Post/Author/DateTime	Post
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-26-07, 09:46 PM	I have been looking at the Ultimate Magus PrC and unless you take the actual PrC to level 28 you won't reach 20th in both Wizard and Sorcerer. Now just going by the 20th progression the max you can be is like 14th and 13th. The highest level spell you cast is 7th. Now that is a lot of spells, but that leaves out 8th and 9th level spells. Now another thing. Lets say your levels are 3/2 before you take the PrC. Now at level 1 of Ultimate magus you add the +1 level to the smallest which is 2 Sorcerer. next level both, next level both, now so far you have become equal level because of the spellcasting +. Now at level 4 because of the level progression of the PrC are the classes actually equal or do you look at the actual level of the 2 classes Wizard 3/Sorcerer 2?
FinalDivineDragoon 01-26-07, 10:17 PM	Entering as Wizard 3/Sorcerer 2 UM 1 - Wizard 3/Sorcerer 3 UM 2 - Wizard 4/Sorcerer 4 UM 3 - Wizard 5/Sorcerer 5 UM 4 - Wizard 5(6)/Sorcerer 5(6) you can choose either if all are equal UM 5 - Wizard 6(7)/Sorcerer 6(7) UM 6 - Wizard 7(8)/Sorcerer 7(8) UM 7 - Wizard 8/Sorcerer 8 the one you didn't pick is added here UM 8 - Wizard 9/Sorcerer 9 UM 9 - Wizard 10/Sorcerer 10 UM 10 - Wizard 11/Sorcerer 11 So at 15th level (Wizard 3/Sorcerer 2/Ultimate Magus 10) you would be casting as an 11th level Wizard and 11th level Sorcerer. Hope that helps :)
Seerow 01-26-07, 10:26 PM	An illumian with practiced spellcaster can end up with a full Wizard progression (thus losing only 1 level of Wizard casting, to get the dip into Sorcerer) and still cast as an 8th level Sorcerer and have the other UM goodies besides. They say to give up a single caster level you should get some really awesome stuff. I'd say 8 caster levels in another class plus special abilities covers that =P
Magrus 01-26-07, 10:42 PM	You do give up caster levels and spell levels. However...with the Practiced Manifester feat applied to one of the two classes it can be quite useful. Why? If you take meta-magic feats, and say, use Practiced Manifester: Wizard, you can then use your sorcerer spell slots to cast on the fly OR pay the cost for metamagic on your wizard spell slots. A maximized Cone of Cold for example, doing so 4/day as a 15th level wizard, isn't something to shake a stick at. Better yet, memorizing a maximized scorching ray as a 5th level spell, and quickening it with your sorcerer levels. A quickened chance at 72 points of damage if you hit all three touch attacks isn't half bad. Going beyond offensive, let's look at the buff and status effect aspect of this. You get a wizard who quicken's Haste on the party, and then casts ray of enfeeblement on the great brute coming towards the party. Your wizard has now A: protected himself, and B: drops the dangerous opponent's melee capabilities, making him useless. On the next round, the party's fighter squashes the brute, and the little minions running around are wiped out by the rest of the party with ease. The wizards insane spell load can handle such a display, and it is the majority of the partys resources being taken up. He now loses his place as a cannon, and takes the place of the best support character in the game. The cleric, druid, bard, or whatever can save their spells for healing or spells to make them better in melee while the wizard protects the party in a one round dual buff binge the first round of the important combat situations the party runs into. Sure, he might not be able to penetrate SR and kill big baddies at high levels, but that would be playing him wrong.
runestar 01-26-07, 10:47 PM	As mentioned earlier, you can use practiced spellcaster to "trick" the prc into recognising that your wiz caster lv is lower than your sorc caster lv(even though you have more lvs in wiz than sorc), thus letting you concentrate on boosting your wiz spellcasting lvs, so you don't actually have to stagger the advancement of both wiz and sorc lvs.:) The end result is that you give up only 1 or 2 lvs of wiz spellcasting.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-26-07, 10:53 PM	Entering as Wizard 3/Sorcerer 2 UM 1 - Wizard 3/Sorcerer 3 UM 2 - Wizard 4/Sorcerer 4 UM 3 - Wizard 5/Sorcerer 5 UM 4 - Wizard 5(6)/Sorcerer 5(6) you can choose either if all are equal UM 5 - Wizard 6(7)/Sorcerer 6(7) UM 6 - Wizard 7(8)/Sorcerer 7(8) UM 7 - Wizard 8/Sorcerer 8 the one you didn't pick is added here UM 8 - Wizard 9/Sorcerer 9 UM 9 - Wizard 10/Sorcerer 10 UM 10 - Wizard 11/Sorcerer 11 So at 15th level (Wizard 3/Sorcerer 2/Ultimate Magus 10) you would be casting as an 11th level Wizard and 11th level Sorcerer. Hope that helps :) Wizard 3/ Sorcerer 2 1 UM 1 2 UM 1 1 3UM 1 1 4 UM Choose 5 UM 1 1 6 UM 1 1 7 UM Choose 8 UM 1 1 9 UM 1 1 10 UM 1 1 11th/11th or 10th/12th or 12th/11th Now add 5 levels normally 3 Wizard 14th/13th or 1 Wizard 4 Sorcerer 12th/15th so max would be 10th Wizard/ 15th Sorcerer or vice versa. So anyway I don't see the basis as the ultimate spellcaster when he can't even cast 9th level spells. So a straight Wizard or Sorcerer in my opinion still has more power. I think the Ultimate Magus needs a little work.
Seerow 01-26-07, 10:55 PM	You do give up caster levels and spell levels. No. No you don't. You start as a Wizard4/Sorc1. You have Practiced Spellcaster, and you're an Illumian with the Word that gives +2 CL. Both of these applied to Sorcerer. Caster Levels: Wizard-4 Sorcerer-5 (7) At UM1, you gain one to your lowest caster level. This is your Wizard. Caster Levels: Wizard-5 Sorcerer-5(7) [1] At UM4, it happens again Caster Levels: Wizard-8 Sorcerer-8(9) [3] At UM7, it happens for the last time. Caster Levels: Wizard-11 Sorcerer-11 [5] By UM10, you're at: Caster Levels: Wizard-14 Sorcerer-14 [8] The rest of your levels after this go to some Wizard prestige class. This gives you Wizard19, Sorcerer8, Casting Wise. A Total CL of 23/18.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-26-07, 10:55 PM	As mentioned earlier, you can use practiced spellcaster to "trick" the prc into recognising that your wiz caster lv is lower than your sorc caster lv(even though you have more lvs in wiz than sorc), thus letting you concentrate on boosting your wiz spellcasting lvs, so you don't actually have to stagger the advancement of both wiz and sorc lvs.:) The end result is that you give up only 1 or 2 lvs of wiz spellcasting. Actually i think you end up losing 5 levels.
Seerow 01-26-07, 10:57 PM	No, as I just showed elaborrately, you lose 1. You would lose at most 3-4, there is no way to end up losing 5 unless you're really not trying.
Celeris 01-26-07, 11:12 PM	ok, i see all this discussion about maxing out the wizard levels (as i understand its the highest because of the prerequisites) but is the how does one attempt to get the sorceror into higher levels. i believe the method with the practiced spellcaster would work but is there any other way to boost it because for a character build im making i need another race than illumian and feats are precious. i know there probably isn't another way but any kind of help would work. Also, what would people say to switching the prerequisites of the UM around so that the spontaneous caster needed the 2nd level spells and the prepared one needed only first? (PS i dont care if wizards are better than sorcerors, im creating a character from an idea then minmaxing, not the other way around)
Seerow 01-26-07, 11:16 PM	For Sorcerer first? I'd say Wizard3/Sorcerer2/UM10/SorcPrestige5 Practiced Spellcaster for the Wizard's side, so you always boost the Sorcerer level with UM. The problem with this though is, the highest level spell you'll ever have on the Sorc side is 8th level. If the Sorc didn't have a delayed progression you'd get 9th level spells (you end up with Sorc level 17), and for the other side you have Wizard10.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-26-07, 11:36 PM	No. No you don't. You start as a Wizard4/Sorc1. You have Practiced Spellcaster, and you're an Illumian with the Word that gives +2 CL. Both of these applied to Sorcerer. Caster Levels: Wizard-4 Sorcerer-5 (7) At UM1, you gain one to your lowest caster level. This is your Wizard. Caster Levels: Wizard-5 Sorcerer-5(7) [1] At UM4, it happens again Caster Levels: Wizard-8 Sorcerer-8(9) [3] At UM7, it happens for the last time. Caster Levels: Wizard-11 Sorcerer-11 [5] By UM10, you're at: Caster Levels: Wizard-14 Sorcerer-14 [8] The rest of your levels after this go to some Wizard prestige class. This gives you Wizard19, Sorcerer8, Casting Wise. A Total CL of 23/18. Practiced Spellcaster, it says this feat does not affect your spells per day or spells known so what the point. That feat is good if you have say a fighter Mage and you want your fighter levels to add to your caster level and thats it. The class already increases your caster level by 4. big whoop, you don't get anymore spells per day or spells known. All in all the highest level spell you can possibly cast is 8th.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-26-07, 11:41 PM	No, as I just showed elaborrately, you lose 1. You would lose at most 3-4, there is no way to end up losing 5 unless you're really not trying. I was going with normal races drow maybe. But just standard normal races. I mean yeah i can boost my actual caster level all day, but there still isn't a way to be able to cast 9th level spells.
Seerow 01-26-07, 11:44 PM	Practiced Spellcaster, it says this feat does not affect your spells per day or spells known so what the point. That feat is good if you have say a fighter Mage and you want your fighter levels to add to your caster level and thats it. The class already increases your caster level by 4. big whoop, you don't get anymore spells per day or spells known. All in all the highest level spell you can possibly cast is 8th. you're missing the point. Ultimate Magus increases the level of your spellcasting class that has the lowest CASTER LEVEL. So the trick to maxing out your Wizard casting is to pump your Sorcerer Caster Level to make sure it's higher than the Wizards until you get to Ultimate Magus7. Hence having Practiced Spellcaster applying to the SORCERER. That way your Sorcerer Caster Level beats your Wizard caster level everytime it's checked, so you increase the Wizard casting again. This lets you gain full Wizard casting, and 7/10 Sorc casting from the prestige class. You finish having lost only one caster level. I was going with normal races drow maybe. But just standard normal races. I mean yeah i can boost my actual caster level all day, but there still isn't a way to be able to cast 9th level spells. If you had any clue what you were talking about this might be a valid statement. But you don't and it isn't. And a Drow Spellcaster? Are you mad man? That LA is **** on a spellcaster, and they have nothing really worth it. Some SR and ability score adjustments? Feh, feh I say! Feh!
