Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Killroy3rd 03-27-05, 12:40 AM	I know that this subject was brought up once before and the thread was closed but I have a question still about it. In Complete Divine there is a feat called “Arcane Disciple” … an arcane spell-caster could make a Clerics Domain Spells arcane. So, in theory, if a Sorcerer went around looking for spells that were written by characters with this feat, couldn’t he possibly be able to cast every spell known to man???
DM Zoc 03-27-05, 12:55 AM	No. You can only learn the spells which are part of the domains of the deity you worship. You must worship a deity. Each time you take the feat, you only gain access to one of the domains. Each spell you want to learn from the domains counts againts your sorcerer spells known; they are not "free" or "bonus" spells known. Sorcerers only gain spells upon level-up.
Eliza_Stormwhisper 03-27-05, 02:17 AM	No. You can only learn the spells which are part of the domains of the deity you worship. You must worship a deity. Each time you take the feat, you only gain access to one of the domains. Each spell you want to learn from the domains counts againts your sorcerer spells known; they are not "free" or "bonus" spells known. Sorcerers only gain spells upon level-up. From what I understand, as well, a good number of domain spells (I'd estimate half) are really arcane spells usable by clerics (such as Fireball from the Fire domain, and Power Word Kill from the War domain).
SALDAR 03-27-05, 02:49 AM	From what I understand, as well, a good number of domain spells (I'd estimate half) are really arcane spells usable by clerics (such as Fireball from the Fire domain, and Power Word Kill from the War domain). These spells may be on the list of an arcane caster but they are not "arcane spells usable by a cleric." When cast or written on a scroll by a cleric they are divine spells.
Eliza_Stormwhisper 03-27-05, 03:09 AM	These spells may be on the list of an arcane caster but they are not "arcane spells usable by a cleric." When cast or written on a scroll by a cleric they are divine spells. Well, technically, yes. But a divine spellcaster can't actually cast them unless they take the domain. The technicality of it, I think, doesn't really matter, but I thank you for pointing out the flaws in my logic. I believe my basic idea stands, however.
Vatras 03-27-05, 08:02 AM	No, he cannot, they are now divine spells. Only if your DM is a total ***** will he ever allow a sorcerer to take anything else than sorcerer spells for spells known. The only exceptions are certain feats and PrCs, and even those make divine spells not "known", but only make them available to choose from, when a sorcerer gets to chose new spells (see also domain entry in CD).
Rowan_Whispercloak 03-27-05, 08:13 AM	One there is no need to be insulting to other people. I would have to say no to the question because that feat add to your personal spell list and as such only spells that are on your list are castable (is that even a word?), but heck your a sorcerer that means lot of charisma, just take ranks in use magic device for all your "I need divine magic" problem. Sure it uses skill points, but avoids that nasty tithe.
Seeker95 03-27-05, 08:48 AM	I believe Rowan has it right. Spells gained via Domain-related Feats, etc. are not on the class list. They are only on that particular caster's list. And I believe Vatras has it right as well, only delivered a bit too crudely: A DM willing to allow sorcerers to pick from the divine list is asking for a world of hurt.
Count Arioch the 28th 03-27-05, 09:14 AM	And that's a fundamental problem with D&D. Divine casters don't have ASF, have better saves, HD, BaB, and weapon proficiencies. (And in the case of the druid, better skills.) Really, there should be nothing that a cleric can do that a sorceror should even want, since they are so inferior otherwise.
Eliza_Stormwhisper 03-27-05, 09:19 AM	And that's a fundamental problem with D&D. Divine casters don't have ASF, have better saves, HD, BaB, and weapon proficiencies. (And in the case of the druid, better skills.) Really, there should be nothing that a cleric can do that a sorceror should even want, since they are so inferior otherwise. 1 20th-level wizard or sorcerer vs. a church full of 12 20th-level clerics: Step 1: Cast meteor swarm and watch the meteors crush the building, killing all 12 clerics inside. Step 2: Go to the bar and have a drink.
matmos 03-27-05, 01:23 PM	Wow, we just got finished with a HUGE ridiculous thread on this issue. The game only gives a sorcerer one guaranteed successful method for learning spells. If the spells are in the sorcerer/wizard list in the phb, the sorcerer has explicit permission to add them to spells known and cast them at the appropriate levels. If the spells are NOT on the sorcerer/wizard list in the phb, the description considers the spell to be an 'unusual spell'. The only explicit limit on the nature of such spells is that they be arcane. But the method for learning such spells involves the deliberately vague phrase: "gained some understanding of through study". This is not a concrete game term. Whenever the game gives no concrete mechanics for a process, the DM is REQUIRED to intervene to make a ruling. So the DM is REQUIRED to house rule on ALL unusual spells even if they are arcane, whether they involve healing or evocation or... whatever. If you're asking if the game provides permission to learn any unusual arcane spell, the answer is yes, but the DM is ALWAYS required by RAW to make a case by case ruling on study method, time required, chance of success, etc. since they are not defined in the book for ANY unusual spells. Note: some would take the provided example in the phb to mean that you can always automatically learn an unusual, explicitly sorcerer/wizard spell if you have a scroll or spellbook detailing the spell. But since the DM would ALWAYS have to personally indroduce an unusual, explicitly sorcerer/wizard spell into the game for it to get written to a scroll in the first place, this doesn't really change anything since he's still in the loop. Moot point. But MOLOT, the poster of the last thread on this topic, took the stance that this example could be interpreted to mean that ALL unusual spells could AUTOMATICALLY be learned by a sorcerer if it was arcane and if you had it on a scroll. He would say the poster of this thread is correct. I haven't found anyone else that thinks that the study method example provided can be considered definitive and universally applicable to ALL unusual spells in this way. Plus, this example is not in the SRD, so for those depending on the SRD for their rulings, no ambiguity whatsoever.
scwolf 03-27-05, 02:03 PM	Wow, we just got finished with a HUGE ridiculous thread on this issue. I'd say maybe you should post the story about Cleo the dog and the couch cushions here, but I suppose a link to it should suffice (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=5775021&postcount=165).
Killroy3rd 03-27-05, 02:09 PM	Ok, I thought about getting all technical and quoting this and that and giving source and all that junk, then I realize something which I will share later. As for the Sorcerer knowing divine spells issue here we go: An Arcanist takes the feat "Arcane Disciple" from the book "Complete Divine" which allows him to gain domain spells from his chosen god that he can use only they are arcane magic when he uses them. Said Arcanist decides to write down one of the domain spells he has learned either in a book or a scroll. Now, any mage that can, can learn this spell. I am not seeing where all the fuss is. The spell that the Arcanist writes is not divine, it is arcane. So, why couldn't another arcane-spellcaster learn it? As for the competence of DM's. Whatever a DM says goes. Granted. However, if there are mechanics that suppourt a players decision and it all comes straight from the books, a DM that would not allow such a thing is just doing so cause he doesn't want to deal with it and that to me shows bad DMing; not being able to figure out a way to overcome a challenge that your players pose to you? Rule 0: What a DM says goes. Rule -1: A DM is only a DM as long as he has players. If your not willing to listen to your players and you lose sight that this is only a game and that not even the CORE RULES are completly set in stone you are losing sight of what the most important thing about D&D is; Having fun with other people and taking yourself away from reality.
Tsuul 03-27-05, 02:25 PM	The spell that the Arcanist writes is not divine, it is arcane. So, why couldn't another arcane-spellcaster learn it?Because even though it is now an arcane spell, it is not a Sor/Wiz/hex/assassin/other arcaneclasshere spell. The feat allows the arcane caster who takes it to transform select spells from divine to arcane. Those spells are now on his spell list by virtue of him being able to cast them, they still have not transended to become class spells for every class able to use arcane spells. If a spell being arcane were the only prerequisite for being a class spell then hexblades, assassins, wizards, sorcerers would all have the same spell list. This is also why unusual spells that a sorcerer wishes to take must still be on the sor/wiz class list. The book flat out says "unusual sorcerer/wizard spell". Even though it is unusual, it must still be a sorcerer/wizard spell. Think of spells like this. Arcane = red ink, Divine = black ink, Wizard/Sorcerers class spells = English, Cleric spells = Russian, Druid spells = Polish, Hexblade spells = German, Assassin spells = Italian, Paladin spells = Chinese. Change the ink around all you want, only certain classes can read the spell.
