is. Not if they have access to ways to get more wizard spells through items.

So, to be clear, you think that a party who had a bunch of wands of CLW and the like, and never, ever, needed to resort to Cleric healing (allowing the Cleric/Wizard to do other things with his spells) would be fine and balanced, but you believe that a Cleric/Wizard burning wizard spells to get what is, in the end, a similar effect to a wand of CLW and/or similar items, except at the huge cost of the loss of powerful wizard spells, would be unbalanced? That's not remotely convincing.

It absolutely is the limit I think it is, frankly, and this "ways to get more wizard spells through items" bit is meaningless, because by the same token, they could be getting more cleric spell-equivalents through items. That's pretty straightforward.

I really dont see the problem with this. It's not as if the cure spells are actually any good. Oh noes, I could lose a prepared Teleport spell to cast Mass Cure Light Wounds. Seriously, cure spells are pretty awful during combat and barely worth it over very cheap wands out of combat. Also you are giving up a level of wizard in order to do this, that is an enormous cost.

Precisely. It's not some sort of huge gain in power - it's actually rather a false gain, like levels of Monk in order to boost the AC of the wizard (which was a popular idea at the dawn of 3E, before people realized the real mechanical issues it created). Straightforwardly, you are giving up linear power for lateral flexibility, but that linear power ALSO provided other forms of lateral flexibility (which you lose out on), so it really is a serious trade-off.

I can see perfectly respectable RP/setting reasons not to allow this, but balance ones? No, not unless you have entirely rebalanced the healing mechanics of 3.XE/PF.

 

[tomBitonti]

The class ability text only applies in so far as telling you whether the character has an ability. A Cleric/Wizard does have the ability.

The ability states "a prepared spell which is not an orison or domain spell". And, refers, to "stored spell energy". Both texts interpret favorably to any prepared spell. "a prepared spell" is non-specific, and "stored spell energy" is non-specific. Further, the limitation supplied by the dependent "which is not an orison or domain spell", indicates that the writer considered limitations and chose to set those specific limitations. Perhaps an oversight, but reinforcing the any interpretation.

The text for domain spell is loose: This seems intended to refer to a spell prepared using a domain spell slot, but, "domain spell" would seem to mean a spell which is on a domain spell list. That would, as written, prevent a cleric with the Strength domain from converting Bull's Strength even it were prepared using a Wizard spell slot. The problem here is that "domain spell" is poorly defined. I'd interpret "domain spell" as "spell prepared in a domain slot".

The text would seem to allow the spells to be cast at a higher level than is normally allowed by the cleric, with "any cure spell of the same spell level or lower". A 19 Wizard / 1 Cleric would seem to be able to convert a 9'th level spell to Heal, Mass.

Thx!

TomB

 

[The Black Ranger]

I really dont see the problem with this. It's not as if the cure spells are actually any good. Oh noes, I could lose a prepared Teleport spell to cast Mass Cure Light Wounds. Seriously, cure spells are pretty awful during combat and barely worth it over very cheap wands out of combat. Also you are giving up a level of wizard in order to do this, that is an enormous cost.

Or I could burn up all those lower level spells and continuously heal the hell out of myself.

 

[The Black Ranger]

The class ability text only applies in so far as telling you whether the character has an ability. A Cleric/Wizard does have the ability.

The ability states "a prepared spell which is not an orison or domain spell". And, refers, to "stored spell energy". Both texts interpret favorably to any prepared spell. "a prepared spell" is non-specific, and "stored spell energy" is non-specific. Further, the limitation supplied by the dependent "which is not an orison or domain spell", indicates that the writer considered limitations and chose to set those specific limitations. Perhaps an oversight, but reinforcing the any interpretation.

The text for domain spell is loose: This seems intended to refer to a spell prepared using a domain spell slot, but, "domain spell" would seem to mean a spell which is on a domain spell list. That would, as written, prevent a cleric with the Strength domain from converting Bull's Strength even it were prepared using a Wizard spell slot. The problem here is that "domain spell" is poorly defined. I'd interpret "domain spell" as "spell prepared in a domain slot".

The text would seem to allow the spells to be cast at a higher level than is normally allowed by the cleric, with "any cure spell of the same spell level or lower". A 19 Wizard / 1 Cleric would seem to be able to convert a 9'th level spell to Heal, Mass.

Thx!

TomB

You forgot some text.

A good "cleric".

Also, the PRD under "multiclassing" spells it out pretty well.

 

[tomBitonti]

I'm seeing no text in the D20 SRD which would apply:

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/multiclass.htm

Spells

The character gains spells from all of his or her spellcasting classes and keeps a separate spell list for each class. If a spell’s effect is based on the class level of the caster, the player must keep track of which class’s spell list the character is casting the spell from.

The Pathfinder SRD has only:

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/character-advancement

Note that there are a number of effects and prerequisites that rely on a character's level or Hit Dice. Such effects are always based on the total number of levels or Hit Dice a character possesses, not just those from one class. The exception to this is class abilities, most of which are based on the total number of class levels that a character possesses of that particular class.

This answers the question of whether a W19/C1 has spontaneous casting, but does not modify the ability itself. This would answer the question of whether a F2/R1 would have Evasion.

The SRD are often a subset of the full rules text. Is there additional text which applies?

Thx!

TomB

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Or I could burn up all those lower level spells and continuously heal the hell out of myself.

And you'd still be reducing your power massively, because even lower-level Wizard spells are extremely powerful in both 3.XE and PF.

A wand of CLW lets you "continuously heal the hell out of yourself" a lot better than burning all your Wizard spells. Also, you're healing that much, something has gone horribly wrong. Probably because you're using all your highly effective low-level Wizard spells to heal people instead of y'know, win fights.

 

[tomBitonti]

Hi,

The problem with casting CLW (1d8+1) at 20'th level is that it is a huge waste of an action: Expected damage at that level is much more than 1d8+1, meaning, you would fall behind dramatically.

In medium to high power level games, only a dedicated healer will keep up with damage output. Say, a cleric with the healing domain and with augment healing can put out 1d8 + 2 (effective caster level) + 2 (augment) at first level. At fifth level, that would be 3d8 + 6 (effective caster level) + 6 (augment). There are at least two build paths (one uses a reserve feat, one uses turning powered abilities), if the Complete books are used.

Mass Heal, on the other hand, could be worth casting.

Thx!

TomB