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-26-07, 11:59 PM	you're missing the point. Ultimate Magus increases the level of your spellcasting class that has the lowest CASTER LEVEL. So the trick to maxing out your Wizard casting is to pump your Sorcerer Caster Level to make sure it's higher than the Wizards until you get to Ultimate Magus7. Hence having Practiced Spellcaster applying to the SORCERER. That way your Sorcerer Caster Level beats your Wizard caster level everytime it's checked, so you increase the Wizard casting again. This lets you gain full Wizard casting, and 7/10 Sorc casting from the prestige class. You finish having lost only one caster level. If you had any clue what you were talking about this might be a valid statement. But you don't and it isn't. And a Drow Spellcaster? Are you mad man? That LA is **** on a spellcaster, and they have nothing really worth it. Some SR and ability score adjustments? Feh, feh I say! Feh! Your not listening. Make the Ultra Magus using a standard. Not all DM's will allow other races. lets just stick with the Elf, Human etc... Ok the Ultimate Magus not going beyond 20th will never be able to obtain 9th level spells. The max level spell he could cast would be 8th. You are losing 4 levels, not counting caster level which effects duration, bypassing SR etc.., but the caster level that gives you spells per day and spells known. 16th is the max you can have. 16th/11th. The PrC gives you 4. So if you used Practiced spellcaster it would be either 24th/15th just caster level, or 20th/19th. But you still couldn't cast 9th level spells.
Seerow 01-27-07, 12:04 AM	I'm not listening? You're the one who just tried to make the argument to me that Practiced Spellcaster doesn't give you extra spells per day, thus the trick doesn't work. Don't change your argument post to post please. As for your new point? Nonsense. You just have to find another way to boost Sorcerer Caster Level. I'm certain there is one, Illumian is just a general favorite. Also, why is the DM allowing any prestige class you want, but not any race? You can get away with playing whatever you want so long as you don't deviate from Dwarf/Elf/Gnome and the occasional Drizzt wannabe?
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 12:08 AM	I'm not listening? You're the one who just tried to make the argument to me that Practiced Spellcaster doesn't give you extra spells per day, thus the trick doesn't work. Don't change your argument post to post please. As for your new point? Nonsense. You just have to find another way to boost Sorcerer Caster Level. I'm certain there is one, Illumian is just a general favorite. Also, why is the DM allowing any prestige class you want, but not any race? You can get away with playing whatever you want so long as you don't deviate from Dwarf/Elf/Gnome and the occasional Drizzt wannabe? Dude Practiced Spellcaster doesn't give you extra spells. Look in Complete Arcane page 82.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 12:11 AM	I'm not listening? You're the one who just tried to make the argument to me that Practiced Spellcaster doesn't give you extra spells per day, thus the trick doesn't work. Don't change your argument post to post please. As for your new point? Nonsense. You just have to find another way to boost Sorcerer Caster Level. I'm certain there is one, Illumian is just a general favorite. Also, why is the DM allowing any prestige class you want, but not any race? You can get away with playing whatever you want so long as you don't deviate from Dwarf/Elf/Gnome and the occasional Drizzt wannabe? There are a lot of DM's who allow almost any PrC but not race. Drow is a part of the core line up. It's a part of the MM which is a standard core book, and using the drow was way out there. The Illumian is not a race that you hear of people playing a lot.
Seerow 01-27-07, 12:11 AM	I never said it did! You're seriously just proving my point here. It doesn't give you new spells, but it tricks UM into progressing Wizard rather than Sorcerer, giving you FULL SPELL PROGRESSION which DOES give you new spells. Btw, even without Illumian, just practiced spellcaster alone lets you end with Wizard18/Sorc9 effective casting.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 12:11 AM	I never said it did! You're seriously just proving my point here. It doesn't give you new spells, but it tricks UM into progressing Wizard rather than Sorcerer, giving you FULL SPELL PROGRESSION which DOES give you new spells. Btw, even without Illumian, just practiced spellcaster alone lets you end with Wizard18/Sorc9 effective casting. It doesn't work that way.
Seerow 01-27-07, 12:12 AM	Practiced Spellcaster, it says this feat does not affect your spells per day or spells known so what the point. That feat is good if you have say a fighter Mage and you want your fighter levels to add to your caster level and thats it. The class already increases your caster level by 4. big whoop, you don't get anymore spells per day or spells known. All in all the highest level spell you can possibly cast is 8th. There are a lot of DM's who allow almost any PrC but not race. Drow is a part of the core line up. It's a part of the MM which is a standard core book, and using the drow was way out there. The Illumian is not a race that you hear of people playing a lot. Anyone who actually has Races of Destiny has probably seen at least one illumian in their games.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 12:12 AM	Anyone who actually has Races of Destiny has probably seen at least one illumian in their games. thats if they have the book.
Seerow 01-27-07, 12:12 AM	It doesn't work that way. Yes it does. (See, I can play the "Lets make a statement and not give proof" game too!)
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 12:13 AM	Yes it does. (See, I can play the "Lets make a statement and not give proof" game too!) Practiced Spellcaster can't be used that way.
Seerow 01-27-07, 12:13 AM	thats if they have the book. We're assuming they're using Complete Mage. It's a newer book than Races of Destiny. Why are we assuming having only the splats that you want? Though like I already said, it doesn't matter. You still end up with Wizard level 18 without it.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 12:14 AM	You add Practiced Spellcaster after all levels. You don't stack future levels on top of Practiced Spellcaster.
Seerow 01-27-07, 12:19 AM	Practiced Spellcaster can't be used that way. What way is that? Ultimate Magus says, I quote: "At 1st, 4th, and 7th level, you gain new spells per day and an increase in caster level (and spells known, if applicable) as if you had also gained a level in your arcane spellcasting class with the lowest caster level." Now, what does practiced spellcaster do? It raises the CASTER LEVEL of one class. So when you enter, you are Wizard4, Sorcerer1. You have Practiced Spellcaster, So you have an effective Sorcerer Caster Level of FIVE. Which is higher than Wizard. So Your Wizard gets bumped. At level 4 of UM, the caster levels are the same, so you get to choose. You bump Wizard again. At level 7, Wizard is now lower (unless you were illumian), so Sorcerer gets bumped. This is the ONLY time you lose a Wizard caster level. If you still don't get it, you're either an idiot or a troll.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 12:34 AM	What way is that? Ultimate Magus says, I quote: "At 1st, 4th, and 7th level, you gain new spells per day and an increase in caster level (and spells known, if applicable) as if you had also gained a level in your arcane spellcasting class with the lowest caster level." Now, what does practiced spellcaster do? It raises the CASTER LEVEL of one class. So when you enter, you are Wizard4, Sorcerer1. You have Practiced Spellcaster, So you have an effective Sorcerer Caster Level of FIVE. Which is higher than Wizard. So Your Wizard gets bumped. At level 4 of UM, the caster levels are the same, so you get to choose. You bump Wizard again. At level 7, Wizard is now lower (unless you were illumian), so Sorcerer gets bumped. This is the ONLY time you lose a Wizard caster level. If you still don't get it, you're either an idiot or a troll. Listen carefully. With Practiced Spellcaster you cannot, I repeat cannot count those 4 levels when it comes to spells per day or spells known.
Seerow 01-27-07, 12:37 AM	And I repeat. I never counted those 4 levels when it came to spells per day or spells known. If I did, your Sorcerer level would be 12 rather than 8. You're seriously not even TRYING to read what I'm saying.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 12:46 AM	And I repeat. I never counted those 4 levels when it came to spells per day or spells known. If I did, your Sorcerer level would be 12 rather than 8. You're seriously not even TRYING to read what I'm saying. You can't use Practiced Spellcaster to trick the Prereqs for a PrC. You will not be able to have 9th level spells with this PrC.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 12:52 AM	This is what you do. Take you a piece of paper and write it out. Even if you were to use the Practiced spellcaster feat and not count those four levels as spells per day you still would only come out being able to cast 8th level spells cause you would have the spells of a 16th level caster.
Seerow 01-27-07, 01:08 AM	You aren't tricking the prereqs. The PrC prereqs are met fully by Wizard4/Sorc1. What you are affecting is the spell progression of the PrC, which is dependant on your caster level. There is absolutely nothing to say Practiced Spellcaster doesn't count towards your caster level. In fact, that's the only thing the feat does! Right now your argument is that you can't get full Wizard progression from your Sorc level being higher, because a feat doesn't do what it was made to do, which is absolute BS.
Tempest Stormwind 01-27-07, 01:10 AM	XunVal, let me walk you through this. Practiced Spellcaster does not change spells per day or spells known. You are correct here -- but no one's claiming it does. What it does change is "caster level". A wizard 4 / sorcerer 1 with Practiced Spellcaster (Sorcerer) has the spells per day and spells known of a 4th level wizard (which she casts as a 4th level wizard) and the spells per day and spells known of a 1st level sorcerer (which she casts as a 5th level sorcerer since Practiced Spellcaster increases her caster level by 4 here). With me so far? Ultimate Magus, when you gain levels in it, judges your "lower-level" class based on caster level. The exact quote is "At 1st, 4th, and 7th level, you gain new spells per day and an increase in caster level (and spells known, if applicable) as if you had also gained a level in your arcane spellcasting class with the lowest caster level." This means that, if your Wizard 4 / Sorcerer 1 (with PC: Sorcerer) were to take a level of Ultimate Magus, she would look at her CASTER LEVELS -- which are Wizard 4, Sorcerer 5 due to Practiced Spellcaster, even though she only casts the same number of spells as a first-level sorcerer -- to determine which class to add her increase from. Since her WIZARD CASTER LEVEL is 4, and 4 is less than 5, Ultimate Magus's first-level "+1 level of lower-level existing arcane casting class" is forced to apply to her WIZARD levels. She therefore casts spells as a 5th level wizard / 1st level sorcerer, with her sorcerer spells behaving as if she were level 5 because of Practiced Spellcaster. It's not a matter of "tricking PrC requirements". It's a matter of Ultimate Magus looking at CASTER level instead of CLASS level. Because Practiced Spellcaster (and other things, like the Krau sigil) adjusts CASTER level, it can be used to affect which class Ultimage Magus boosts at level 1, 4, and 7. If you want to reply to this post, please reply paragraph-by-paragraph, so we can see if you're following this reasoning.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 01:16 AM	XunVal, let me walk you through this. Practiced Spellcaster does not change spells per day or spells known. You are correct here -- but no one's claiming it does. What it does change is "caster level". A wizard 4 / sorcerer 1 with Practiced Spellcaster (Sorcerer) has the spells per day and spells known of a 4th level wizard (which she casts as a 4th level wizard) and the spells per day and spells known of a 1st level sorcerer (which she casts as a 5th level sorcerer since Practiced Spellcaster increases her caster level by 4 here). With me so far? Ultimate Magus, when you gain levels in it, judges your "lower-level" class based on caster level. The exact quote is "At 1st, 4th, and 7th level, you gain new spells per day and an increase in caster level (and spells known, if applicable) as if you had also gained a level in your arcane spellcasting class with the lowest caster level." This means that, if your Wizard 4 / Sorcerer 1 (with PC: Sorcerer) were to take a level of Ultimate Magus, she would look at her CASTER LEVELS -- which are Wizard 4, Sorcerer 5 due to Practiced Spellcaster, even though she only casts the same number of spells as a first-level sorcerer -- to determine which class to add her increase from. Since her WIZARD CASTER LEVEL is 4, and 4 is less than 5, Ultimate Magus's first-level "+1 level of lower-level existing arcane casting class" is forced to apply to her WIZARD levels. She therefore casts spells as a 5th level wizard / 1st level sorcerer, with her sorcerer spells behaving as if she were level 5 because of Practiced Spellcaster. It's not a matter of "tricking PrC requirements". It's a matter of Ultimate Magus looking at CASTER level instead of CLASS level. Because Practiced Spellcaster (and other things, like the Krau sigil) adjusts CASTER level, it can be used to affect which class Ultimage Magus boosts at level 1, 4, and 7. If you want to reply to this post, please reply paragraph-by-paragraph, so we can see if you're following this reasoning. But you still will not be able to gain access to 9th level spells.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 01:17 AM	You aren't tricking the prereqs. The PrC prereqs are met fully by Wizard4/Sorc1. What you are affecting is the spell progression of the PrC, which is dependant on your caster level. There is absolutely nothing to say Practiced Spellcaster doesn't count towards your caster level. In fact, that's the only thing the feat does! Right now your argument is that you can't get full Wizard progression from your Sorc level being higher, because a feat doesn't do what it was made to do, which is absolute BS. Answer me this. Are you saying that this character, will be able to cast 9th level spells?