Killroy3rd 03-27-05, 02:53 PM	Funny that your example actually should me what was wrong with everything. I am speaking a different language than you. I never said that because a spell was now arcane it was a CLASS spell. What I am saying is that because it is now an arcane spell it can be learned by arcane spell-casters. Of course they would have to go throught all the studying that they would normally have to do to gain a new spell (that is why I said " if they could they could" (meanning if they had what it took to learn such a spell, then it was possible for them to learn it). The point I was trying to make was that now Arcane Spell-casters could actually eventually learn all the spell known to man (Divine *but arcanely divine/or Arcane). I am not saying "Hey cause he is a arcane spell caster he can now cast every spell" that would be like saying that a 1st level wizard could cast Wish ... I mean he can ... but it probably wont be pretty.
matmos 03-27-05, 03:16 PM	Killroy: The point here is that if a sorcerer wants to learn a spell that is explicitly sorcerer/wizard in the phb, he has EXPLICIT permission do so in the rules as written. The DM would have to house-rule against RAW to PREVENT him from doing so. But if he wants to learn an arcane spell that does not appear on the PHB Sorcerer/Wizard list, it is an unusual spell by definition in the sorcerer description, so he has to "gain some understanding of it through study". This process is not detailed. There are no RAW mechanics for it, so the DM HAS to house-rule to describe the process. Whether it has sorcerer/wizard in the description is a moot point. The fact that it is an "unusual spell" as defined in the description, means you have to follow the "unusual spell learning rules". Which is left out of the text, and so, up to the DM. Getting an arcane scroll of Cure Serious Wounds is easy. Just have a bard scribe one for you. But nothing in raw states definitively that studying a scroll of an unusual spell, even if it is not explicitly banned for the sorcerer, automatically allows him to add it to his known list. Sounds reasonable. Seems like he can study the scroll. But only the DM can judge at what point he has "gained some understanding of the spell through study". A day? A year? 10 years? The rules don't say. DM discretion.
Tsuul 03-27-05, 03:53 PM	The point I was trying to make was that now Arcane Spell-casters could actually eventually learn all the spell known to man (Divine *but arcanely divine/or Arcane). Learn? Learn what exactly? Learn enough about it to be able to copy it? Sure. Go nuts, create a super scribe. Learn enough about it to ever be able to add it to a sorcerer's Known Spell list, no. A sorcerer can cast any spell he "knows", however he can not ever cast a spell that in not on his spell list. Ergo, he can never know a spell that he didn't, in some manner, add to his class list first (Arcane Disciple adds spells to an arcane spell list).
Seeker95 03-27-05, 04:21 PM	I never said that because a spell was now arcane it was a CLASS spell. What I am saying is that because it is now an arcane spell it can be learned by arcane spell-casters.And what you are saying is wrong. A wizard cannot learn Bard-only spells, even though they are arcane. A wizard cannot learn Assassin-only spells, even though they are arcane. Being arcane does not make a spell accessible to a Wizard or Sorcerer. Being on the Wizard or Sorcerer class list makes a spell accessible to Wizards or Sorcerers.
matmos 03-27-05, 08:17 PM	Hmm... The description is also meant to give the sorcerer the ability to learn unique spells that aren't on ANY list, not just spells on sorcerer/wizard list in other books. They wanted to give sorcerers the ability to research new weird spells just like they give all other casters. For instance, if a sorcerer wanted to study the skulls of dinosaurs and dragons for a while, meditate on the nature of vicious biting, then contemplate the nuances that could be tweaked in the spell Bigby's Grasping Hand, the DM could rule that he has sufficiently studied enough so that he could learn the "unusual" spell, Matmos' Mighty Masticator, a spell that causes a huge set of free floating jaws full of pointy teeth to fly about, biting the sorcerer's foes viciously. This DM is clearly allowed to do this by the sorcerer's description for learning unusual spells. Many would argue that the unusual spell thus created would require the DM to label the spell necessarily a sorcerer/wizard spell by definition. I don't see that in the language describing unusual spells for sorcerers. As I see it, the rules read: A sorcerer casts ONLY arcane spells. A sorcerer casts primarily spells with the sorcerer/wizard descriptor from the phb. A sorcerer can freely select these spells as he goes up in levels according to raw without DM intervention. A sorcerer also can cast "unusual spells", not on the phb sorcerer/wizard list, which may or may not have the sorcerer/wizard descriptor. Vague phrase. A sorcerer always requires DM intervention to learn an unusual spell, since "understanding of by study" is not defined for sorcerers. The sorcerer is the only class that I'm aware of that is not explicitly restricted in the language of the description to casting spells with his class descriptor. This can be easily be seen as a contextual clue that the game designers intend sorcerers to be a unique case. After all, wizards and clerics also can research unusual spells: "Independent Research A wizard also can research a spell independently, duplicating an existing spell or creating an entirely new one. " and for clerics: "Independent Research A divine spellcaster also can research a spell independently, much as an arcane spellcaster can. Only the creator of such a spell can prepare and cast it, unless he decides to share it with others." But they don't have the word 'primarily' in THEIR character descriptions. So all the unusual spells they research MUST have the appropriate class descriptor or they can't cast it. This implies that their researched spells are automatically learnable or at least castable by scroll by other members of their class. Spontaneous casters are weird though. They usually just gain spells out of the blue for chrissakes. Words, gestures, materials required... it all just bubbles up out of their personal aura one day. No deity. No study. So the fact that the sorcerer description allows that any new spells they "gain an understanding of by study" don't even have to have a class descriptor needn't be surprising. They can be "Matmos level 5". Such a spell could not be automatically learned by ANYONE else but Matmos the sorcerer.
Seeker95 03-27-05, 09:27 PM	The description is also meant to give the sorcerer the ability to learn unique spells that aren't on ANY list, not just spells on sorcerer/wizard list in other books. They wanted to give sorcerers the ability to research new weird spells just like they give all other casters.Key words here: Not on ANY list. and new weird spells. The sorcerer is just as likely as any other class to come up with a never-before-seen spell. But if the spell is already on a divine spell list, it fits neither of these criteria. Can a sorcerer learn a brand new spell? Yes. Can a sorcerer learn a divine spell? No.
Tsuul 03-27-05, 10:15 PM	A sorcerer also can cast "unusual spells", not on the phb sorcerer/wizard list, which may or may not have the sorcerer/wizard descriptor. Vague phrase."unusual spells" is told to look at pg 54 for details. Those details on page 54 say "unusual sorcerer/wizard spell". It must still be a sorcerer/wizard spell. Which is, of course, completely under control of the DM.
TheGogmagog 03-27-05, 10:26 PM	Seeker95, just ignore matmos. He's just making the same claim over and over and not listening to input. I think the referenced discussion may have been on EnWorld forums, I read it and felt no need to chime in with the chorus against him. All he wants is one person to agree with him so his DM lets him learn whatever spell. Matmos, As suggested in the previous discussion, pose your question any way you like to customer service, and post what they say. You have a convoluted interpretation of the RAW, which doesn't make it a house rule to deny a sorcerer a spell that's not on the sor/wiz class list, at best it's a rules interpretation. Though I dread discussing this with you, I do have one question. If a Sorcerer were to learn a spell that doesn't have a sor/wiz level assigned to it, what level slot do you suppose that it should take for the sorcerer, under these rules that you say are written?
matmos 03-28-05, 12:56 AM	Gogamagog... Lighten up. Just a nerdy discussion. I'm interested in what others have to say on this just for its own sake. Yes, I'm that much of a dork. And I frequently back down on specific points when people give persuasive arguments. And please don't mischaracterize my argument. Once again, my position is that the DM ALWAYS has to house rule on ALL unusual spells. So no forcing the DM's hand in any way. No ulterior motives. Yes I'm repeating myself. So why aren't you picking up that part of my stance? As for the level question, this was covered in the last thread. Molot swayed me away from your stance on that particular objection. Specific class versions of spells have specific levels associated with them. This level can be objectively measured. The bard version of Cure Serious Wounds is a 3rd level spell, not just for bards, but for any other purpose. For instance, a ring of spell storing would have to be able to store 3 levels of spells for a bard to store his version of the spell in it, but the same ring would have to have 4 levels of spell storing to store the Druid version of Cure Serious Wounds. Now, since the ring is neither Druid, nor Bard, these spells obviously must have an objectively measurable level independent of class so the ring can function. So couldn't you use this objectively measurable spell level to determine the spell level for the sorcerer as well?
