Can a spell being cast via a magic item be considered to be more than one class’ spell at the same time?

Can a spell being cast via a magic item be considered to be more than one class’ spell at the same time? Specifically, items phrased along the lines of “While holding it, you can use an action […] to cast [a spell] from it”, with no ties to a particular class (such as Wand of Magic Missiles, Helm of Teleportation, Wand of Entangle, etc.).

The reason I’m asking this question is it seems like it is possible via an odd interaction quirk of the following rules that I’m aware of, and I wanted to make sure I’m not missing anything:

  • From the answers over on the question of “What makes a spell being cast considered to be a {class} spell?”, the implication is that something is a ‘class spell’ if it is on that class’ spell list.

  • The multiclass spellcasting rules state “Each spell you know and prepare is associated with one of your classes”. However, in an instance where you are a multiclassed character who neither knows nor has prepared the spell from either class, I don’t think this rule would apply, removing the limit of being associated with only one class.

  • My current understanding is that spells cast from magic items can still be considered class spells, as per the answer to “Can a sorcerer spell cast from a magic item trigger a Wild Magic Surge” (plus, they are still on the class’ spell list, as mentioned above).


(For a specific application of where this may matter, consider this example: Could a multiclassed 10th level School of Evocation wizard/1st level Wild Magic sorcerer PC benefit from both Empowered Evocation and Wild Magic Surge on a single cast of magic missile from a Wand of Magic Missiles, assuming that they did not pick up magic missile as a spell via either of their classes? Empowered Evocation and Wild Magic Surge care that the spell being cast is a wizard spell and a sorcerer spell, respectively.)

Is the Midgard Heroes Handbook Centaur race considered as Medium, or Large, for the purpose of grappling and shoving?

In the "Midgard Heroes Handbook" from the Kobold Press, there is a playable character race, the Centaur. Their size is rather unique – a Medium/Large hybrid, so to speak :

Size. Centaurs stand between 8 and 9 feet tall and weigh in excess of 1,000 pounds. Your size is Large.

Humanoid Torso. Although you are Large, you wield weapons and wear armor sized for a Medium creature, thanks to the proportions of your humanoid torso.

It is clear to me that, as a creature with a Large, equine lower part, a Midgard Centaur can be ridden by a Medium creature (provided they’re wearing a saddle), but as a creature with a Medium, humanoid upper part, they cannot wield oversized weaponry.

But what about grappling and shoving ? Are they considered Large, or Medium for such things ? I can see an argument for either interpretation – since they’re of Large category, but have Medium sized hands…

Can magic missile be considered both 1 damage roll and several? [duplicate]

While 99% of the time this doesn’t matter if you roll several dice or just the 1 dice for all the darts, a player did something which seems contradictory and knowing the true answer to this would clear up a lot of uncertainty.

They cast magic missile after using Hexblade’s curse, to add their prof to each damage roll. Then after used the Empowered Metamagic to reroll the 1 for all the darts, into a 4, and topped it all of with the wizards Empowered Evocation to add their INT to the dart.

The way I see this the Hexblades curse would only work several times if you were treating each of the darts individually, by rolling them out separately. This would have the benefit that the Lore Bards cutting words can’t cut the damage down to zero as effortlessly, by cutting the 1 dart that is multiplied down to 0.

But if treated as an AOE the Empower Metamagic and wizards Empowered Evocation would work. This also matters immensely when considering how magic missile works on damage thresholds (others have answered, and it seems to contradict again).

So my question which way does it work?

What is considered an enemy for an Orc’s Aggressive trait?

Volo’s Guide to Monsters says that you may play an Orc character, which gives you the following trait, amongst others (p. 120):

Aggressive. As a bonus action, you can move up to your speed toward an enemy of your choice that you can see or hear.

My question is: what can be considered as an enemy for this trait to apply?

  1. Anything I want
  2. Any living creature, including non-hostile ones
  3. Only creatures that are hostile to me (actual enemies)

For example, can I choose a tree as my enemy, justifying it by a "Me find tree insult my race, me hate tree, me ANGRY!", and then bonus-move toward said tree?

Why is pastebin considered a high risk service

The company I work at uses zscaler to restrict access to certain websites.

Earlier today, I tried to visit pastebin.com, but got the error message in the picture below:

Website blocked. Not allowed to browse SHN-High Risk Services category. You tried to visit:https://pastebin.com/

Trying to google why pastebin is considered a high risk service, I didn’t really find much, except this one blog post which talks about certain hacker groups pasting sensitive data to the site.

This alone doesn’t seem like a very strong reason to block the site, as there should be a multitude of other options for making information public. What am I missing here?

Is the Pathfinder FAQ considered RAW?

There has been some contention recently over the RAW-ness of officially published FAQs for tabletop games. While (as far as I am aware) the D&D 3.5 FAQ is not considered RAW, I’m not aware of any such determination where Pathfinder is concerned. Since the Pathfinder FAQ is written by Paizo and is considered official by the company, can we consider the Pathfinder FAQ to be RAW? If there is a rules clarification in the FAQ that does not conflict with existing rules, is that clarification RAW?

Since this seems to be contentious, please provide answers which are as definitive as possible with officious-looking citations.

Are the spells Leomund’s Tiny Hut and Tiny Hut considered the same spell for the purposes of combining magical effects?

The Player’s Handbook contains the spell Leomund’s Tiny Hut, and the Basic Rules contains an SRD version of this spell called Tiny Hut. The descriptions of these spells are completely identical.

The rules for combining magical effects say:

The effects of different spells add together while the durations of those spells overlap. The effects of the same spell cast multiple times don’t combine, however. Instead, the most potent effect–such as the highest bonus–from those castings applies while their durations overlap, or the most recent effect applies if the castings are equally potent and their durations overlap.

Additionally, the Dungeon Master’s Guide contains a more general version of this rule for combining game effects:

Different game features can affect a target at the same time. But when two or more game features have the same name, only the effects of one of them—the most potent one—apply while the durations of the effects overlap.

These spells notably have different names, but are they considered the same spell for the purposes of applying the rules for combining magical and game effects?

This question was inspired by this quesition concerning stacking tiny huts as a countermeasure against dispel magic.

Why is prepared casting considered to always be superior to spontaneous?

Many times, I’ve seen the case made for a specific prepared caster class being superior to its spontaneous equivalent (e.g. Wizard vs Sorcerer, Cleric vs Favored Soul, anything vs its Uneathered Arcana spontaneous caster optional rule version) and said case is usually based on the spontaneous caster happening to be one level’s worth of spell progression behind the prepared version. However, in my experience, the wider community considers prepared casting to be always superior to spontaneous casting. Why is this? The specific cases alone aren’t proof of a general rule and all else being equal, spontaneous casting ought to be superior. What argument, if any, is so strong that it knocks down all of the spontaneous casters?