Tempest Stormwind 01-27-07, 01:17 AM	But you still will not be able to gain access to 9th level spells. You didn't reply paragraph-by-paragraph, so I do not know if you follow the reasoning. Do you accept that using tricks that raise your caster level can affect which class Ultimate Magus' advanced spellcasting applies to, as I outlined above?
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 01:21 AM	Also I don't believe this will work because I think the level of the character goes by HD. I think you only count the feat towards caster level, not character level. Thats why it won't work.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 01:22 AM	I know exactly what you are doing, but it doesn't work that way.
Seerow 01-27-07, 01:22 AM	But the PrC specifies that it refers back to Caster level, not Character level, which both me and TS have pointed out to you.
Tempest Stormwind 01-27-07, 01:24 AM	Also I don't believe this will work because I think the level of the character goes by HD. I think you only count the feat towards caster level, not character level. Thats why it won't work.And I would agree with you if it said character level. I think it should. But it says caster level -- which Practiced Spellcaster adjusts.I know exactly what you are doing, but it doesn't work that way.No on both parts of this sentence, it seems. Look, do I have to build it *for* you?
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 01:27 AM	Answer me, are you saying this character will be able to cast 9th level spells?
Seerow 01-27-07, 01:29 AM	Yes.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 01:30 AM	Yes. It will not work that way. I can promise you.
Seerow 01-27-07, 01:31 AM	You still have given no reason whatsoever that contradicts anything we have put forth.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 01:34 AM	reqs for Ultimate Magus Able to spontaneously cast 1st level arcane spells, able to prepare and cast 2nd level spells. Now +1 level of lower level existing arcane casting "class". Practiced Spellcaster. Your "caster" level for the chosen spellcasting class increases by 4. Practiced Spellcaster doesn't increase your overall level.
Tempest Stormwind 01-27-07, 01:37 AM	reqs for Ultimate Magus Able to spontaneously cast 1st level arcane spells, able to prepare and cast 2nd level spells. Now +1 level of lower level existing arcane casting "class". Practiced Spellcaster. Your "caster" level for the chosen spellcasting class increases by 4. Practiced Spellcaster doesn't increase your overall level. True, all of it. HOWEVER: Read the text accompanying the table. The table (i.e. the summary of the abilities) says "+1 level of lower-level existing arcane casting class". The TEXT (i.e. the important part that contains all the rules) says "At 1st, 4th, and 7th level, you gain new spells per day and an increase in caster level (and spells known, if applicable) as if you had also gained a level in your arcane spellcasting class with the lowest caster level." The text always trumps the table. It works off of caster level.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 01:40 AM	True, all of it. HOWEVER: Read the text accompanying the table. The table (i.e. the summary of the abilities) says "+1 level of lower-level existing arcane casting class". The TEXT (i.e. the important part that contains all the rules) says "At 1st, 4th, and 7th level, you gain new spells per day and an increase in caster level (and spells known, if applicable) as if you had also gained a level in your arcane spellcasting class with the lowest caster level." The text always trumps the table. It works off of caster level. With the feat you are only considered 4 levels higher for caster level only not class. The +1 is for class only you don't count the +4 for Practiced Spellcaster.
Seerow 01-27-07, 01:41 AM	And why don't you count the +4 from practiced spell caster? Practiced Spellcaster affects Caster Level, which is what is required.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 01:42 AM	You guys really need to read up on the rules. I'm not being ugly or anything, but check up on everything carefully.
Tempest Stormwind 01-27-07, 01:43 AM	With the feat you are only considered 4 levels higher for caster level only not class. The +1 is for class only you don't count the +4 for Practiced Spellcaster. So, you treat your caster level as 4 higher, but you don't treat your caster level as 4 higher? That's what you're saying. It'd work if Practiced Spellcaster were worded like "When casting spells from the chosen class, treat your caster level as up to 4 higher...". Instead, it says that you increase your caster level. Period. I don't know about you, but telling *me* to read up on the rules is pretty damn arrogant of you, particularly how you're using contradictions like this. I'm a freaking CO board regular and a published d20 author. Knowing the rules is What I Do. And Seerow's certainly no slouch either, if you'd read his material.
Krevon 01-27-07, 01:44 AM	Just read the post tonight(yay insomnia) Tempest and Seerow are correct on this. If it were me, I'd thank them for the effort and go enjoy my nineth level spells, but do what you want.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 02:04 AM	So, you treat your caster level as 4 higher, but you don't treat your caster level as 4 higher? That's what you're saying. It'd work if Practiced Spellcaster were worded like "When casting spells from the chosen class, treat your caster level as up to 4 higher...". Instead, it says that you increase your caster level. Period. I don't know about you, but telling *me* to read up on the rules is pretty damn arrogant of you, particularly how you're using contradictions like this. I'm a freaking CO board regular and a published d20 author. Knowing the rules is What I Do. And Seerow's certainly no slouch either, if you'd read his material. Dude it doesn't work like that. Only your caster level. The +1 for the PrC goes by class level not caster level. What you are trying to do is against the rules.
Tempest Stormwind 01-27-07, 02:08 AM	Dude it doesn't work like that. Only your caster level. The +1 for the PrC goes by class level not caster level. What you are trying to do is against the rules. The bolded part is where you are wrong. Open up Complete Mage, page 78. Look at the Ultimate Magus's "Spellcasting" entry, about halfway down the page. Read the second paragraph, the one beginning with "At 1st, 4th..." and so on. Notice how it says that the +1 level applies to the class with the lowest CASTER level?
Tuhljin 01-27-07, 04:22 AM	Personally, I think that Wizards should use an errata to change the wording to prevent this "trick," but technically, as I understand it, the trick is valid. But remember, technically valid isn't the same as "your DM should allow it." I don't think I would.
runestar 01-27-07, 07:32 AM	Guys, I think that XunValDorl of HouseKilsek still has no idea what you are talking about. Dude it doesn't work like that. Only your caster level. The +1 for the PrC goes by class level not caster level. What you are trying to do is against the rules. Against the spirit of the rules perhaps, but going by a literal reading of the prc was printed, nothing stops it.:) I dunno if you truly understand the crux of just what is going on, and arguing why it should not work, or are still in a world of your own, where you think that we are trying to argue that practiced spellcaster increases spells known, when that was never our intent in the first place, and never will be. How much more explicit do we need to be?
Gothenem 01-27-07, 09:17 AM	Indeed. Should work and does work are two different things. Using PC: Sorcerer, one ends up with the spells/day as a Wizard 17, just barely getting the 9th-level spells. XunValDorl: You must read the appropriate text. It does state Caster Level in the text, not Class Level. This is the reason the build is possible. Whether or not YOU personally agree, that is RAW. To Illustrate: Note: Practiced Spellcaster (sorcerer) taken at 3rd level The number in brackets designates the level for determining spells per day and spells known. The other number is the actual CASTER LEVEL. Lvl Class levels Wiz CL Sor CL 1 Wiz1 1 (1) 0 2 Wiz2 2 (2) 0 3 Wiz2/Sor1 2 (2) 5 (1) 4 Wiz3/Sor1 3 (3) 5 (1) 5 Wiz4/Sor1 4 (4) 5 (1) 6 Wiz4/Sor1/UM1 6 (5) 6 (1) 7 Wiz4/Sor1/UM2 7 (6) 7 (2) 8 Wiz4/Sor1/UM3 8 (7) 8 (3) 9 Wiz4/Sor1/UM4 10 (8) 9 (3) 10 Wiz4/Sor1/UM5 11 (9) 10 (4) 11 Wiz4/Sor1/UM6 12 (10) 11 (5) 12 Wiz4/Sor1/UM7 13 (10) 13 (6) 13 Wiz4/Sor1/UM8 14 (11) 14 (7) 14 Wiz4/Sor1/UM9 15 (12) 15 (8) 15 Wiz4/Sor1/UM10 17 (13) 17 (9) 16 Wiz5/Sor1/UM10 18 (14) 17 (9) 17 Wiz6/Sor1/UM10 19 (15) 17 (9) 18 Wiz7/Sor1/UM10 20 (16) 17 (9) 19 Wiz8/Sor1/UM10 21 (17) 17 (9) 20 Wiz9/Sor1/UM10 22 (18) 17 (9) The relevant text is Here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20061010a&page=3). Read the Text carefully. Relvant parts bolded. At 1st, 4th, and 7th level, you gain new spells per day and an increase in caster level (and spells known, if applicable) as if you had also gained a level in your arcane spellcasting class with the lowest caster level. For example, a 4th-level wizard/1st-level sorcerer who gained one level of ultimate magus would gain increased spellcasting ability as if he had gained a level of sorcerer (since that class's caster level is lower than his wizard caster level). If all your arcane spellcasting classes have equal caster levels, you can apply this benefit to any of your existing arcane spellcasting classes. You do not, however, gain any other benefit a character of those classes would have gained.
Khatoblepas 01-27-07, 09:32 AM	Couldn't you also use a kobold to get Wizard 19 casting? Using the chart above, take the Greater Rite of Draconic Passage (RoTD Web Enhancement: Increase Sorc caster level/spells known by 1) at 11HD, thus boosting your levels to 10/10, and allowing you to choose Wizard again, so you don't have to worry about the last three levels.
SunTzuWarmaster 01-27-07, 09:49 AM	No, you don't get level 9 spells like that. That's crazy talk, you're cheating, omg hax0rs! Just to let you guys know that in the next campaign I play in, I plan to play a UM, and the little tricks that have been written are extremely helpful and clear. Thanks
Gothenem 01-27-07, 09:55 AM	Couldn't you also use a kobold to get Wizard 19 casting? Using the chart above, take the Greater Rite of Draconic Passage (RoTD Web Enhancement: Increase Sorc caster level/spells known by 1) at 11HD, thus boosting your levels to 10/10, and allowing you to choose Wizard again, so you don't have to worry about the last three levels. Indeed. It can be done with Illumian too.
runestar 01-27-07, 09:55 AM	Hey, you can call us munchkins or minmaxers, but you can't call us cheaters!!!:mad: We pride ourselves in adhering to the rules here...:P
AbyssKnight 01-27-07, 01:11 PM	XunValDorl, I don't see that you are paying any attention to the points the other posters are making. Seerow and Runestar are entirely correct. Practiced Caster boosts your caster level. Since Ultimate Magus adds to your class with the lower caster level for three levels and both classes for the other seven, it will allow you to gain 9th level wizard spells. As for when you add in the bonus from Practiced Caster, this has been asked and officially you can add it any where that is most advantageous to you, you just must add it all at once and it cannot be added in the middle of another ability that affects caster level. But then, if you just refuse to listen to other people, I don't see why you would listen to me either.
mittenninja 01-27-07, 02:28 PM	You can't use Practiced Spellcaster to trick the Prereqs for a PrC. You will not be able to have 9th level spells with this PrC. Reply With Quote Hes not using it for prereqs. Hes using it for a class ability. at certain levels of Um you dont gain effective spell levels in both classes. When you only gain one it goes to the spellcasting class with the lowest caster level. With that said Practiced Spellcaster increases one classes effective caster level giving your lower (secondary) casting class a higher caster level than your primary. So when you gain those single levels of higher spell progression as a class feature they get applied to your primary casting class instead of the secondary. Understand now?