mrpopstar 03-28-05, 03:57 AM	Let me just start by saying that KILLROY3RD has presented the best argument for the Sorcerer thus far! :) Here's the scenario: Arcane caster takes ARCANE DISCIPLE. Arcane caster gains access to the domain of DESTRUCTION. Arcane caster chooses INFLICT CRITICAL WOUNDS when he attains a new level. Arcane caster scribes scroll of INFLICT CRITICAL WOUNDS. Sorcerer comes into ownership of scroll of INFLICT CRITICAL WOUNDS scribed by aformentioned arcane caster. Here's the question: Can Sorcerer learn spell from scroll? Here's the answer:NO. Here's why: Dungeon Master's Guide 3.5(pg. 238): To have any chance of activating a scroll spell, the scroll user must meet the following requirements. The spell must be of the correct type(arcane or divine). Arcane spellcasters(wizards, sorcerers, and bards) can only use scrolls containing arcane spells... The user must have the spell on his or her class list(see the spell lists in Chapter 11 of the Player's Handbook for which classes can cast which spells). The user must have the requisite ability score... By the rules, a Sorcerer can not learn a spell from an arcane writing(including scrolls) if the spell is not found on his or her class list. Any spell with a sorcerer/wizard level is considered to be found on the Sorcerer's class list. All others do not meet the criteria. In reference to Sorcerer's seeming limitless spell selection: Player's Handbook 3.5(pg. 179): ... With the DM's permission, sorcerers and bards can also select the spells they gain from new and unusual spells that they have gained some understanding of(see Spells in the sorcerer description, page 54). For instance, when Hennet the sorcerer becomes 2nd level, he gains an additional 0-level spell. He can pick that spell from the 0-level spells on the sorcerer and wizard spell list, or he might have learned an unusual spell from an arcane scroll or spellbook. As I've already evidenced above, a Sorcerer can not learn an unusual spell from an arcane scroll or spellbook unless that spell is on his or her class list. Player's Handbook 3.5(pg. 54): ... These new spells can be common spells chosen from the sorcerer/wizard spell list(page 192), or they can be unusual spells that the sorcerer has gained some understanding of by study. For example, a sorcerer with a scroll or spellbook detailing an unusual sorcerer/wizard spell(one not on the sorcerer/wizard spell list in this book) could select that spell as one of his new spells for attaining a new level, provided that it is of the right spell level. ... Sorcerer's can select spells they have gained understanding of through study when gaining a new level instead of choosing spells listed on the sorcerer/wizard spell list in the Player's Handbook 3.5 as evidenced above. One example is given of where a sorcerer might find new spells: on a scroll or spellbook detailing a sorcerer/wizard spell located in a supplemental rulebook. Just remember that in order to learn a spell from a scroll or spellbook, no matter the source, the spell must be on his or her class list. Another way is to research original spells(as detailed in the Dungeon Master's Guide 3.5 pg. 198), which is allocated to the jurisdiction of the DM(who is cautioned to deny access to the creation of spell effects that are already in play; such as CURE spells). Furthermore, a sorcerer could multi-class or take feats(such as ARCANE DISCIPLE) in order to broaden his or her study of the arcane arts. There are no other ways for a sorcerer to access arcane magic and gain new spells than the ways I have listed. Are there any holes in my logic? Speak now or forever bind your sorcerer to the sorcerer/wizard spell list! :D
matmos 03-28-05, 10:29 AM	POPSTAR: I like that someone is dredging up fresh material at least...but the rule you excerpted details the rules for ACTIVATING a scroll. I agree, he can't just whip out the scroll and cast the spell. But this has nothing to do with what can be said to qualify as vague process of "gaining familiarity of through study". If he wants to learn an unusual spell, he could also watch clerics playing frisbee on the beach. He could watch ER episodes on his scrying mirror. If the DM is goofy enough to say this qualifies as "gaining an understanding of by study", he can. The book doesn't say what studying means. The scroll method is just an example, not the only one. TSUUL: Unusual spells is deliberately vague. The example given on p54 is just an example. Not meant to replace the vague rule but to illustrate a particular instance. It's not in the SRD. Using examples your way is NOT the convention in the books. If a spell description states: "This spell can turn one type of creature into another type of creature. For example it can turn a human into a chicken." You're not supposed to use the example to come to the conclusion that the spell ONLY turns humans into chickens. It's a possible interpretation of intent, but they don't use examples like this. It's just a specific instance to give you the general idea.
mrpopstar 03-28-05, 01:47 PM	MATMOS: I quoted numerous ways of learning spells. See here: Another way is to research original spells(as detailed in the Dungeon Master's Guide 3.5 pg. 198), which is allocated to the jurisdiction of the DM(who is cautioned to deny access to the creation of spell effects that are already in play; such as CURE spells). Furthermore, a sorcerer could multi-class or take feats(such as ARCANE DISCIPLE) in order to broaden his or her study of the arcane arts.I thoroughly detailed the rules of scroll use because the original poster asked the question in pertinence to written magic; and I quote: So, in theory, if a Sorcerer went around looking for spells that were written by characters with this feat, couldn’t he possibly be able to cast every spell known to man???Scrolls and spellbooks are written forms of arcane magic. I arrived at my final ruling above thusly.. Player's Handbook 3.5(pg. 178): ... To decipher an arcane magical writing(such as a single spell in written form in another's spellbook or on a scroll), a character must make a Spellcraft check(DC 20 + the spell's level). ... ... Deciphering a magical writing allows the reader to identify the spell and gives some idea of its effects(as explained in the spell description). If the magical writing was a scroll and the reader can cast arcane spells, she can attempt to use the scroll(see the information on scrolls in the Dungeon Master's Guide). Note:The information on scolls in the Dungeon Master's Guide 3.5 was quoted by me in the previous post. Simply deciphering a magical writing does not allow a character access to the spell, it only allows the reader to identify the spell and gives some idea of its effects as explained in the spell description. After identifying a spell, refering to the spell's description will divulge a level listing. Player's Handbook 3.5(pg. 174): The next line of a spell description gives the spell's level, a number between 0 and 9 that defines the spell's relative power. This number is preceded by an abbreviation for the class whose members can cast the spell. ... If a spell's level listing does not include a number preceded by an abbreviation for the class whose members can cast the spell that includes a sorcerer, a sorcerer can not cast the spell. If the DM decides that deciphering a spell provides means enough for the further study of the spell, than such a decision is given on a case by case basis, is thoroughly justified by the rules, and does not allow said spell to be added to the sorcerer's class list(it remains an unusual spell usable solely by said sorcerer). Again, DM's are strongly cautioned in the Dungeon Master's Guide 3.5 as to what spells they should allow their players to access. Dungeon Master's Guide 3.5(pg. 35): Wizards and sorcerers should not cast healing spells, but they should have the best offensive spells. If the spell is flashy or dramatic, it should probably be a wizard/sorcer spell. Spell scrolls and spellbooks are the only methods listed in either the Player's Handbook 3.5 or Dungeon Master's Guide 3.5 as means of studying spells. Why a DM would allow 'hanging with the party Druid' to constitute a justifiable means of spell-study I do not know but, he is well within his right to do so if he sees fit. I won't deny that. I will, however, go out on a limb and state that this more than likely wasn't the game designers intent and it is a small stretch to ignore the example given on page 54 of the Player's Handbook 3.5. It was given for a reason, and it fully supports every other reference to learning magic in the core rulebooks.
Tsuul 03-28-05, 02:35 PM	Unusual spells is deliberately vague. The example given on p54 is just an example. Not meant to replace the vague rule but to illustrate a particular instance. It's not in the SRD.Granted. However when one rule is "vague" and there are multiple ways to interpert it, you must rule out all interpretations where it contradicts other rules. Otherwise it causes long needless discussions. :D
mrpopstar 03-28-05, 04:24 PM	I have taken the initiative to mail customer service. My request for clarification was as follows:Player's Handbook 3.5(pg. 54): A sorcerer's selection of spells is extremely limited. A sorcerer begins play knowing four 0-level spells (also called cantrips) and two 1st level spells of your choice. At each new sorcerer level, he gains one or more new spells, as indicated on Table 3-17: Sorcerer Spells Known. (Unlike spells per day, the number of spells a sorcerer knows is not affect by his Charisma score; the numbers on Table 3-17 are fixed.) These new spells can be common spells chosen from the sorcerer/wizard spell list (page 192), or they can be unusual spells that the sorcerer has gained some understanding of by study. ... The Player's Handbook 3.5 gives the example of a sorcerer with a scroll or spellbook detailing an unusual sorcerer/wizard spell not found on the sorcerer/wizard spell list in the Player's Handbook 3.5 as a means of finding an unusual spell that the sorcerer has gained some understanding of by study but, the text remains vague as to what determines an unusual spell that the sorcerer has gained some understanding of by study. What constitutes an unusual spell that the sorcerer has gained some understanding of by study? Must this new and unusual spell have a sorcerer/wizard level listed in the spell description? Please clarify.Now we just wait for the official reply. :) TSUUL: However when one rule is "vague" and there are multiple ways to interpert it, you must rule out all interpretations where it contradicts other rules. Otherwise it causes long needless discussions. :DHere, here!
matmos 03-28-05, 05:16 PM	Tsuul: Absolutely reasonable. So the question is, which rule would it contradict to have the candidate unusual spell not have a sorcerer/wizard description in it? No rule that I can find outside the example. And you can't use your interpretation of the example's meaning to support your interpretation of the example. Conclusion assumed in premise. Not a good argument. I just wish they didn't stick that word 'primarily' in the description of sorcerer if it didn't add anything. If they removed it, this discussion would be dead. I'm mainly interested in game designer intent though, so let's see what the customer service says and leave it at that.
mrpopstar 03-28-05, 05:59 PM	Customer Service has replied with the following:Thank you for contacting us Daniel, This refers to any Sorcerer/Wizard spell allowed by the DM that cannot be found in the Player's Handbook. It is also possible that the player (with DM's permission) might create his own spell using the spell creation rules found on page 35 of the Dungeon Master's Guide. Good Gaming! Sam S. Customer Service Representative Wizards of the Coast 1-800-324-6496 (US and Canada) 425-204-8069 (From all other countries) Monday-Friday 7am-6pm PST / 10am-9pm ESTPlain for all to see. The unusual spells that the sorcerer has gained some understanding of by study refers to any sorcerer/wizard spell allowed by the DM that cannot be found in the Player's Handbook 3.5. The unusual spell must list a sorcerer/wizard level in the spell description in order for a sorcerer to learn it. Otherwise they must create a new spell altogether as detailed on page 35 of the Dungeon Master's Guide 3.5. All of which I evidenced in earlier posts. I do realize that this reply came unbelievably quick and coincidentally works out in my favor. If any of you would like me to forward the response to your e-mail I would be glad to do so(because you can be darn sure I'd make you mail it to me). :D
matmos 03-28-05, 08:24 PM	Thank god.
shultz 03-28-05, 08:35 PM	The divine version of inflict critical wounds is listed in the players handbook. The arcane version is not, so I would allow the sorceror to learn it in my campaign.
