|
| 5 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would really like my druid to be able to use this spell when I go through the eyes of the ten with him at the end of March 2015.
The issue is with the spell material component which is Black Adder Venom.
The spell is from Inner Sea Gods and legal to use according to Additional Resources.
The material component, Black Adder Venom is not legal for purchase in Pathfinder Society Play according to the FAQ and even if it was, the Druid Class is not allowed to buy poisons.
So either the spell needs to be listed as illegal for use in Society play OR there needs to be a FAQ stating that Spell Material Components for allowed spells are always available for purchase in Society but those components with other uses that are not legal must be used only as a spell component.
I was going to suggest false focus would allow some people to cast this, however the cost for a vial of black adder venom is just over the limit (120g). The only way I can see currently possible would be if you had black adder venom listed on a chronicle sheet.
I know it doesn't help you, but other casters that have access to Blood Money would also be able to cast this spell under the current rules without a FAQ being added.
edit: also the additional resources does list black adder venom as purchasable for Alchemists, ninja, and poisoner rogues, so you could dip a level for access to buy. Also if you have one of those classes in your eyes of the ten group, you could ask them nicely to buy a couple to loan you during the session in case you need them.
I know these aren't ideal options for you, but they are options.
|
|
I know it doesn't help you, but other casters that have access to Blood Money would also be able to cast this spell under the current rules without a FAQ being added.edit: also the additional resources does list black adder venom as purchasable for Alchemists, ninja, and poisoner rogues, so you could dip a level for access to buy. Also if you have one of those classes in your eyes of the ten group, you could ask them nicely to buy a couple to loan you during the session in case you need them.
Unfortunately we have no poisoners, ninjas or alchemists in the Eyes of Ten group.
Also, I would not dip one level for a single spell, I don't need it that bad plus I am already exactly 12th level that would not be possible.
Since the spell doesn't specify the cost of the vial of venom you could say that its a spell component so its therefore included in your spell component pouch.
It appears I was looking to deep and didn't see the obvious answer, well put and I agree with the above, much better.
|
|
Since the spell doesn't specify the cost of the vial of venom you could say that its a spell component so its therefore included in your spell component pouch.
It doesn't specify cost but it does specify a specific poison that has a price per vial (120 GP) which is more than the generic 25 GP limit. I have already spoken to the two GM's and they would enforce only legal PFS play which would require that I purchase the venom.
I do have one chronicle on the character that has black adder venom listed but it is limited to three vials. So I could cast the spell three times. I just wanted the ability to cast it more than that.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
unless the inner sea gods gets an errata adding a cost... the GMs can't stop you since per the core rulebook...
Material (M): A material component consists of one or more physical substances or objects that are annihilated by the spell energies in the casting process. Unless a cost is given for a material component, the cost is negligible. Don’t bother to keep track of material components with negligible cost. Assume you have all you need as long as you have your spell component pouch.
the fact there may or may not be a different cost to the component is irrelevant per the above text.
if there were an easier answer that made more sense (spell components always available) I would prefer to see that alternative. But this does allow you to play. Perhaps buy those three vials and assume the spell component only uses a small portion of it.
|
Think of it this way... a spell pouch has a sampling of the venom which is sufficient for the spell use as it only needs a droplet sized amount, but is an insufficient quantity to poison anyone as that requires a significant volume by comparison. (A suggestion on how to envision the rule without harming suspension of disbelief.)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Saying the GM is "going against RAW" is incorrect - RAW says two different things on the matter, and they can't both be right. In cases like this, the GM makes the call. And that call is right, because it does not violate RAW, and also make sense and was accepted by the player (who is now looking for a different way to accomplish the goal within the rules).
(Sorry, I hate it when folks try to say a GM is somehow cheating when they make a ruling on an area like this. Taking one line of the CRB in a vacuum while ignoring others is not RAW, it's poor reasoning.)
|
|
NO. There is only one rule in this area. And it is quoted above. Material component's cost nothing unless specifically called out in the spell's description. There is no other rule for that to be in conflict with.
Most every thing that is a material component could be ruled to have a cost under that interpretation which would upend the whole point of the spell component pouch and the material component rule in the first place. For instance, Dragon's Breath from the APG calls for a dragon's scale. A tiny bit of effort reveals that dragon hide is very valuable so does that spell now have a cost despite it clearly not? What about lightning bolt? A glass rod is obviously an item which must be manufactured so it obviously has some value.