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 05:25 PM	XunValDorl, I don't see that you are paying any attention to the points the other posters are making. Seerow and Runestar are entirely correct. Practiced Caster boosts your caster level. Since Ultimate Magus adds to your class with the lower caster level for three levels and both classes for the other seven, it will allow you to gain 9th level wizard spells. As for when you add in the bonus from Practiced Caster, this has been asked and officially you can add it any where that is most advantageous to you, you just must add it all at once and it cannot be added in the middle of another ability that affects caster level. But then, if you just refuse to listen to other people, I don't see why you would listen to me either. I am fully paying attention. You can't do that. It doesn't work that way. You are trying to use a feat that says it doesn't give you extra spells per day or spells known to gain those things and you can't. The feat is always applied after the class levels are in place. When you go to add that +1 to the lowest you don't count that feat. Thats not the way it works. Read the rules. And even if you did it like that, take off those four levels when it comes to highest level spell cast and you still come up with 8th being the highest.
Seerow 01-27-07, 05:35 PM	Ladies and Gents, we have ourselves a Troll on our hands. Bring out the Fire and Acid!
mittenninja 01-27-07, 05:40 PM	ok your still not understanding. let me go into detail. a wizard4/sor1 take his first level in Um. He has the Practiced Spellcaster feat for his Src levels. Thus his wiz caster level is 4 and his sor is 5. Yes as a sor he can only cast 1st level spells but his effective caster level is 5. So at wiz4/sor1/Um1 he has spells per day as a wiz5/sor1. At 2nd and 3rd lvl of the prc both classes go up one thus haveing the spells per day as a wiz7/sor3 at the 4th level both wiz and sor caster levels are equal at 7 (again the sor can only cast 1 level spells at this point.) so you can apply the +1 level to wizard again bringing the spell per day totals to wiz8/sor3. again two more levels of both bringing the total to wiz10/sor5. at 7th lvl the +1 has to go to sor bringing the totals to Wiz10/sor6. then the next three go to both for a total spells per day of wiz13/sor9 and caster levels of wiz13/sor13 (not including arcane spell power). At this point you are a 15th level char. 5 more levels of wizard and you have spells per day as a 18th wizard and a 9th sor. got in now?
Seerow 01-27-07, 06:06 PM	We've explained it at least 3-4 times in this topic already. If he didn't get it before, he's not going to get it now. No matter how many people point it out to him.
runestar 01-27-07, 09:33 PM	I think he got it, he just refuses to admit it. It's apparent once you notice that his arguments have nothing to do with the original points raised whatsoever.:rolleyes:
Magrus 01-27-07, 09:45 PM	You know, I just skimmed through this thread since my last post, and the whole argument is based on one thing. The folks advocating the use of this Practiced Spellcaster trick, haven't bothered to clarify where you get the 9th level spells from. I had to go back and read, becuase I know how the feat works, and it doesn't improve your spells per day, as mentioned. The breakdown was here: Seerow and the others state that by applying the feat to your Sorc levels, you can get 9th level spells. XunValDorl disagrees, saying that doesn't work. The problem being, the "others", never clarified which class you get them in. You do end up with getting them in your wizard class, with your Sorcerer levels being behind by quite a bit in spells/day and spell levels. If someone had bothered to clarify the fact that the wizard casting progression reaches 9th level spells like...20 post ago, you wouldn't have needed those last 20 posts. Or, I could have skipped a post in my quick skimming and it could have been mentioned way back there, instead of three posts above mine for the first time like I thought. *shrugs* In which case, everyone's time was wasted.
navar100 01-27-07, 09:49 PM	Indeed. Should work and does work are two different things. Using PC: Sorcerer, one ends up with the spells/day as a Wizard 17, just barely getting the 9th-level spells. XunValDorl: You must read the appropriate text. It does state Caster Level in the text, not Class Level. This is the reason the build is possible. Whether or not YOU personally agree, that is RAW. To Illustrate: Note: Practiced Spellcaster (sorcerer) taken at 3rd level The number in brackets designates the level for determining spells per day and spells known. The other number is the actual CASTER LEVEL. Lvl Class levels Wiz CL Sor CL 1 Wiz1 1 (1) 0 2 Wiz2 2 (2) 0 3 Wiz2/Sor1 2 (2) 5 (1) 4 Wiz3/Sor1 3 (3) 5 (1) 5 Wiz4/Sor1 4 (4) 5 (1) 6 Wiz4/Sor1/UM1 6 (5) 6 (1) 7 Wiz4/Sor1/UM2 7 (6) 7 (2) 8 Wiz4/Sor1/UM3 8 (7) 8 (3) 9 Wiz4/Sor1/UM4 10 (8) 9 (3) 10 Wiz4/Sor1/UM5 11 (9) 10 (4) 11 Wiz4/Sor1/UM6 12 (10) 11 (5) 12 Wiz4/Sor1/UM7 13 (10) 13 (6) 13 Wiz4/Sor1/UM8 14 (11) 14 (7) 14 Wiz4/Sor1/UM9 15 (12) 15 (8) 15 Wiz4/Sor1/UM10 17 (13) 17 (9) 16 Wiz5/Sor1/UM10 18 (14) 17 (9) 17 Wiz6/Sor1/UM10 19 (15) 17 (9) 18 Wiz7/Sor1/UM10 20 (16) 17 (9) 19 Wiz8/Sor1/UM10 21 (17) 17 (9) 20 Wiz9/Sor1/UM10 22 (18) 17 (9) The relevant text is Here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20061010a&page=3). Read the Text carefully. Relvant parts bolded. Actually, for character levels 3 and 4 your caster level in Sorcerer is only 3 then 4 because Practiced Spellcaster does not increase your caster level above your HD, only up to equal your HD. It will be caster level 5 at character level 5, so it still has its synergy with Ultimate Magus.
runestar 01-27-07, 10:31 PM	The problem being, the "others", never clarified which class you get them in. You do end up with getting them in your wizard class, with your Sorcerer levels being behind by quite a bit in spells/day and spell levels. It was shown neatly on a table on the 2nd page, and has effectively proven this beyond reasonable doubt. Anyone actually paying attention to the discussion would have notice it...
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 10:47 PM	Ladies and Gents, we have ourselves a Troll on our hands. Bring out the Fire and Acid! Nobody is trolling I am just trying to get you to understand that you that the trick doesn't work. You are using the feat incorrectly. Just because you are wrong and I am trying to tell you you are wrong that doesn't make it trolling.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-27-07, 10:52 PM	Look on the chart for the Ultimate Magus. On the far right it has +1 for arcane spellcasting class not caster level. You are trying to use a feat that affects just caster level for spells, not for the class. Adding it to a 1st level sorcerer doesn't make you a 5th level sorcerer. When dealing damage or the duration of a spell you do it as a 5th level sorcerer, or spell resistance. Thats it, you are still a 1st level sorcerer. You are doing something wrong with the rules, you are twisting them to benefit you. i don't care what you say you can argue until you die, you are "WRONG"!!!!
Tempest Stormwind 01-27-07, 10:52 PM	We have explained this to you at least ten times now. We are not using Practiced Spellcaster to improve our spells per day or spells known. We are using Practiced Spellcaster to raise our caster level. Ultimate Magus does not look at spells per day/spells known when determining which class is "lower level". Ultimate Magus looks at caster level when determining which class is "lower level." It says so right there in the rules text associated with it. We are using Practiced Spellcaster to raise our Sorcerer caster level above our Wizard caster level, meaning Ultimate Magus raises our Wizard level at level 1. Continue this trend as described in the thread and you can get the equivalent of 18th level wizard spells per day / spells known. Thus, 9th level spells. Read the rules and you'll see it's clear as day. If you reply to this thread, please deal with each assertion point-by-point.
Tempest Stormwind 01-27-07, 11:02 PM	Apologies for the double-post, but you seem to love them, so... As near as I can tell, you think we're wrong because you believe the table (which summarizes the text and in this case says "lower-level") trumps the text (which is the full rules and in this case says "caster level"). To counter this, I present to you this, from the Player's Handbook errata.When you find a disagreement between two D&D® rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct. One example of a primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a table entry. An individual spell description takes precedence when the short description in the beginning of the spells chapter disagrees.Straight from the boys at Wizards. Let me spell that out again. One example of a primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a table entry. Here, the text says "caster level" and thus takes precedence over the table, which says "lower-level". Thus, the Ultimate Magus looks at CASTER LEVEL to determine which class to advance. Conclusion: you are wrong, and are an ass for continuing to insist that we were all wrong earlier instead of reading the rules as you so haughtily insisted that we do.
Jaisin 01-27-07, 11:46 PM	This is funny. Practiced Spellcaster let's you use the class as Seerow states (states rather well, actually). Read the text. I stopped trying to get the whole story from a book by looking at pictures at around 3 and began looking at the words. :) EDIT: Wow, I thought this was funny when I thought there was only 1 page of replies, now that it took 8 people and 75 replies to explain the difference between Caster Level and Character Level, its just sad. And funny.
Krevon 01-28-07, 12:44 AM	Gviving the benifit of the doubt....he may not have know about the text trumping rules tidbit.......but kudos to the guys explaining for not getting cruel with it.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-28-07, 01:52 AM	It doesn't matter people. You can't use the feat like that. Tell you what. I will talk to a WoTc official and find out.
runestar 01-28-07, 02:02 AM	We are beginning to sound like broken records...:embarrass
Tempest Stormwind 01-28-07, 02:19 AM	It doesn't matter people. You can't use the feat like that. Tell me why. I've told you why it works, you should tell us why it doesn't (in your opinion). If you have an opinion, back it up with reason.Tell you what. I will talk to a WoTc official and find out.And if *they* agree with us (which they will if they read the rules), what will you say? Runestar: http://www.telusplanet.net/~sdupuis/Tempest/argument.gif
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-28-07, 02:25 AM	Ok allow me to break it down for you. What you are doing is using a feat that does not allow you to gain new spells to gain new spells. Wizard 4 Sorcerer 1 Ok lets do it your way. UM 1 1 (5) UM 2 1 1 UM 3 1 Even 1 UM 4 1 UM 5 Sorcerer is lower 1 UM 6 1 Even 1 UM 7 1 UM 8 1 1 UM 9 1 1 UM 10 1 1 Wiz 13th Sorcerer 13 5 levels to play with, say all for Wiz. 18th Wizard 13th Sorcerer Now the PrC has what is called Arcane Spell Power which at 10th you will have +4. Now mind you this ability works just like Practiced Spellcaster accept it only applies with arcane spellcasting but same principle. If your theory is correct then the final levels should would be 22nd Wizard/17th level Sorcerer. So thats why you are wrong. Using the Practiced Spellcaster the way you do is illegal.