Seeker95 03-28-05, 09:03 PM	The divine version of inflict critical wounds is listed in the players handbook. The arcane version is not, so I would allow the sorceror to learn it in my campaign.Let me play in your campaign! Sneak attack is listed as a rogue special ability. It is not listed as a Sorcerer special ability. I should be allowed to let my Sorcerer make sneak attacks. the d12 is used for Barbarian hit points in the PHB. It is not used by Sorcerers. I should be allowed to use the d12 for my Sorcerer's hit points. Rary's Mnemonic Enhancer is listed as a Wizard spell in the PHB. It is not listed as a Sorcerer spell in the PHB. My sorcerer should be able to use it.
shultz 03-28-05, 10:16 PM	Let me play in your campaign! Sneak attack is listed as a rogue special ability. It is not listed as a Sorcerer special ability. I should be allowed to let my Sorcerer make sneak attacks. the d12 is used for Barbarian hit points in the PHB. It is not used by Sorcerers. I should be allowed to use the d12 for my Sorcerer's hit points. Rary's Mnemonic Enhancer is listed as a Wizard spell in the PHB. It is not listed as a Sorcerer spell in the PHB. My sorcerer should be able to use it. Sorry I'd prefer to play with people who have common sense.
Nephlite 03-28-05, 11:48 PM	Customer Service has replied with the following:Plain for all to see. The unusual spells that the sorcerer has gained some understanding of by study refers to any sorcerer/wizard spell allowed by the DM that cannot be found in the Player's Handbook 3.5. The unusual spell must list a sorcerer/wizard level in the spell description in order for a sorcerer to learn it. Otherwise they must create a new spell altogether as detailed on page 35 of the Dungeon Master's Guide 3.5. All of which I evidenced in earlier posts. I do realize that this reply came unbelievably quick and coincidentally works out in my favor. If any of you would like me to forward the response to your e-mail I would be glad to do so(because you can be darn sure I'd make you mail it to me). :D Cut serve said: Thank you for contacting us Daniel, This refers to any Sorcerer/Wizard spell allowed by the DM that cannot be found in the Player's Handbook. It is also possible that the player (with DM's permission) might create his own spell using the spell creation rules found on page 35 of the Dungeon Master's Guide. -------- IT IS ALSO possible that the player create his own spell. Well let me create Arthur's Cure Moderate wounds, arcane version.(Sorceror only). So Sorcerors can still cast bard spells just get DMs okay. Problem solved.
Tsuul 03-29-05, 01:45 AM	IT IS ALSO possible that the player create his own spell. Well let me create Arthur's Cure Moderate wounds, arcane version.(Sorceror only). So Sorcerors can still cast bard spells just get DMs okay. Problem solved.Of course! The DM can also have a Pitfiend eating Froot-Loops off your front porch.
wonderland666 03-29-05, 04:28 AM	Okay you can't learn a Arcane Heal as a normal sorcerer. (Thats okay) But if you get a Scroll with an Arcane Heal, you could use the scroll normaly. (One Use like normal)
Will Brandiman 03-29-05, 04:32 AM	Sorry I'd prefer to play with people who have common sense. So presumably you would not want to play with people who would say something likeThe divine version of inflict critical wounds is listed in the players handbook. The arcane version is not, so I would allow the sorceror to learn it in my campaign. :D
Will Brandiman 03-29-05, 04:33 AM	Okay you can't learn a Arcane Heal as a normal sorcerer. (Thats okay) But if you get a Scroll with an Arcane Heal, you could use the scroll normaly. (One Use like normal) Only if you are good at Use Magic Device. Heal is not on the Sorceror's spell list and therefore they cannot use spell completion or spell trigger items involving that spell, regardless of whether it is an arcane or divine version.
mrpopstar 03-29-05, 05:10 AM	Nephlite: IT IS ALSO possible that the player create his own spell. Well let me create Arthur's Cure Moderate wounds, arcane version.(Sorceror only). So Sorcerors can still cast bard spells just get DMs okay. Problem solved.No one is contesting the fact that you can solicit DM approval for creating your own spells. Do remember however that the DM is cautioned against allowing characters to create spells that duplicate the spells of other classes as I evidenced here:Dungeon Master's Guide 3.5(pg. 35): Wizards and sorcerers should not cast healing spells, but they should have the best offensive spells. If the spell is flashy or dramatic, it should probably be a wizard/sorcerer spell.Note that the cautionary statement explicity states that sorcerers should not cast healing spells. Again, this is ultimately up to your DM. wonderland666: But if you get a Scroll with an Arcane Heal, you could use the scroll normaly.No you can't. I evidenced this here:Dungeon Master's Guide 3.5(pg. 238): To have any chance of activating a scroll spell, the scroll user must meet the following requirements. The spell must be of the correct type(arcane or divine). Arcane spellcasters(wizards, sorcerers, and bards) can only use scrolls containing arcane spells... The user must have the spell on his or her class list(see the spell lists in Chapter 11 of the Player's Handbook for which classes can cast which spells). The user must have the requisite ability score...By the rules, a Sorcerer can not cast a spell from a scroll if the spell is not found on his or her class list. Any spell with a sorcerer/wizard level is considered to be found on the Sorcerer's class list. All others do not meet the criteria. Tsuul: Of course! The DM can also have a Pitfiend eating Froot-Loops off your front porch.Wouldn't that be a DM worth bouncing some crazy plans for the sorcerer off of! :) matmos: Thank god.No. Thank customer service! :D Will Brandiman: Only if you are good at Use Magic Device.I've been forgetting about UMD! Now I remember why I keep you around. ;)
matmos 03-29-05, 07:01 AM	ARRGH!! <pant,pant,pant...> OK. Feel better now. I have to confess. I was being dishonest. I gave a short post, indicating assent to mrpopstar's assessment of the customer service reply, because I didn't want to get flamed for arguing just for the sake of arguing. But now that Nephlite has spoken, I can't just leave him hanging out there to dry. The question put to the customer rep was basically: are the unusual spells referred to required to have the sorcerer/wizard class designation? The customer service rep responded that unusual spells fall into 2 categories: A.> Non PHB spells that have the Sorcerer/Wizard designation. B.> Special spells, that can have "his own spell" as the class designator. Yes, DM's can always do crazy things with demons and fruitloops. But if a Wizard were to research a spell with "his own spell" as the class descriptor, the DM might allow it, sure. But the Wizard couldn't cast it according to RAW since the Wizard is explicitly restricted to casting spells from the Wizard list. Sorcerers are the ONLY casting class that aren't explicitly restricted to their own list. So they can cast spells that have "his own spell" as the class designator in the spell description. They always require DM intervention to learn them, but once they have, they can cast them. So technically, one of these new spells could also have Clr4 as the class designator, and the sorcerer could STILL cast it. Pretty much academic, since the DM has to supervise the research process for new spells, but there would be a few obscure ramifications if this were possible. Maybe mrpopstar should pose this specific situation to the same customer rep to see what he says.
Seeker95 03-29-05, 12:05 PM	Pretty much academic, since the DM has to supervise the research process for new spells, but there would be a few obscure ramifications if this were possible. Maybe mrpopstar should pose this specific situation to the same customer rep to see what he says.The answer from customer service would have to be the same one you have received here: The DM can allow it, because it is his or her game. The general (but not unanimous) opinion expressed here is that such a DM would be less than intelligent for allowing this.
matmos 03-29-05, 02:26 PM	Seeker95: Let's forget about making the unusual spell a Clr4 spell for a moment. We all agree the DM has to give permission for the new spell's construction whatever class designator you give it. I'm curious though. Once the DM allows the sorcerer to research a spell with a "personal" class descriptor, do you think that the rules as written allow the sorcerer to cast the spell? Or will the DM have to make a house rule AGAINST the rules as written for the sorcerer to be able to cast it? My point is that the customer service rep seems to say that he wouldn't have to make a house rule for the sorcerer to cast such a spell after the research process was completed. That's all I wan't to clarify. There are other issues here than whether or not DM's would be stupid to give sorcerers access to healing magic. For instance, if the DM is free to allow the new spell "personal" class designator without violating the rules governing sorcerer casting, he'll have the freedom to give a specific player a special spell without worrying that the player could use game mechanics to spread the spell to other players.