There is a difference between "has some value" and "is an item listed on the equipment list with a cost associated with it". If a spell had a long sword as a material component, would you argue that it is free and contained in a spell component pouch as well?
The fact that it is being debated, and that the OP's 2 previous GMs ruled opposite to you, suggests that it is in fact a grey area. In cases like this, unless and until it is clarified, then the GM makes the call, and they are right. Please stop telling GMs at other tables that they are doing it wrong, when that is only your opinion and not one that is supported by ironclad RAW.
|
|
I simply read the CRB. I understand where you are coming from but you have no basis in the rules.
Again, that is your opinion, one that is not shared by at least three other GMs who have read the same rulebook you have. Lucian already pointed out one interpretation above; there are others.
When you're the GM, you can make the grey area call your way. I think it is counterproductive to tell GMs that they can't make the call differently, though, when in fact they can.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Its a matter of how you read
Unless a cost is given for a material component, the cost is negligible
as either
Unless a cost is given [in the component line] for a material component, the cost is negligible
or
Unless a cost is given [somewhere] for a material component, the cost is negligible
and if the later, you assume that the black adder venom is a full dose, not a drop.
|
Adding words isn't simply reading the rules. It is making rules up. If I can insert words into rules I can change any rule to suit my whim.
The rule is simply and only:
"Material (M):A material component consists of one or more physical substances or objects that are annihilated by the spell energies in the casting process. Unless a cost is given for a material component, the cost is negligible."
I would have to agree with Lamplighter and possibly BigNorseWolf here. [somewhere] is the implied location unless otherwise specified otherwise, and it doesn't specify otherwise. He isn't adding rules(and that's precisely what errata does). He's interpreting them as given. The ruling may be corrected in the future, but until then, I would stop arguing with the 4-star GM so harshly.
|
|
Adding words isn't simply reading the rules. It is making rules up. If I can insert words into rules I can change any rule to suit my whim.
Its not inserting words. Its interpreteting the exact same words differently. Its a neccesary part of reading comprehension because no readable english sentence is going to be perfectly clear.
The rule is simply and only:
"Material (M):A material component consists of one or more physical substances or objects that are annihilated by the spell energies in the casting process. Unless a cost is given for a material component, the cost is negligible."
Right, but it doesn't technically say WHERE it had to be listed. Its heavily implied by the material component line to be in the material component line but doesn't come right out and say it.
Please note that I not only agree with you, but was the one to make the argument in the first place. I just don't think its good enough to try to beat the dm over the core rulebook with.
|
I am sorry, but those advocating a cost when one isn't listed, and trying to justify it by implying that an item could have value somewhere else, are making my brain hurt :P Sheesh!
I did a quick search using the d20pfsrd advanced spell search function found here, and it turned up 196 Wizard and/or Cleric spells that specifically list a cost in the component line of the spell description.
That, and the actual text from the CRB on material components and cost, makes it abundantly clear that the RAW and the RAI are in sync in this case and a component ONLY has a special cost when it is called out in the spell (or in some case by an additional source, such as an alchemical power component).
*note: I am aware that the d20pfsrd is not a legal source, however, the spell search is only a search function, and a manual search of all of the listed spells will turn up the same information relevant to this instance.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because of text limits they put the comma and then the "powdered silver worth 25 GP", because the value is identical as the 5 pounds of powdered silver is the component for making holy water.
You also picked the one spell that had multiple options and is presented that way.
Every spell that has a special cost has it listed, the ones that fall under the "spell component pouch" limit do not.
|
|
I would point out that the spell description lists a vial of the poison. Exactly how many doses of poison in a vial??? If we are going to try to parse things out beyond what is written clearly, then I challenge anyone to find a specific cost for a vial of any poison. The rules section that includes a table of prices refers to poison by doses not vials. So we are back to the fact that there is no listed price for a vial of Black Adder poison.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...., I would stop arguing with the 4-star GM so harshly.
This is no statement against GM Lamplighter, but Quantity of games run, the ONLY requirement for 4 stars, says nothing of Quality of games run, much less rules knowledge.
Some of the best GMs I have played under had a tenuous, at best, grasp of the rules.
|
|
CRB - Pages 557-559 - price is in the table on 559. Only reference is "dose" not "vial".
The flask of holy water example is a compelling argument in favor of the 120 gp cost.
However, I am not in favor of the interpretation that disallows a legal spell choice from viability. (and it is absolutely an interpretation)