Tempest Stormwind 01-28-07, 02:33 AM	XunVal, did you even bother to read my post? With the really big letters? The text trumps (overrides) the table. The text says "the lower CASTER level" (emphasis mine). What the table says is irrelevant, since the text takes precedence. Practiced Spellcaster raises your Sorcerer caster level above your Wizard level at that stage. You have the spells per day / spells known of a first-level sorcerer, but you CAST them as a 5th level sorcerer (that is, your caster level is 5). Since 5 (Sorcerer CASTER level) > 4 (Wizard CASTER level), Ultimate Magus applies its spellcasting increase to the wizard side. Reply to this, point-by-point, so I know what, exactly, you aren't following.
FlameLover 01-28-07, 03:45 AM	Wow. Tempest_Stormwind, Seerow and runestar - some of the leading members of this board, and each someone I respect - have been through this at least 10 times already. They have continued to demonstrate why it works using the Rules as Written. Wizards of the Coast has been asked for the validity of this 'trick' as you put it, and has implied (possibly out-right stated, I don't know) that it works as they have explained. The other posters in this thread have asked you multiple times now to explain why you feel it doesn't work. They want to see a quoted rule that prohibits it, or at the very least a detailed explanation of your reasoning. But you have provided nothing to that description. Before you post again I would advise that you really try to see what the above posters have said. Re-read the Ultimate Magus Prestige Class description, re-read the Practiced Spellcaster feat, and re-read this entire thread. Put aside what you think the rules should say, and try to read what is actually written. If, after all of that, you still cannot understand why it works, don't sweat it. This is just a game after all, and something is fundamentally wrong if you aren't having fun. Play with it however you feel best in your own home games. But, and this is the key point of this post, you cannot claim that the Rules as Written work a certain way without giving proof. The other posters have given so much proof this thread could almost explode from truth. Yet you still have given nothing besides quoting the table, which has already been demonstrated quite expertly by Tempest_Stormwind to be a secondary source. Unless you can bring some proof of your own to this discussion, you have failed. http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/4535/failed7.jpg
mittenninja 01-28-07, 04:00 AM	very well put. :D
rironin 01-28-07, 04:55 AM	Wooooooow. Yeah, I agree with everyone who's right. Also, XunValDorl, I'm not sure if you've been posting in that style on purpose or what, but if you're actually conducting an argument, you really need to pick up on the style of quoting your opponents point by point and refuting them. I know that if you'd done so in this case, well, you would've lost a long time ago, but it does no one any good. Watching you quote an entire 3 paragraph post (which quite lucidly explained the opposing viewpoint) and responding with one sentence that said "you are wrong" has been just as infuriating as watching you not understand any of those 3 paragraph posts. Perhaps moreso.
MarkL 01-28-07, 08:01 AM	I dont see why you need the illuminan race to pull of this trick. You can just take practiced spellcaster twice. (although the feat loss is nasty)
Bryan_0697 01-28-07, 08:53 AM	All I can say is wow. I come onto these boards almost everyday (rarely ever posting) and always see a post or two (I agree with) by both Seerow and Tempest. Xun clearly doesn't want to see the 'light' on this topic and I say we leave him in his self imposed prison of ignorance. BTW, I cannot believe how this topic stayed civil for so long. My /vote on this topic is for Tempest and Seerow... and everyone else that stating the same thing over and over... and over. :D A new topic for an awesome thread - A good Transmuter PrC with full spellcasting.
Krevon 01-28-07, 09:09 AM	Xun, do you houserule it to be different? If you do thats perfectly fine and acceptable. Just going by RAW and the errata that supports it, this works.
Anaxander 01-28-07, 09:16 AM	XunValDorl of HouseKilsek, doesn't it mean something to you that everyone disagrees with you on this topic? Why asking a question if you intend to ignore consequently all rational and careful explained answers? Please accept the answer of Stormwind & co... :twitch:
Davith Bothain 01-28-07, 09:37 AM	Okay... Having just read this thread over a period of about fifteen minutes and alternating between rolling around in my chair laughing and holding myself back from punching the computer screen, I feel obliged to join the attack against this madness else become part of it to appease the internal torment. Since Mr. XunVal seems to hate picking things out point-by-point within a post, I shall, if you will forgive me, spread my attempt out over a number of posts. (Why do I get the sinking feeling that he'll just quote each post in a row without responses in between and then summarize with a statement that doesn't address any of the aforementioned points only at the very end?) Oh, and, on a side-note, does anyone else find it fitting that the first line of his sig is "" I am the bane of all that is good, I am the weilder of Angelsbane, I am Xun Val'Dorl of House Kilsek. The good and rightous fear me, they have good reason to"."? I sure as heck agree.
Davith Bothain 01-28-07, 09:37 AM	The topic of this post is the feat called "Practiced Spellcaster". Since this feat is non-OGL, I cannot go into great detail about it. However, as has already been explained here, the feat increases the caster level of a "chosen spellcasting class" by 4, limited by one's Hit Dice. Time to clarify: this does not increase the level of a caster for the purpose of determining spells known/spells per day. This increases the level of a caster for the purpose of determining variables such as duration, damage dice, and other variables. Everyone here agrees on this. Heck, you yourself have stated this in the past, XunVal. Needless to say, if you dispute this point, I will cry. Cry and give myself an excuse to get myself a new monitor on my way to the E.R. to get my hand X-rayed. You may, possibly, be stuck on a point which has also been debunked countless times by previous posters, but exists in a single throwaway sentence at the bottom of the feat description. Forgive me, WizOs, but... This feat does not affect your spells per day or spells known. Yes. That's right. The feat, as previously described, has absolutely no effect upon your spells per day or spells known. The feat does not do this. Understand this.
Davith Bothain 01-28-07, 09:38 AM	Moving on, the topic of this post is the prestige class called "Ultimate Magus". As previously referenced, the prestige class description can be found in its entirety HERE (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20061010a&page=3). In order to Better Know a Prestige Class, let's take the guided tour right down the page, shall we? If you look on your left, we will be passing by the planned community of "Entry Requirements". Residents include 4 ranks in Knowledge (arcana), 8 ranks in Spellcraft, the possession of any metamagic feat of one's choice, the ability to cast 1st-level arcane spells spontaneously, and the ability to prepare and cast 2nd-level arcane spells. As we move on, we come to the real thrill of the Ultimate Magus tour: "Class Features". Here we have come across the apparently ever-so-contentious "Spellcasting" section, which details, as the name might imply, the spellcasting progression of the Ultimate Magus prestige class. In the first paragraph, we will find it says "At each level except 1st, 4th, and 7th, you gain new spells per day and an increase in caster level (and spells known, if applicable) as if you had also gained a level in both a prepared arcane casting class and a spontaneous arcane casting class to which you belonged before adding the prestige class level. You do not, however, gain any other benefit a character of those classes would have gained." In layman's terms, this increases the casting progression of both sorcerer and wizard as if both classes had been taken at once. It nets an increase of +1 level for the purposes of determining spells per day and spells known for each class, as well as a +1 caster level for determining the variable effects of spells. Moving further down, we find perhaps the most important paragraph here: the second. It states, in... (Arial? Helvetica? I have no idea)... an undoubtedly specific typeface: "At 1st, 4th, and 7th level, you gain new spells per day and an increase in caster level (and spells known, if applicable) as if you had also gained a level in your arcane spellcasting class with the lowest caster level." It then goes on to cite an example, but no worry: I shall clarify for you. At these levels, the casting progression and caster level increases in the previously detailed manner, but for only a single class. This single class is determined by which class has the lowest caster level. Frequently, the class with the lowest caster level is the lower-level class. However, this is not always the case. It is possible for a caster's caster level to be... *gasp*... HIGHER than his or her class level. For a more detailed analysis, we shall move on to...
Davith Bothain 01-28-07, 09:39 AM	THIS post, the topic of which is the interaction between the feat called "Practiced Spellcaster" and the prestige class called "Ultimate Magus", is called "the interaction between the feat called "Practiced Spellcaster" and the prestige class called "Ultimate Magus"". Given the information of the two previous posts and the rules set out in the "Feats" chapter of the Player's Handbook, it is possible for a character taking or hoping to take levels in Ultimate Magus to take the feat Practiced Spellcaster. HERE. IS. HOW. IT. WORKS. The second paragraph of the "Spellcasting" section of the Ultimate Magus description (hereafter referred to as the "bone of contention") states that at 1st, 4th, and 7th levels, the spellcasting progression of the arcane spellcasting class with the lowest caster level increases. Here's the confoundingly tricky part: the feat Practiced Spellcaster does a crazy thing that increases the caster level of a single class. Now the insane, hippie, drug-smoking, draft-dodging, candy-from-baby-stealing jump that everyone else is making is that somehow, someway a feat that affects a class' caster level will also affect a class ability that depends upon caster level. Out of this world, I know, but, see, here's the thing: if the caster level of one class is lower than the caster level of another class and is then altered by, say, this feat, then it is entirely possible that the caster level of the first class will suddently be higher than the caster level of the second class. Now what the heck does this mean, anyway? Here's the really, really, REALLY important part (bolded and capitalized unnecessarily for emphasis): THE CLASS WHICH NOW HAS THE LOWER CASTER LEVEL STILL HAS AN ACTUAL LEVEL HIGHER THAN THE CLASS WITH THE HIGHER CASTER LEVEL. The spellcasting progression of the lower-caster level class is more advanced than the higher-caster level class. Meaning, then, that the spell progression as set out in the "Spellcasting" section of the Ultimate Magus description allows for the class with the higher castable spell levels to progress even higher, eventually (as specifically detailed by veritable legions of posters before me) allowing for the casting of 9th-level spells. Ta-bloody-da. Now, I admit the giant blocks of text and multiple posts might be daunting, but I honestly can't make it any simpler, detailed, and cordially snide than that. If past instances of ignoring perfectly-executed explanations are any indication, this will similarly be ignored. Whether it does or not, it is of no matter, for I have learned to stop worrying and love the bomb and shall, accordingly, be sitting on the sidelines, watching as the madness either grows in spite of me or implodes in upon itself. Good day, all.
crowclub 01-28-07, 11:26 AM	THIS post, the topic of which is the interaction between the feat called "Practiced Spellcaster" and the prestige class called "Ultimate Magus", is called "the interaction between the feat called "Practiced Spellcaster" and the prestige class called "Ultimate Magus"". Given the information of the two previous posts and the rules set out in the "Feats" chapter of the Player's Handbook, it is possible for a character taking or hoping to take levels in Ultimate Magus to take the feat Practiced Spellcaster. HERE. IS. HOW. IT. WORKS. The second paragraph of the "Spellcasting" section of the Ultimate Magus description (hereafter referred to as the "bone of contention") states that at 1st, 4th, and 7th levels, the spellcasting progression of the arcane spellcasting class with the lowest caster level increases. Here's the confoundingly tricky part: the feat Practiced Spellcaster does a crazy thing that increases the caster level of a single class. Now the insane, hippie, drug-smoking, draft-dodging, candy-from-baby-stealing jump that everyone else is making is that somehow, someway a feat that affects a class' caster level will also affect a class ability that depends upon caster level. Out of this world, I know, but, see, here's the thing: if the caster level of one class is lower than the caster level of another class and is then altered by, say, this feat, then it is entirely possible that the caster level of the first class will suddently be higher than the caster level of the second class. Now what the heck does this mean, anyway? Here's the really, really, REALLY important part (bolded and capitalized unnecessarily for emphasis): THE CLASS WHICH NOW HAS THE LOWER CASTER LEVEL STILL HAS AN ACTUAL LEVEL HIGHER THAN THE CLASS WITH THE HIGHER CASTER LEVEL. The spellcasting progression of the lower-caster level class is more advanced than the higher-caster level class. Meaning, then, that the spell progression as set out in the "Spellcasting" section of the Ultimate Magus description allows for the class with the higher castable spell levels to progress even higher, eventually (as specifically detailed by veritable legions of posters before me) allowing for the casting of 9th-level spells. Ta-bloody-da. Now, I admit the giant blocks of text and multiple posts might be daunting, but I honestly can't make it any simpler, detailed, and cordially snide than that. If past instances of ignoring perfectly-executed explanations are any indication, this will similarly be ignored. Whether it does or not, it is of no matter, for I have learned to stop worrying and love the bomb and shall, accordingly, be sitting on the sidelines, watching as the madness either grows in spite of me or implodes in upon itself. Good day, all. We know this, why doesn't everyone else?