mrpopstar 03-29-05, 02:40 PM	matmos: But if a Wizard were to research a spell with "his own spell" as the class descriptor, the DM might allow it, sure. But the Wizard couldn't cast it according to RAW since the Wizard is explicitly restricted to casting spells from the Wizard list.This statement doesn't make sense. When a Wizard researches a spell(as described on pages 35 & 198 in the Dungeon Master's Guide 3.5), the DM makes a final ruling on the spell level. The spell level that is assigned to the spell is a sorcerer/wizard spell level, not his own spell spell level. The rules for creating a new spell are explicit as to who should cast what kind of spell because it is assumed that this new spell will be shared with others. Why else would a character spend so much time and effort creating a new spell if it were not going to see use? the Wizard is explicitly restricted to casting spells from the Wizard list.So are Sorcerers. Sorcerers are the ONLY casting class that aren't explicitly restricted to their own list.No. Sorcerers are most certainly restricted to their own class list. So technically, one of these new spells could also have Clr4 as the class designator, and the sorcerer could STILL cast it. I don't understand what you mean here. Sorcerers(and Wizards for that matter) do not have the ability to research or create original spells with class levels that differ from their own. Where is the logic in that? How do you propose a Sorcerer sits down, creates a spell with a Clr4 level and then prances about casting it at liesure? What DM would allow something like that? If you mean to say that a Sorcerer could cast a Sorcerer/Wizard spell that has Cleric levels associated with it, this is already canonized. Here's an example: Player's Handbook 3.5(pg. 269): READ MAGIC Divination Level: Brd 0, Clr 0, Drd 0, Pal 1, Rgr 1, Sor/Wiz 0 ... The customer service rep responded that unusual spells fall into 2 categories: A.> Non PHB spells that have the Sorcerer/Wizard designation. B.> Special spells, that can have "his own spell" as the class designator.This is not so. As I've already stated, the "special spells" you speak of do not fall into the category of having his own spell spell levels. These "special spells" are researched, original spells that are assigned a level by the DM. This assigned level must reflect the fact that the class in question can cast the spell or the ability to cast the spell is null and void. After an original spell is created by a character it is not then listed on the class list for selection by all characters. It remains original and within the creator's whim to do with what he pleases. The original spell still requires an accessible spell level to the caster, otherwise the spell level would contest his understanding of such magics. Maybe mrpopstar should pose this specific situation to the same customer rep to see what he says.I would be much obliged. :) Seeker95: The general (but not unanimous) opinion expressed here is that such a DM would be less than intelligent for allowing this.Nicely put.
matmos 03-29-05, 02:56 PM	Creating a misrepresentation of an argument, and then attacking that misrepresented argument is refered to as a "straw man" argument. Many here excel at this technique. I find it dishonest. Well, I guess I've said my piece on the topic. If ya don't buy it, ya don't buy it. mrpopstar: I hope you'll send another clarifying request to your customer service rep.
shultz 03-29-05, 04:22 PM	So presumably you would not want to play with people who would say something like :D No just with people who make no sense. Much like your post. :D :D
mrpopstar 03-29-05, 05:11 PM	I sent the following to Customer Service: I recently asked a question about Sorcerers and the explanation in the Player's Handbook 3.5 as to what source they draw their new spells from in which to add to their spells known. You replied as such: This refers to any Sorcerer/Wizard spell allowed by the DM that cannot be found in the Player's Handbook. It is also possible that the player (with DM's permission) might create his own spell using the spell creation rules found on page 35 of the Dungeon Master's Guide. When a Sorcerer creates his own spell (with DM's permission), is the agreed upon level of the spell a Sorcerer/Wizard level? By this I wish to clarify if a spell created by a Sorcerer is effectively a Sorcerer/Wizard spell, or if a spell created by a Sorcerer could be a Cleric or Druid spell if he so chooses. Player's Handbook 3.5(pg. 54): Spells: A Sorcerer casts arcane spells(the same type of spells available to bards and wizards), which are drawn primarily from the sorcerer/wizard spell list(page 192). What is meant by primarily? Are Sorcerers bound to their class list of spells? By this I wish to clarify if a spell, created by the player or chosen from a source other than the Player's Handbook 3.5, must have a Sorcerer/Wizard level associated with it in order for it to be cast by a Sorcerer. Many thanks in advance! Now we wait. :) matmos: Creating a misrepresentation of an argument, and then attacking that misrepresented argument is refered to as a "straw man" argument. Many here excel at this technique. I find it dishonest.Who is that in reference to? :confused:
Seeker95 03-29-05, 06:08 PM	Creating a misrepresentation of an argumentNobody is creating a misrepresentation of your argument. We have said that we would not allow a sorcerer to create a cleric spell. You argue that *if* he could, he would be able to cast it. You keep setting up a spceific premise in order to reach a specific conclusion. We reject your premise. As such, your conlcusion never follows. To put this as clearly as possible: A sorcerer can only cast spells on the sorcerer class list. A sorcerer can research brand new spells (with DM approval). Such approved spells are then considered to be "on the Sorcerer class list". We would not allow a sorcerer to turn another class' spells into sorcerer spells.
Ander Spectacular 03-29-05, 06:32 PM	Seeker95: Are you saying that an a sorceror who learns an arcane version of a cleric spell from either the Arcane Disciple feat or the Rainbow Servant class ability is not considered to know a cleric spell in an arcane version? And if this was true, could a sorceror not learn this unusual sorceror spell from said sorceror? Once a sorceror adds a spell to his spells known list it becomes a sorceror spell. Also, the 5th level ability of the Exalted Arcanist in BoED adds all sanctified spells to his spells known list. Can he then not cast them? There are circumstances where a sorceror can learn spells from other spell lists. This can be said even without entering into the whole argument about the description of a sorceror's spells in the class description. -AS-
Harsk 03-29-05, 07:12 PM	And if this was true, could a sorceror not learn this unusual sorceror spell from said sorceror? Since when do sorcerers "teach" spells to other sorcerers? This is counterintuitive and out of flavor for the class. I mean, my PHB specifically states, "Unlike wizards, they gain little by sharing their knowledge and have no strong incentive to work together." Their magic is "intuitive" and "innate." It seems that arguments about sorcerers being able to "teach" one another anything are simply misapplying the wizard mechanics, further muddying the issue. But maybe that's just me. I'm not sure why this discussion is ongoing. It's pretty clear that whether or not a sorcerer can learn an arcane version of any given divine spell is a DM's call which can be argued either way from the quasi-ambiguous wording in the rules, but which it seems no small number of posters (and customer service) would tend to rule against. ~Harsk
Seeker95 03-29-05, 07:53 PM	Seeker95: Are you saying that [... ... ... ... ...]What I am saying is... Feel free to be creative in designing brand new spells for your sorcerer. Stay the hell away from existing spells that do not belong to the sorcerer. And, although not located specifically in this thread... stay the hell away from all the cheese-laden Prestige Classes that each "more powerful than the last" book offers to totally screw with a DM's sense of balance by encouraging players to grab as much power as they can. But that is somewhat beyond what you were asking.
mrpopstar 03-29-05, 07:56 PM	Ander Spectacular: Are you saying that an a sorceror who learns an arcane version of a cleric spell from either the Arcane Disciple feat or the Rainbow Servant class ability is not considered to know a cleric spell in an arcane version? And if this was true, could a sorceror not learn this unusual sorceror spell from said sorceror? Once a sorceror adds a spell to his spells known list it becomes a sorceror spell.A sorcerer who learns an arcane version of a cleric spell from either the ARCANE DISCIPLE feat or the Rainbow Servant class ability is not capable of teaching the spell to another sorcerer. Here's why: Complete Divine(pg. 78) ARCANE DISCIPLE [GENERAL] Choose a deity, and then select a domain available to clerics of that deity. You can learn to cast the spells associated with that domain as arcane spells. Taking ARCANE DISCIPLE allows a sorcerer to choose a domain and cast the spells associated with that domain as arcane spells. If a sorcerer takes ARCANE DISCIPLE, chooses the Death domain, and then chooses the spell DESTRUCTION on his next level-up, the spell DESTRUCTION remains a Clr 7 spell. The feat ARCANE DISCIPLE exemplifies that particular sorcerer's study(which allowed him to access the magic of the divine via arcane means), it does not change the nature of the spell(only the means by which the effects were accessed). A sorcerer without the knowledge gained by taking ARCANE DISCIPLE is without the skills required to learning the secrets of such unusual magic. Furthermore, a Rainbow Servant class ability works in the same way: Complete Divine(pg. 55): Extra Domain: A rainbow servant gains the granted power and spell access of the Good domain at 1st level, the Air domain at 4th level, and the Law domain at 7th level. ... The sorcerer who has taken levels of Rainbow Servant is given spell access to the above-mentioned domains. The description of the domain spells remains the same, they means by which the effects are accessed is made an exception for the particular sorcerer who has taken levels of Rainbow Servant. A sorcerer who has no levels in Rainbow Servant laks the skills required to to learn the secrets of such unusual magic. As evidence of my claim that the description of spells do not change, see here: Complete Divine(pg. 20): ... In cases where the spell is only divine the wizard may scribe a divine scroll into his book. ... This statement proves that access granted to domain spells does not change the description of the spell. Only the means by which the effects are accessed(arcane vs. divine). Also here: Complete Divine(pg. 20): ... Once the domain spell is known the sorcerer may cast it freely. Unless the prestige class specifies otherwise, such spells are considered arcane spells when cast by arcane spellcasters. So again, the means by which the effects are accessed changes from divine to arcane. The description of the spell itself, does not change. Conclusively, a sorcerer who has not taken a feat or levels of a prestige class that allows access to spells lacking a sorcerer/wizard spell level can not learn such spells from a sorcerer who has. Once a sorceror adds a spell to his spells known list it becomes a sorceror spell.This simply is not true. See above. There are circumstances where a sorceror can learn spells from other spell lists. This can be said even without entering into the whole argument about the description of a sorceror's spells in the class description. There are numerous circumstances, as has been evidenced. The key term is that these are "circumstances" and are not so for all sorcerers.