CantripN 01-28-07, 11:41 AM	...Awesomeness... Wow. Just wow. Have a :cookie:
Davith Bothain 01-28-07, 04:42 PM	Wow. Just wow. Have a :cookie: Wee-haw! My first internet confection... *munches* ...Bleh. Now I know why they're kept for posterity...
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-28-07, 06:09 PM	People I knwo the little trick. I have known it before this thread was made. I knwo all the steps exactly. i know every little tweak. But what you are missing is this class was not ment to be able to cast 9th level spells. I can guarantee that WoTc will have this changed in an errata. You don't have to keep repeating steps out to me. I probably came up with this little tweak long before most of you did. Thats not the issue. The issue is you are using the feat in a way that you are not supposed to.
Davith Bothain 01-28-07, 06:19 PM	People I knwo the little trick. I have known it before this thread was made. I knwo all the steps exactly. i know every little tweak. But what you are missing is this class was not ment to be able to cast 9th level spells. I can guarantee that WoTc will have this changed in an errata. You don't have to keep repeating steps out to me. I probably came up with this little tweak long before most of you did. Thats not the issue. The issue is you are using the feat in a way that you are not supposed to. Okay... Well, until this "trick" gets errata-ed out (a laughable "until", to be honest), we'll be here progressing as normal with our optimization and loophole exploitation. Now, unless you are either Skip Williams, Penny Williams, Ari Marmell, Kolja Raven Liquette, Richard Baker, or some sort of artificially-intelligent bot programmed with the sum of their knowledge, I honestly don't think it's your place to be dictating rules intention to this board. Unless we are specifically told otherwise by a WotC official, the intention is that a given publication is compatible with another. Progress as you want in house-ruling that one cannot use this exploit, but do not expect us to have adopted this viewpoint "because you said so" (as clearly evinced by a 100-post thread debating you).
mrsake 01-28-07, 06:46 PM	this class was not ment to be able to cast 9th level spells. I guess they finally noticed you could actually make a fairly strong non munchkin-y build with the MT by focusing on one class and using the other just as buffing/healing/utility, ending up with 9th level spells in one class and 7th level in the other. So they made sure the Ult Magnus forced a player to even out both classes so it ends up just a mediocre mage with a lot of arcane spells per day.
Tempest Stormwind 01-28-07, 06:49 PM	All right, so first you deny it's doable at all, you then say that we're breaking the rules, you then say that you're right nyah, then that you're talking to WotC, and now that you know what WotC's thinking and that you know it works but it shouldn't. Pal, you're all over the place. And good luck hoping for an errata: there hasn't been one since.... Wow, the Monster Manual 3. Last JUNE. Since then, there have been COUNTLESS big releases that desperately need errata -- the spell compendium, Complete Psionic, Complete Mage, the Tome of Battle, and the PHB2 come immediately to mind, not to mention several Eberron books (Magic of Eberron comes immediately to mind... and as much as I'd *really* like to believe Faiths of Eberron's Planar Shepherd was a big mistake, I don't sit around praying for errata on that one). That's a long wait for a train don't come. Besides, I'm looking for the post on the CO boards from around the time of that preview where someone actually contacted the authors, and Richard Baker (I think it was him; could have been Skip, I'm not sure) actually said that it was intentional. It'll take a bit of time to find, though.
rironin 01-28-07, 07:39 PM	I probably came up with this little tweak long before most of you did. Thats not the issue. The issue is you are using the feat in a way that you are not supposed to.Good luck convincing anyone who's read your posts in this thread of that, my friend. I don't care how much you wave your hands when you say it, you'd have a better chance of convincing me that I don't need to see your identification or that those aren't the droids I'm looking for. Although I must say, given your ability to speak with perfect confidence at complete right angles to reality, you probably have a long and fruitful career in politics ahead of you. In the meantime, enjoy being toasted in-game by an Ultimate Magus' meteor swarm :P
CantripN 01-28-07, 07:46 PM	...In the meantime, enjoy being toasted in-game by an Ultimate Magus' meteor swarm :P Hey, why waste such spells on the likes of him? Use the UM's special abilities... Intensified Ball Lightning! Now that's 180/ round, and it only cost a 5th and 7th level spell... Yeah, I know you meant UM get 9th level spells...
runestar 01-28-07, 11:59 PM	Here you go for the wording of the practiced spellcaster feat... Practiced Spellcaster Choose a spellcasting class that you possess. Your spells cast from that class are more powerful. Prerequisite: Spellcraft 4 ranks. Benefit: Your caster level for the chosen spellcasting class increases by 4. This benefit can't increase your caster level to higher than your Hit Dice. However, even if you can't benefit from the full bonus immediately, if you later gain Hit Dice in levels of nonspellcasting classes, you might be able to apply the rest of the bonus. For example, a human 5th-level sorcerer/3rd-level fighter who selects this feat would increase his sorcerer caster level from 5th to 8th (since he has 8 Hit Dice). If he later gained a fighter level, he would gain the remainder of the bonus and his sorcerer caster level would become 9th (since he now has 9 Hit Dice). A character with two or more spellcasting classes (such as a bard/sorcerer or a ranger/druid) must choose which class gains the feat's effect. This feat does not affect your spells per day or spells known. It increases your caster level only, which would help you penetrate spell resistance and increase the duration and other effects of your spells. Special: You may select this feat multiple times. Each time you choose it, you must apply it to a different spellcasting class. For instance, a 4th-level cleric/5th-level wizard who had selected this feat twice would cast cleric spells as an 8th-level caster and wizard spells as a 9th-level caster. ANd please, could you use larger font?:(
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-29-07, 01:27 AM	Good luck convincing anyone who's read your posts in this thread of that, my friend. I don't care how much you wave your hands when you say it, you'd have a better chance of convincing me that I don't need to see your identification or that those aren't the droids I'm looking for. Although I must say, given your ability to speak with perfect confidence at complete right angles to reality, you probably have a long and fruitful career in politics ahead of you. In the meantime, enjoy being toasted in-game by an Ultimate Magus' meteor swarm :P I am not trying to convince anybody and i really don't give a damn if you believe me or not. Your not special. I knew about the Practiced Spellcaster before this thread. Why do you think I started this thread in the first place. Exactly how the +1 to arcane class and Prereqs were done.
rironin 01-29-07, 03:22 AM	I am not trying to convince anybody and i really don't give a damn if you believe me or not. Your not special. I knew about the Practiced Spellcaster before this thread. Why do you think I started this thread in the first place. Exactly how the +1 to arcane class and Prereqs were done.You know, some perverse, pain-loving portion of me was hoping you'd say that. Even though I know that feeding trolls is baaad... Here's a fun recap! :) Now that is a lot of spells, but that leaves out 8th and 9th level spells.So anyway I don't see the basis as the ultimate spellcaster when he can't even cast 9th level spells.Actually i think you end up losing 5 levels.That feat [Practiced Spellcaster] is good if you have say a fighter Mage and you want your fighter levels to add to your caster level and thats it.I mean yeah i can boost my actual caster level all day, but there still isn't a way to be able to cast 9th level spells.But you still couldn't cast 9th level spells.It doesn't work that way.Practiced Spellcaster can't be used that way.You can't use Practiced Spellcaster to trick the Prereqs for a PrC. You will not be able to have 9th level spells with this PrC.But you still will not be able to gain access to 9th level spells.Also I don't believe this will work because I think the level of the character goes by HD. I think you only count the feat towards caster level, not character level. Thats why it won't work.It will not work that way. I can promise you.I am fully paying attention. You can't do that. It doesn't work that way. You are trying to use a feat that says it doesn't give you extra spells per day or spells known to gain those things and you can't.Nobody is trolling I am just trying to get you to understand that you that the trick doesn't work. You are using the feat incorrectly. Just because you are wrong and I am trying to tell you you are wrong that doesn't make it trolling.You are doing something wrong with the rules, you are twisting them to benefit you. i don't care what you say you can argue until you die, you are "WRONG"!!!!It doesn't matter people. You can't use the feat like that. Tell you what. I will talk to a WoTc official and find out.Using the Practiced Spellcaster the way you do is illegal.and the grand finale...People I knwo the little trick. I have known it before this thread was made. I knwo all the steps exactly. i know every little tweak. But what you are missing is this class was not ment to be able to cast 9th level spells. I can guarantee that WoTc will have this changed in an errata. You don't have to keep repeating steps out to me. I probably came up with this little tweak long before most of you did. Thats not the issue. The issue is you are using the feat in a way that you are not supposed to.Yeeaaahh, you really sounded like you've known it all along. Maybe you got hit on the head, suffered temporary amnesia, and then regained your memories for the last couple of posts where you told everyone that you'd known it all along? :P
Lotus Crane 01-29-07, 04:16 AM	XunValDorl, I believe it is exceedingly arrogant of you to insist that you know more about the game than the rest of us combined. Any reasonable person would think to himself, "gee, if all these (mostly more experienced) people are saying I'm wrong, instead of stubbornly insisting I'm right, I should look at every possible way that I might be wrong." (Polaris is a shining example of the virtue of humility; he was willing to listen to logic and completely reverse his original position on Extra Spell. People respect him more because he's willing to admit when he's wrong. Nobody will respect you unless you figure out your mistake, admit it, and apologize to the senior members you've unjustly insulted.) However, it's possible that this is all stemming from a basic misunderstanding of what our strategy is trying to accomplish, so I'll explain it to you more simply, and give you a chance to redeem yourself. You are trying to use a feat that says it doesn't give you extra spells per day or spells known to gain those things and you can't. Practiced Spellcaster doesn't grant you extra spells per day or spells known, correct. However, with the Ultimate Magus PrC, if you use Practiced Spellcaster to increase your sorcerer caster level, you can force the PrC to advance your wizard spellcasting progression (not just caster level, but also spells per day and new spell levels). Simply because of the entry requirements (wiz 3/sor 2 or wiz 4/sor 1), Ultimate Magus can never give you 9th level sorcerer spells before 21st level, no matter what tricks we try to use. However, if you go into the PrC as a wiz 4/sor 1 and use Practiced Spellcaster to boost your sorcerer caster level, you can choose to advance wizard spellcasting often enough to have 9th level wizard spells by 19th character level. (With the illumian trick, you can even get 9th level wizard spells by 18th character level.) That is the trick; you are looking at the problem in an overly straight-forward manner, while we are going a roundabout (but perfectly legal) way. We don't care about sorcerer spellcasting (which is inferior to wizard spellcasting anyway); with the strategy people have been trying to teach you, you will only wind up with probably 5th level sorcerer spells before 21st level. Because of the way Ultimate Magus is worded, it is perfectly legal to boost your sorcerer caster level, to be able to advance your wizard spellcasting progression. If your sorcerer caster level is equal to or higher than your wizard caster level when you take certain levels of Ultimate Magus, you can choose to advance your wizard spellcasting progression at most of them. The way Ultimate Magus is written, you can use Practiced Spellcaster to boost your sorcerer caster level (which doesn't give you any more sorcerer spells per day or sorcerer spells known), which then allows you to legally choose to advance wizard spellcasting (which does give you more wizard spells per day and new wizard spell levels). I think the main problem here, is that you mistakenly believe we were trying to use Practiced Spellcaster to advance the sorcerer spellcasting progression. We're not; we don't care about mere sorcerer spells. With Ultimate Magus, boosting sorcerer caster level means advancing wizard spellcasting progression. "Normal" character builds would get 8th level wizard and 7th level sorcerer spells. Our trick gets you 9th level wizard and 5th level sorcerer spells, by boosting the sorcerer caster level to "trick" the PrC into advancing your wizard spellcasting progression more often than it "normally" would. Using the Practiced Spellcaster the way you do is illegal. It's somewhat unethical, but it's perfectly legal.
Kary Wanzer 01-29-07, 04:35 AM	:r: What everybody else said, XunValDork. If you use Practiced Spellcaster to raise your sorcerer caster level higher than your wizard caster level (yes, of course we know that Practiced Spellcaster, in and of itself, will not grant any additional spells per day or spells known), then at certain levels of Ultimate Magus, you can advance your spellcasting progression (which does grant additional spells per day and new spells levels) in wizard, instead of sorcerer. Boosting sorcerer caster level = legally choosing wizard spellcasting progression Taking Practiced Spellcaster for sorcerer will not get you any more sorcerer spells per day or sorcerer spells known. It does however, open a legal door for Ultimate Magus to advance your wizard spellcasting progression more often, because Ultimate Magus only cares if your sorcerer caster level is higher than your wizard caster level. If you can cast 3rd level sorcerer spells at 11th caster level (thanks to Practiced Spellcaster), and 5th level wizard spells at 10th caster level, then guess what? You can legally choose to advance wizard spellcasting progression instead of sorcerer spellcasting progression, thus allowing 9th level wizard spells by 19th level (or earlier with the illumian trick). Ultimate Magus can never grant you 9th level sorcerer spells before 21st level, but like LC said: Who cares about sorcerer spells? :b:
Anaxander 01-29-07, 07:59 AM	The issue is you are using the feat in a way that you are not supposed to. I think it all boils down to this argument. 1.The feat doesn't say you can use it in order to improve your caster level in an UM build. Which is logical, since the feat existed prior to the UM. 2. Nowhere in the UM build in CM can be found a reference to Practiced Spellcaster. It's a pity that Wizards didn't mention the feat in their build otherwise we wouldn't have this discussion. The absence of the feat in the example UM on page p.81, however, does not automatically mean that Practiced Spellcaster can't be used with UM to create the effect we advocate. Power Attack isn't mentioned, but that doesn't mean that you can't use it as an UM. Furthermore, if you own an Orange Ioun stone which grants you +1 caster level, or any other general caster level boost item/feat/ability, it will have the same effect as practiced spellcaster. When Wizards publish new stuff, there are two ways to handle the relationship with the old stuff: 1. Don't accept any interaction between the old & the new stuff, unless WotC explicitly state so. This attitude makes accepting new stuff de facto near impossible, since the point of new supplements is that they're based on already existing material. Wizards will NOT say of every little feat, ability & skill if they're compatible with the newer material. In time, if you're lucky, an errata will appear, with apart from spelling mistakes, some modifications based on actual player testing & experience. However, in the mean while, everyone of us has the following attitude: 2. Accept any interaction between the old & the new stuff, unless WotC explicitly says otherwise. Conclusion: Practiced Spellcaster works with UM since Wizards have not yet stated that it won't.
Anaxander 01-29-07, 08:02 AM	It's somewhat unethical, but it's perfectly legal. It isn't even unethical, it's the only logical thing to do when the feat exists.
Tempest Stormwind 01-29-07, 09:01 AM	Actually, if you're opening up more sources, it's strictly superior to use beguiler as your spontaneous casting class. Int-based, same number of spells, spontaneous access to entire spell list, and (if you start off as a beguiler instead of wizard) far more skill points and a higher HD. But enough talk.
FabulousRex 01-29-07, 04:40 PM	I think that there has been one major miscommunication here, that Xun hasn't picked up on... I think Xun is expecting 9th level Sorcerer spells and 9th level Wizard spells at the same time. This is not the case at all. You will end up with: 9th level Wizard and 5-6th level Sorcerer Casting Nowhere did anyone ever say that the Sorcerer side will have it's own 9th level spells, only the Wizard side of the progression will have 9th level spells. You can most certainly have a higher CL than your HD, it happens with some regularity in Core rules only. Orange Ioun Stone, Spell Power from Archmage/Hierophant, Beads of Karma, etc. If this is not what Xun has been arguing, and if in fact he's claiming you can't cast 9th level spells from either Sorcerer -or- Wizard, then he really needs to read up on some rules. A Wiz9/Sor1/UM10 would have 9th level spells on the Wizard side even without Practiced Spellcaster...
Largegnome 01-29-07, 05:12 PM	If this is not what Xun has been arguing, and if in fact he's claiming you can't cast 9th level spells from either Sorcerer -or- Wizard, then he really needs to read up on some rules. A Wiz9/Sor1/UM10 would have 9th level spells on the Wizard side even without Practiced Spellcaster... Well, actually, no, since you'd be forced to assign your 1st, 4th and 7th "+1 to caster levels" to the sorc. 9 Wizard levels + 7 caster levels= cast as a 16th level wizard, so you'd only cast 8th level spells.
Gothenem 01-29-07, 05:31 PM	Ok, now XunValDorl of HouseKilsek: Please, do not continue unless you can post a SPECIFIC example in the rules which prohibits this. State book and page number please. Many others have done so, and if you wish to continue to argue your point, you will need some backing of the rules. As the rules CURRENTLY stand, this trick can be done. Whether or not that was intentional, or an oversight, whether or not there needs to be errata or not, currently the RAW support this. Unless you can point out a specific area where the RAW state otherwise, accept that you are wrong.
Sactheminions 01-29-07, 06:11 PM	Actually, in my opinion it's better to take a level of Wild Mage [see below], and then Practiced Spellcaster on the -Wizard- side, which leaves you with not only 9th level Wizard spells, but also an additional +1d6 caster level. I mean, you can take PS on the Sorc side too if you want, but you're going to take all your utility spells on that side anyway, so who cares? The primary combat function of Sorceror casting is to make room for your augmented Metamagic. I'm sure some developer thought you couldn't get 9th level spells at 20th. I expect a couple of others realized you could. I don't think anyone really believes that the rules of DnD are based on "developer's intent". We're all textualists now. Sor1 Wiz4 Wildmage1 (-3 CL), the 1d6 only applies -when you cast a spell- and therefore is invisible to the UM progression. UM10 Pickone4 (Archmage, Fatespinner, or Wild Mage +4, probably)
Gothenem 01-29-07, 06:13 PM	Actually, in my opinion it's better to take a level of Wild Mage [see below], and then Practiced Spellcaster on the -Wizard- side, which leaves you with not only 9th level Wizard spells, but also an additional +1d6 caster level. I mean, you can take PS on the Sorc side too if you want, but you're going to take all your utility spells on that side anyway, so who cares? The primary combat function of Sorceror casting is to make room for your augmented Metamagic. I'm sure some developer thought you couldn't get 9th level spells at 20th. I expect a couple of others realized you could. I don't think anyone really believes that the rules of DnD are based on "developer's intent". We're all textualists now. Sor1 Wiz4 Wildmage1 (-3 CL), the 1d6 only applies -when you cast a spell- and therefore is invisible to the UM progression. UM10 Pickone4 (Archmage, Fatespinner, or Wild Mage +4, probably) You will not get 9th-level spells with this build. Only 8th. PC has to be on the Sor side or you can't get the 9th-lvl spells. PC in Sorcerer is the reason that the 1st, 4th and 7th level spellcastings go to the Wizard. Otherwise, they default to the Sorcerer (Being the lower caster level)
Davith Bothain 01-29-07, 06:52 PM	To everyone who's still trying to use logic and rules to sway the OP: Such efforts are utterly futile. There has been no miscommunication in previous dialogue, no misunderstanding of rules as written. Even if there was in the past, the laws of probability dictate that after fifty explanations, he would catch on. No, it is obvious that either he is horrible at communicating his point and held to the belief that this "shouldn't" happen, rules be damned, or that he's making this up as he goes along (I'm inclined to believe the latter, as evinced by this (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11320660&postcount=104) fine summary). We've honestly a better chance of getting my dog to do calculus than to get this guy to suddenly "see the light" (to be fair, the dog is smart and, if cuteness has any bearing upon mathematical ability, he's got up to basic trigonometry just on natural skill). Oh, and... Here you go for the wording of the practiced spellcaster feat... ANd please, could you use larger font?:( Two things: One, I didn't know that there was an excerpt of Complete Arcane that contained that particular feat. I apologize; 'twas slothful of me. Strike my previous statement about it being non-OGL. Two, what the heck is wrong with Times New Roman? Same technical size as its Arial equivalent; blame the boards for shrinking it down so much. I honestly prefer the slightly-flared edges of this font over the plain ends and general blockiness of the board's standard.
Sactheminions 01-29-07, 07:29 PM	You will not get 9th-level spells with this build. Only 8th. PC has to be on the Sor side or you can't get the 9th-lvl spells. PC in Sorcerer is the reason that the 1st, 4th and 7th level spellcastings go to the Wizard. Otherwise, they default to the Sorcerer (Being the lower caster level) Wait, you're right. But I think I still get 17th level Spells Per Day for the Wizard side... Wiz4Sor1 (4th Wiz, 1st Sorc Caster, 4/1 SPD) Wild Mage (3rd Wiz, 1st Sorc Caster, 5/1 SPD) UM10 (+7/+7, Sorc/Sorc/Wiz - 13/10) Full Casting PrC 4, all to the wizard side gives me 17th level Spells Per Day.