mrpopstar 03-29-05, 08:02 PM	Harsk: Since when do sorcerers "teach" spells to other sorcerers? This is counterintuitive and out of flavor for the class. I mean, my PHB specifically states, "Unlike wizards, they gain little by sharing their knowledge and have no strong incentive to work together." Their magic is "intuitive" and "innate."An undeniable point. :)
Nom 03-29-05, 11:05 PM	ARCANE DISCIPLE [GENERAL] Choose a deity, and then select a domain available to clerics of that deity. You can learn to cast the spells associated with that domain as arcane spells.[/indent] Taking ARCANE DISCIPLE allows a sorcerer to choose a domain and cast the spells associated with that domain as arcane spells. If a sorcerer takes ARCANE DISCIPLE, chooses the Death domain, and then chooses the spell DESTRUCTION on his next level-up, the spell DESTRUCTION remains a Clr 7 spell.Actually, it remains a Death 7 spell from the perspective of the sorcerer. It so happens that it is also a Clr 7 spell, but that's irrelevant to our discussion, since the sorcerer is casting the spell off the domain list, not the cleric list. Arcane Disciple effectively allows the character to treat a particular domain's spells as if they were part of his class list. One could legitimately consider it the opposite of a wizard's prohibited domains, which remove all spells of certain schools from that wizard's class list.
rencomp101 03-29-05, 11:42 PM	Alright, I was groggy and cranky when I made my last post. There’s really only a bit of mischaracterizing nonsense and I’m sure it was just to inject humor into the argument. My apologies. But some here seem to think that a restriction on the class designator to “sorcerer” in the unusual spell description would make things more balanced for some reason. Not at all. With the mrpopstar/seeker95 interpretation, a player can decide to research a new Mass Heal spell with the “sorcerer/wizard” description. The reasonable DM, while having the option to say “yes”, actually says: “You make no progress. You fail miserably and your character gets the feeling that he’ll never succeed in a million years.” With MY interpretation, the player comes to the DM with a scroll containing an arcane version of Mass Heal and says “I’d like to learn this spell by gaining familiarity of it through study.” The reasonable DM, while having the option to say “yes” AND the option of what would appear in the class descriptor of such a spell, actually says: “You make no progress. You fail miserably and your character gets the feeling that he’ll never succeed in a million years.” You see? No real difference. But with the mrpopstar/seeker95 interpretation, whenever the DM allows the sorcerer to learn an unusual spell, the DM’s hand is forced. He HAS to stick “sorcerer” in the class descriptor for the sorcerer to cast it. That’s the only real debate here at this point. Game balance is not at issue at all. Seeker95: I’ve been reviewing your posts in this thread. You’ve cast your vote on many of the points raised here. Most of your posts read like declarations of truth by fiat. I agree with some of them. Some I don’t. Textual support would be nice for some of them. Here’s one of your posts that make me think we’re not so far apart: “I believe Rowan has it right. Spells gained via Domain-related Feats, etc. are not on the class list. They are only on that particular caster's list.” What would be the class/level designator for such a spell in the spell’s description? Sounds like you’re not against the general concept of a caster casting spells that don’t contain his class designator. But you DO object to a sorcerer being able to do this. You seem very confident of this. What text from the PHB sold you on it for sorcerers in particular? I’ve seen mrpopstar’s textual support. One of those quotes perhaps? And lest I also be accused of just making assertions, here’s my main support AND contextual clue to designer intent: Let’s play “One of these things is not like the others!!” From the srd: “A bard casts arcane spells, which are drawn from the bard spell list.” Bang! Bards can only cast spells that are arcane and have the “bard” designator. “A cleric casts divine spells, which are drawn from the cleric spell list.” Bang! Clerics can only cast spells that are divine and have the “cleric” designator. “A druid casts divine spells, which are drawn from the druid spell list.” BANG! Druids can only cast spells that are divine and have the “Druid” designator. “a paladin gains the ability to cast a small number of divine spells, which are drawn from the paladin spell list.” Bang! Paladins can only cast spells that are divine and have the “Paladin” designator. “a ranger gains the ability to cast a small number of divine spells, which are drawn from the ranger spell list.” Bang! Rangers can only cast divine spells that have the “Ranger” designator. “A sorcerer casts arcane spells which are drawn primarily from the sorcerer/wizard spell list.” KLONK!?! Sorcerers can only cast arcane spells that… um… PRIMARILY… have the sorcerer/wizard designator. <Hmmm. This kind of stands out. Primarily implies “not always”. Why change the pattern? Well, let’s go on…> “A wizard casts arcane spells which are drawn from the sorcerer/wizard spell list.” Bang! Wizards can only cast arcane spells with the “wizard” designator. That’s all of the casters. Do you see the pattern? Do you see where the authors deviate from the pattern? Not only is my interpretation a proper LITERAL interpretation, but a supported CONTEXTUAL interpretation. All the other casters have the explicit restriction. Since the restriction is left out of the sorcerer description, Mrpopstar tries to search elsewhere in the text of the books to impose the class designator restriction on ALL classes through inference, and so, through inference to the sorcerer. Fine. This evidence can be seen to support his viewpoint. Or debated. But don’t you think the simplest way to determine the designers’ intent regarding the sorcerer’s capabilities is to just stick to the explicit lines in the sorcerer’s description? I think so anyway. I’ve sent another email to Customer Service really trying to nail them down on this so they say “yes” or “no” so this thread can finally die. The last unhelpful response was: “It is perfectly legal to create a new spell if the DM allows such things in the campaign. That is the intent of the rule. The final decision on spell creation is adjudicated by the DM.” Slippery suckers.
mrpopstar 03-30-05, 01:59 AM	Customer Service has replied with this:Thank you for contacting us again Daniel, Sorcerers are bound by the Sorcerer/Wizard list of spells. Sometimes a prestige class or spell creation can allow a spell that is not on the Sor/Wiz list. (The Hathran in the Player's Guide to Faerun, pages 60-61 has such an example.) Good Gaming! Sam S. Customer Service Representative Wizards of the Coast 1-800-324-6496 (US and Canada) 425-204-8069 (From all other countries) Monday-Friday 7am-6pm PST / 10am-9pm ESTThere you have it folks. Sorcerers are bound by the Sorcerer/Wizard list of spells. Nom: Actually, it remains a Death 7 spell from the perspective of the sorcerer.You are absolutely right. My mistake. Thank you for pointing that out. :) rencomp101(matmos?): All the other casters have the explicit restriction. Since the restriction is left out of the sorcerer description, Mrpopstar tries to search elsewhere in the text of the books to impose the class designator restriction on ALL classes through inference, and so, through inference to the sorcerer. Fine. This evidence can be seen to support his viewpoint. Or debated.What I desire to show everyone by making all of these references is the fact that there is no hard evidence that would support a sorcerer casting spells outside of the sorcerer/wizard level designator(no explicit statements or examples used), and tons of evidence that would refute it(many related statements and explicit examples used).
Tsuul 03-30-05, 02:09 AM	rencomp101(matmos?):Oh, that's not gonna end well. :eek:
mrpopstar 03-30-05, 02:25 AM	Tsuul: Oh, that's not gonna end well.Did I say something wrong?
mrpopstar 03-30-05, 03:08 AM	I have chosen to send yet another letter to Customer Service: Please bear with this listed example, I do have a valid question/point. The following quotes come from the SRD. The text following each quote state my understanding of the quote. “A bard casts arcane spells, which are drawn from the bard spell list.”Bards can only cast spells that are arcane and have a bard level associated with them. “A cleric casts divine spells, which are drawn from the cleric spell list.”Clerics can only cast spells that are divine and have a cleric level associated with them. “A druid casts divine spells, which are drawn from the druid spell list.”Druids can only cast spells that are divine and have a druid level associated with them. “a paladin gains the ability to cast a small number of divine spells, which are drawn from the paladin spell list.”Paladins can only cast spells that are divine and have a paladin level associated with them. “a ranger gains the ability to cast a small number of divine spells, which are drawn from the ranger spell list.”Rangers can only cast spells that are divine and have a ranger level associated with them. “A wizard casts arcane spells which are drawn from the sorcerer/wizard spell list.”Wizards can only cast spells that are arcane and have a sorcerer/wizard level associated with them. “A sorcerer casts arcane spells which are drawn primarily from the sorcerer/wizard spell list.”Sorcerers can only cast spells that are arcane and primarily have a sorcerer/wizard level associated with them. The term "primarily" infers that a sorcerer could choose spells from sources other than the sorcerer/wizard spell list and is inconsistent with the spell descriptions for other classes. This has led to heated debate in the message boards, which leads me to assume that it is leading to heated debate at gaming tables. If it was not the intent of Wizards of the Coast to allow sorcerers the ability to choose spells from sources other than their own spell list, I ask to be given instruction as to how I go about making a request for an update to the SRD so that this confusion does not persist. Why was the word "primarily" added to the text under the explanation of the sorcerer's spells? Thank you for all of your continuing support with this topic! Once again we find ourselves waiting. :)
Will Brandiman 03-30-05, 03:46 AM	No just with people who make no sense. Much like your post. :D :D Sorry mate, it was your original post (#32) that made no sense. As pointed out by both Seeker and myself. I suggest you go back and read that post again and see if you can work out why it was ridiculed.
Will Brandiman 03-30-05, 03:58 AM	Rainbow Servant seems to be the core of many people's problems on this issue. I think it might also be helpful in finding the solution. If, as some people believe, sorcerors can learn non Sor/Wiz spells as a class ability, why does the Rainbow Servant PrC give this as the 10th level class ability? The description of the PrC also mentions that it's favoured by sorcerors more than wizards. Why would this be the case when apparently a sorceror can already do at 1st level what this PrC gives at 16th level?
mrpopstar 03-30-05, 05:05 AM	Will Brandiman: Rainbow Servant seems to be the core of many people's problems on this issue. I think it might also be helpful in finding the solution. If, as some people believe, sorcerors can learn non Sor/Wiz spells as a class ability, why does the Rainbow Servant PrC give this as the 10th level class ability? The description of the PrC also mentions that it's favoured by sorcerors more than wizards. Why would this be the case when apparently a sorceror can already do at 1st level what this PrC gives at 16th level?Valid observation! :D I meant to site this in my response to Ander Spectacular but I felt confident that I had already made my point and didn't wish to beat it to death(which is why our original thread was closed by the moderators).
RaspK FOG 03-30-05, 05:58 AM	There is a simple way to end this discussion: Dragons get spells as if they were sorcerers. SOME dragons can choose from specific domains and/or the cleric spell list for the repertoire of sorcerer spells as if they were on the Sor/Wiz spell list. Thus, not all sorcerers can choose these spells.
Will Brandiman 03-30-05, 07:05 AM	The very point I made in the previous thread. Just before it got closed. :(
rencomp101 03-30-05, 10:24 AM	<Yep. It's me, Matmos. Was resetting password and got interrupted. Can't reset for 24 hours.> I think TSUUL correctly predicted my response on this one. Sorry mrpopstar, I think you emphasized the wrong line in your customer service response. We're debating whether an unusual spell, created through study must be a sorc/wiz spell. The response: "Sometimes a prestige class or spell creation can allow a spell that is not on the Sor/Wiz list." Means it's allowed and he can cast them. This is a teensy, weensy, bit of game obscura that only effects the game in a narrow way. We're just too proud to drop our defensible postions while we've got breath in our bodies.
mrpopstar 03-30-05, 12:49 PM	rencomp101: I think TSUUL correctly predicted my response on this one.I didn't understand what Tsuul meant by the following statement in the beginning.Oh, that's not gonna end well.Though(after careful consideration) I believe he thought I was calling you out while you were 'assuming' a different name. If this is so, I had no intention and I'm sorry(I thought it was obvious to all involved that it was you). In retrospect we are both making assumptions as to what he meant. I invite Tsuul to step in and make clear his meaning. Sorry mrpopstar, I think you emphasized the wrong line in your customer service response. We're debating whether an unusual spell, created through study must be a sorc/wiz spell.A spell that a sorcerer creates through study must have a sorcerer/wizard level associated with it unless the sorcerer has taken a feat or prestige class which allows him access to spells outside of that restriction. This has been my stance throughout this entire thread. Where did you get the idea that I've been debating or emphasizing anything that differs? Do realize that when a Sorcerer 7/Rainbow Servant 5 creates a spell with an Air domain level association he is creating said spell as a Rainbow Servant and not as a Sorcerer. "Sometimes a prestige class or spell creation can allow a spell that is not on the Sor/Wiz list." Means it's allowed and he can cast them.Means what is allowed exactly? This statement very clearly states two things: Taking levels of a prestige class can allow a sorcerer access to spells not associated with a sorcerer/wizard level. Spell creation allows sorcerer's to create spells not currently found on the sorcerer/wizard spell list(subject to DM approval and an accessible sorcerer/wizard spell level association). Do you still insist that a sorcerer can create spells that lack a sorcerer/wizard level? That concept defies all logic. We're just too proud to drop our defensible postions while we've got breath in our bodies.Very eloquently stated. :D Do realize that you are doing exactly what you accused me of earlier.through inference to the sorcererSince the replies from Customer Service and the explanations in the Player's Handbook 3.5/SRD are not explicative, you are inferring that the sorcerer can do what it does not blatantly say he can do. In your own words, such claims can be supported...Or debated.Though as we chip away at this, we chip away at the support for your claims. RaspK FOG: There is a simple way to end this discussion: Dragons get spells as if they were sorcerers. SOME dragons can choose from specific domains and/or the cleric spell list for the repertoire of sorcerer spells as if they were on the Sor/Wiz spell list. Thus, not all sorcerers can choose these spells.If only making a point in here were that simple my friend. ;) Will Brandiman: The very point I made in the previous thread. Just before it got closed. :(Don't you hate when that happens!
matmos 03-30-05, 01:46 PM	mrpopstar: Something just occurred to me... Is it your opinion that the class designator that appears in the spell is a real world observable from the character's perspective like 'level' and 'arcane vs. divine' or "good vs. evil"? I've been approaching this with the assumption that the spell class designator is just a game artifact, that is, a handy label the book authors use to point out to players what classes have explicit permission to use those spells. That's why a designator of "personal only" doesn't rock my conception of the game like it seems to with you. With this expressed point of view, let me rephrase my stance to highlight what's actually going on. If Bob the sorcerer researches a spell that currently has Clr4 as designator in the description, if he succeeds in learning it, the DM is saying the spell now has Clr4, Bob4 <arrghh!!> in the designator. This is not a property of the spell, just an indicator of permission. Sorcerers are described in such a way so that they can have permission to cast spells that other sorcerer's can't because the way they aquire them is highly personal. They are unique in this respect. If Jim the wizard researches a spell though, he can't just limit it to Jim4, because wizards can understand each other's spells. If the DM gives Jim the permission to use it, he must give all other wizards permission to cast it because of the wizard character description. He has to label it Clr4,Wizard4 <shudder!!>. 'Wizards cast spells on the wizard list' means if one wizard has permission to cast a spell, they all do. This makes sense since they're sort of scientific in their approach and so everything they do is reproducible with proper study, experience, and intelligence. Maybe I'm wrong about whether or not the class designator is an actual property of the spell rather than just an indicator of permission. If it's a real property of the spell from the character's perspective like "good vs. evil" I'll retract my argument. I'd never use a linguistic quirk in the rules to argue that a good cleric can cast an evil spell. I'm pretty sure the class designator is just a game artifact for the players' convenience, but I'm willing to be convinced otherwise. One way to do this would be to find an example of a spell like "protection against cleric spells" or something like that.
Seeker95 03-30-05, 02:03 PM	We're debating whether an unusual spell, created through study must be a sorc/wiz spell. The response: "Sometimes a prestige class or spell creation can allow a spell that is not on the Sor/Wiz list." Means it's allowed and he can cast them.Now you're just being silly. A sorcerer cannot research a brand new spell and make it anything BUT a sorcerer spell. Every spell he researches and creates is a sorcerer spell because s/he is a sorcerer.
matmos 03-30-05, 02:15 PM	Seeker95: See my last post. Not being silly, just have my own idea of what the class designator means. You have yours which explains your attitude. I think it's a label to convey permission. You think it's a property of the spell. Not sure which is correct.
Tsuul 03-30-05, 02:33 PM	I believe he thought I was calling you out while you were 'assuming' a different name.Yup. Once someone (I forget who) thought that I and another poster were the same person using different names. I chuckled. The other poster seemed to be highly offended. If Bob the sorcerer researches a spell that currently has Clr4 as designator in the description, if he succeeds in learning it, the DM is saying the spell now has Clr4, Bob4 <arrghh!!> in the designator. This is not a property of the spell, just an indicator of permission. Sorcerers are described in such a way so that they can have permission to cast spells that other sorcerer's can't because the way they aquire them is highly personal. They are unique in this respect.If a sorcerer scribes any scroll, a wizard can learn off of it. As can another sorcerer. The sor/wiz x tag makes this possible. Although earlier in the argument I had an example where an arcane disciple learned the Healing domain, I erroniously put those spells with the "Hokus" descriptor(his name). They should have remained with the Healing descriptor. The sor/wis x tag is a quality (like a different language) that prevents those who don't know it to not be able to use spells with that discriptor.
matmos 03-30-05, 02:48 PM	Another way to prove that class is a real world observable would be to find an example of a magic item that explicitly discriminates on the basis of class. Or a spell like Detect Class. Can anybody find such an example? Here's some more inferential support for my philosophy that class is not a real property of spells or anything else for that matter: The following is a quote from the Symbol of Death description that indicates the author's view of class: "Special conditions for triggering a symbol of death can be based on a creature’s name, identity, or alignment, but otherwise must be based on observable actions or qualities. Intangibles such as level, class, Hit Dice, and hit points don’t qualify." Note: Class is listed as an intangible. What is it then? A game term only.
mrpopstar 03-30-05, 03:04 PM	matmos: Is it your opinion that the class designator that appears in the spell is a real world observable from the character's perspective like 'level' and 'arcane vs. divine' or "good vs. evil"?No. I've been approaching this with the assumption that the spell designator is just a game artifact, that is, a handy label the book authors use to point out to players what classes have explicit permission to use those spells.I too have been approaching it this way. That's why a designator of "personal only" doesn't rock my conception of the game like it seems to with you.The concept that a spell would be "personal only" just doesn't make sense. There are no such spells that exist. That's why my conception of your conception of the game is that of one who lacks conception. If Bob the sorcerer researches a spell that currently has Clr4 as designator in the description, if he succeeds in learning it, the DM is saying the spell now has Clr4, Bob4 <arrghh!!> in the designator. This is not a property of the spell, just an indicator of permission.The DM is absolutely not saying that the spell now has Clr4, Bob4 as the level association. The DM is simply saying that Bob the sorcerer has permission to cast the spell. "Bob" is not a class. "Bob" is not a field in which you can gain levels of understanding. Just as in the instance of gaining levels in a prestige class that allows access to domain spells, the spell remains a Clr4 spell in pertinence to Bob. Sorcerers are described in such a way so that they can have permission to cast spells that other sorcerer's can't because the way they aquire them is highly personal.This I refute. Sorcerers are restricted to spells that have a sorcerer/wizard level associated with them(as was just proven by our reply letter from Customer Service), unless a sorcerer gains access to spells through a selected feat, gains levels in a prestige class, creates a new spell or is given explicit permission by their DM(which makes such a sorcerer's spell an exception to the standard rule of sorcerer spell selection) They are unique in this respect.Let us not forget about the Bard. If Jim the wizard researches a spell though, he can't just limit it to Jim4, because wizards can understand each other's spells.As was stated before, no spell(whether researched/created by Jim the wizard or Bob the sorcerer) has a "personal" level association. If the DM gives Jim the permission to use it, he must give all other wizards permission to cast it because of the wizard character description. He has to label it Clr4,Wizard4 <shudder!!>. 'Wizards cast spells on the wizard list' means if one wizard has permission to cast a spell, they all do. This makes sense since they're sort of scientific in their approach and so everything they do is reproducible with proper study, experience, and intelligence.The DM should allow access by all wizards, since this new spell is a sorcerer/wizard spell. Keep in mind that all of these other wizards you speak of must come accross this spell in their travels, or have Jim the wizard teach it to them. The spell isn't added to the list for ripe picking when a level increase comes along for all wizards. You think it's a property of the spell.You lumped Seeker 95 and I together so I'm assuming this was also in reference to me and my thought processes. I do not think that the level association in the description of the spell is a property of the spell. I don't know where you got this idea from, but your accusation is incorrect. I have been very careful to state that a spell requires a "sorcerer/wizard level association in order for a sorcerer to cast it unless a special circumstance(feats, prestige classes, DM intervention) dictate otherwise." The term "association" does not indicate "property of."
Tsuul 03-30-05, 03:06 PM	Can anybody find such an example?All scrolls and wands. (Spell completion items and spell trigger items)DMG 213.
matmos 03-30-05, 03:08 PM	TSUUL: "The sor/wis x tag is a quality (like a different language) that prevents those who don't know it to not be able to use spells with that discriptor." If you are right about this, I agree with your conclusions. My argument falls. If you are wrong, and the sor/wiz tag is just an indicator of permission, my argument stands, and your conclusions are unjustified. So the new question: Is the class tag in the spell descriptor a real property of the spell or an indicator of permission from the author to the player?
mrpopstar 03-30-05, 03:15 PM	Tsuul: Yup.I figured. Once someone (I forget who) thought that I and another poster were the same person using different names. I chuckled. The other poster seemed to be highly offended.Some people just can't deal. :D
matmos 03-30-05, 03:26 PM	TSUUL: Trigger items, good example. More stuff like this will be helpful. But here's how they discriminate: "just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know" The item doesn't seem to be detecting a "cleric" property. Anyone who has the "special knowledge" can trigger the items. I assume that's how people trigger the item with the Use Magic Device spell succeed. They also have access to the "special knowledge" regardless of class. So this example doesn't quite establish class as a real property. Just the knowledge that members of the class typically possess. Any items that say for instance: "wearable only by clerics" in the description?
mrpopstar 03-30-05, 03:29 PM	This is correct:The sor/wis x tag is a quality (like a different language) that prevents those who don't know it to not be able to use spells with that discriptor.From a character's perspective the sorcerer/wizard level association denies those without the proper level of experience in a sorcerer or wizard class(even sorcerers and wizards of a lower level than the spell level) to understand/use the said spell or magical item. This is also correct:class is not a real property of spellsFrom a player's perspective the sorcerer/wizard level association is not a "property" of a spell or magical item, it is an indicator of permission for a character with the proper level of experience in a sorcerer or wizard class to learn/use the said spell or magical item. matmos: What I do so love about this new argument you're making is that you must reach into the realm of "inference" in order for you to prove your point since it is not explicitly stated anywhere that class is not a property of magic. :D I wonder how you are justified in doing so and I am somehow building a fallible case with "inferred" evidence?
mrpopstar 03-30-05, 03:40 PM	The reply we have all been waiting for(let this finally end): Thank you for contacting us. It was never the intention to allow sorcerers to have access to spells that do not occur on their given list. I'll be happy to pass this feedback along to the appropriate team. Good Gaming! Chris L. Customer Service Representative Wizards of the Coast 1-800-324-6496 (US and Canada) 425-204-8069 (From all other countries) Monday-Friday 7am-6pm PST / 10am-9pm EST What more could we possibly ask for?
matmos 03-30-05, 03:43 PM	mrpopstar: I gave you the wrong impression. Reread the post. I wasn't chastising you for inferring in general, but for building an inferential case using material outside the explicit rules in the sorcerer description to recast the meaning of the sorcerer description. Why not just accept what they're saying in the sorcerer description? In this case, there's no section detailing magic theory on this topic so we have no choice but to look elsewhere if we want to figure out what the game designers meant.
Seeker95 03-30-05, 03:53 PM	matmos, I must give you a :tiphat: for the manner in which you have kept the majority of your comments focused solely upon the topic and not on other members. You have so consistently maintained this approach that I offer you yet another :tiphat:. Note: I still disagree with your premises, which invariably lead me to disagree with your conclusions.
matmos 03-30-05, 03:56 PM	rmpopstar: That's a much better response than I got. "Page 198 of the PHB it states, "A spellcaster of any kind can create a new spell.", we do not put any further requirements on what the Class can create as that is up to the DM. I hope this information is useful." Yours trumps mine in terms of specificity. I hereby relinquish my argument regarding game designer intent about sorcerers. The magic theory aspect is still interesting to me. Another thread sometime.
mrpopstar 03-30-05, 03:58 PM	matmos: I wasn't chastising you for inferring in general, but for building an inferential case using material outside the explicit rules in the sorcerer description to recast the meaning of the sorcerer description.So for "inferring"? Mrpopstar tries to search elsewhere in the text of the books to impose the class designator restriction on ALL classes through inference, and so, through inference to the sorcerer. Yeah. Chastised for "inferring" I'd say. In this case, there's no section detailing magic theory on this topic so we have no choice but to look elsewhere if we want to figure out what the game designers meant.Dude. In the case of sorcerers primarily casting spells from the sorcerer/wizard spell list, there was no section detailing sorcerers casting spells outside of their list as per their description so there was no choice but to look elsewhere if we wanted to figure out what the game designers meant. What's the difference? Why not just accept what they're saying in the sorcerer description?Because what they're saying in the sorcerer description is inconsistent with what they're saying everywhere else.
mrpopstar 03-30-05, 04:04 PM	matmos: I hereby relinquish my argument regarding game designer intent about sorcerers.I hereby accept your rescind and bask in the glory of my triumph. :D I'm kidding of course. Great debate though, huh? Now that we're all masters of the sorcerer class? *LOL* The magic theory aspect is still interesting to me. Another thread sometime.Spark one up my friend. I'll get out some clean sheets of paper for all of the upcoming letters to Customer Service(they must hate us all by now). Seeker95: Yes! Hats off to matmos!
matmos 03-30-05, 04:08 PM	Seeker95: Thanks! I try not to take these things too seriously. mrpopstar: Well argued!
Tsuul 03-30-05, 04:17 PM	Any items that say for instance: "wearable only by clerics" in the description?I loathe(sp) to bring this up because I believe it is broken on other accounts; Behind the curtain: Magic Item Gold Piece Values:Other Considerations:--Item Requires Specific Class or Alignment to Use. Which has probably been used in the following items:Candle of Invocation, Holy Avenger, and many of the "cheap" items found in many splatbooks. [edit: looks like the discussion ended while I was typing, Enjoy all. :edit]