Gothenem 01-29-07, 08:20 PM	Wait, you're right. But I think I still get 17th level Spells Per Day for the Wizard side... Wiz4Sor1 (4th Wiz, 1st Sorc Caster, 4/1 SPD) Wild Mage (3rd Wiz, 1st Sorc Caster, 5/1 SPD) UM10 (+7/+7, Sorc/Sorc/Wiz - 13/10) Full Casting PrC 4, all to the wizard side gives me 17th level Spells Per Day. Hmmm, 2 things: 1: With Practiced Spellcaster (Wizard) as you suggest, you must take all three of the "floating levels" in UM to Sorcerer. 2: You have to put all of them into Sorcerer anyways. Wild Mage (3rd Wiz, 1st Sorc Caster, 5/1 SPD) If you put levels 1 and 4 into Sorcerer, when you reach level 6 in UM, you look like this Wiz4/Sor1/Wld1/UM6 (Cast as: Wiz11/Sor9) With PC (Wizard) you cast as Wiz15/Sor9 Your Level at 7th must go into Sorcerer, making the 10 levels of UM +7/+7 with +3 in Sorc. Thus you end with 16th/11th
runestar 01-29-07, 11:33 PM	Two, what the heck is wrong with Times New Roman? Same technical size as its Arial equivalent; blame the boards for shrinking it down so much. I honestly prefer the slightly-flared edges of this font over the plain ends and general blockiness of the board's standard. Nothing, I am not complaining about the font you are using, I was refering to the size of the words. They are like 1/2 the size of the other posts here, and it is not easy to read them effectively without straining my eyes...:(
Salla 01-30-07, 01:09 AM	Actually, if you're opening up more sources, it's strictly superior to use beguiler as your spontaneous casting class. Int-based, same number of spells, spontaneous access to entire spell list, and (if you start off as a beguiler instead of wizard) far more skill points and a higher HD. But enough talk. Consider this idea stolen. :)
Gothenem 01-30-07, 01:14 PM	Consider this idea stolen. :) Indeed!
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-30-07, 08:13 PM	No there is no mistake about getting 9th level spells on boths sides. God would that be nice before epic. Anyway, I really believe that Wizards will correct this little build. I honestly don't think the PrC was supposed to do that. I mean look at the class. You get +1 to caster only as you go along, both of your classes go up in level, you get bonus spells, you can use slots from one class to power another through meta-magic. And if you continue the class on to epic levels you will have 9th level Wiz and 9th level Sor. Then you will be the Ultimate Magus. If they don't change it, awesome. But I just think WoTc made a mistake.
Gothenem 01-30-07, 08:16 PM	No there is no mistake about getting 9th level spells on boths sides. God would that be nice before epic. Anyway, I really believe that Wizards will correct this little build. I honestly don't think the PrC was supposed to do that. I mean look at the class. You get +1 to caster only as you go along, both of your classes go up in level, you get bonus spells, you can use slots from one class to power another through meta-magic. And if you continue the class on to epic levels you will have 9th level Wiz and 9th level Sor. Then you will be the Ultimate Magus. If they don't change it, awesome. But I just think WoTc made a mistake. Fair enough, however, as was pointed out before, we may be waiting quite some time for said errata.
Tempest Stormwind 01-30-07, 08:35 PM	Besides, it's trivially easy to get 9th level arcane and 9th level divine spells in the same pre-epic character. The difference is the two sides don't interact anywhere near as well as they do with Ultimate Magus.
Kresalak 01-30-07, 09:24 PM	Oh, it's possible, you just have to use Beholder Mage. But please, don't. Using that class is just mean.
Magius_Rerecros 01-30-07, 10:19 PM	For those who like the metamagic and arcane power portion of the Ultimate Magus, but aren't a major fan of the splitting wizard/sorcerer levels and whatnot, might I suggest that you check out my new base class, the Omnimancer (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=782231)?
nighttree 01-30-07, 10:21 PM	WOW....that was the funniest half hour of reading a thread yet........:D
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 01-30-07, 10:28 PM	Besides, it's trivially easy to get 9th level arcane and 9th level divine spells in the same pre-epic character. The difference is the two sides don't interact anywhere near as well as they do with Ultimate Magus. How are you getting 9th level Arcane and 9th level Divine spells. 5/Wiz=5/Cleric=10/Mystic Theurge. Unless there is another class I am missing.
Gothenem 01-30-07, 10:48 PM	How are you getting 9th level Arcane and 9th level Divine spells. 5/Wiz=5/Cleric=10/Mystic Theurge. Unless there is another class I am missing. I believe it is Beholder Mage 2/Cleric 8/Mystic Theurge 10 There may be other ways to pull it off (Ur-Priest comes to mind) Like Wiz5/Ex-Clr5/UrPriest1/MysTheurge 9
Tempest Stormwind 01-30-07, 11:41 PM	How are you getting 9th level Arcane and 9th level Divine spells. 5/Wiz=5/Cleric=10/Mystic Theurge. Unless there is another class I am missing.First, you should have used another theurge class isntead of those last four levels. But the best way to do it involves Sublime Chord and Ur-Priest, although I *think* I'm behind on the theory behind that particular setup (since I seem to recall someone demolished its caster level trick...). The simplest (and oldest, to my knowledge) method of pulling it off is Bard 7/Mindbender 1/Ur-Priest 2/Sublime Chord 2/Mystic Theurge 8. The beholder mage does it better, cheaper, and stronger, but as has been mentioned is just *wrong*.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-01-07, 12:42 AM	People how about a race and class that can normally be used.
Lotus Crane 02-01-07, 12:59 AM	(Deleted by poster.)
Salla 02-01-07, 01:00 AM	People how about a race and class that can normally be used. Which all of the above are, so where's the problem?
mrsake 02-01-07, 01:53 AM	How are you getting 9th level Arcane and 9th level Divine spells. 5/Wiz=5/Cleric=10/Mystic Theurge. Unless there is another class I am missing. Wiz 3/Druid 3/Arcane Heirophant 10/Mystic Theurge 4 maybe? I can't recall the arc heirophant's exact reqs so I'm not sure if that's actually doable though. Plus wizard/druid is just a plain weaker combo than wiz/cleric.
Lotus Crane 02-01-07, 02:06 AM	Wiz 3/Druid 3/Arcane Heirophant 10/Mystic Theurge 4 maybe? I can't recall the arc heirophant's exact reqs so I'm not sure if that's actually doable though. Just checked my Races of the Wild, and yes, that's a valid build. Plus wizard/druid is just a plain weaker combo than wiz/cleric. In terms of pure spellcasting ability perhaps, since druid spells do tend to be less powerful than cleric spells. However, considering all the other class special abilities that druid and Arcane Hierophant bring in compared to vanillia cleric and Mystic Theurge, the overall package may actually be more robust.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-01-07, 06:39 PM	Which all of the above are, so where's the problem? Do you normally go around in a campaign playing a Beholder?
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-01-07, 06:44 PM	Your method of defining "normal" is biased to the point of being unfair. If your DM is already willing to allow the Ultimate Magus into a game, he's almost certainly past the point of caring about whether you use Illumians, Practiced Spellcaster, and/or Master Spellthief to "trick" Ultimate Magus into advancing your wizard spellcasting progression often enough to give you 9th level wizard spells by 19th or even 18th character level. And regardless of how you feel that they "should" work, legal RAW, yes, you are allowed to take advantage of how Ultimate Magus is worded so that you can get 9th level spells pre-epic. Don't expect WotC to issue any errata that supports your anti-RAW claims. If your DM is already willing to allow the Mystic Theurge into a game, why do you think he'd be any less willing to allow the Beholder Mage, Sublime Chord and/or Ur-Priest into a game? Technically, all prestige classes are equally optional; simply being in the DMG and SRD does not necessarily make the Mystic Theurge a "more common and acceptable" PrC. Also, your character building ability (and/or your assumptions thereof) are horrific. A cleric 5/wizard 5/Mystic Theurge 10 is an inferior build that nobody with actual competency would use; cleric 7/wizard 3/MT 10 and cleric 3/wizard 7/MT 10 are both strictly superior setups, because 9th level spells on one side and 7th level spells on the other, will always offer more powerful options than 8th level spells on both sides. Of course, it's even more effective to go archivist 3/wizard 3/MT 10/spellcasting PrC 4, since you reduce MAD and gain a few nice special abilities from whatever final PrC you use. It's ridiculously easy (and perfectly legal) to get 9th level spells on at least one side of a dual-progression PrC; with a little creativity, you can even get 9th level spells on both sides, though it's honestly not that necessary in most games. We can, and have been proving these to you, with the official rules of the game as they are actually written, but you seem to refuse our claims just because you "don't think it should work that way." Your mere opinion cannot overturn reality. Reality says that yes, Ultimate Magi and Mystic Theurges can cast 9th level spells before 20th level. You can do it on one side without any difficulty at all, if you don't mind sacrificing the other side completely (there's no need to try and keep a balanced progression); and with a little more work, you can actually do it on both sides. Your opinion argues against reality; your opinion is wrong. Dude comparing a non-player character PrC such as Beholder Mage because the DM allows Ultimate Magus and other classes doesn't make any sense. You don't normally play beholders in campaigns. Also, not you can't cast spells before 20th with the Mystic Theurge PrC.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-01-07, 06:48 PM	Your method of defining "normal" is biased to the point of being unfair. If your DM is already willing to allow the Ultimate Magus into a game, he's almost certainly past the point of caring about whether you use Illumians, Practiced Spellcaster, and/or Master Spellthief to "trick" Ultimate Magus into advancing your wizard spellcasting progression often enough to give you 9th level wizard spells by 19th or even 18th character level. And regardless of how you feel that they "should" work, legal RAW, yes, you are allowed to take advantage of how Ultimate Magus is worded so that you can get 9th level spells pre-epic. Don't expect WotC to issue any errata that supports your anti-RAW claims. If your DM is already willing to allow the Mystic Theurge into a game, why do you think he'd be any less willing to allow the Beholder Mage, Sublime Chord and/or Ur-Priest into a game? Technically, all prestige classes are equally optional; simply being in the DMG and SRD does not necessarily make the Mystic Theurge a "more common and acceptable" PrC. Also, your character building ability (and/or your assumptions thereof) are horrific. A cleric 5/wizard 5/Mystic Theurge 10 is an inferior build that nobody with actual competency would use; cleric 7/wizard 3/MT 10 and cleric 3/wizard 7/MT 10 are both strictly superior setups, because 9th level spells on one side and 7th level spells on the other, will always offer more powerful options than 8th level spells on both sides. Of course, it's even more effective to go archivist 3/wizard 3/MT 10/spellcasting PrC 4, since you reduce MAD and gain a few nice special abilities from whatever final PrC you use. It's ridiculously easy (and perfectly legal) to get 9th level spells on at least one side of a dual-progression PrC; with a little creativity, you can even get 9th level spells on both sides, though it's honestly not that necessary in most games. We can, and have been proving these to you, with the official rules of the game as they are actually written, but you seem to refuse our claims just because you "don't think it should work that way." Your mere opinion cannot overturn reality. Reality says that yes, Ultimate Magi and Mystic Theurges can cast 9th level spells before 20th level. You can do it on one side without any difficulty at all, if you don't mind sacrificing the other side completely (there's no need to try and keep a balanced progression); and with a little more work, you can actually do it on both sides. Your opinion argues against reality; your opinion is wrong. You are also missing the point. I know that one side will be able to cast 9th. Someone was talking about being able to cast 9th level cleric "and" 9th level Wizard spells before 20th. It can't be done no matter how much you argue. Also you haven't proven a damn thing about 9th level on both sides. You haven't even been on these threads until now. Whats this "we" crap. I see you are one of those types. You wait until an arguement has more on one side so you jump in on that side saying "yeah we told you so". Come on man come up with your own answers.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-01-07, 06:51 PM	Also, your character building ability (and/or your assumptions thereof) are horrific. A cleric 5/wizard 5/Mystic Theurge 10 is an inferior build that nobody with actual competency would use; cleric 7/wizard 3/MT 10 and cleric 3/wizard 7/MT 10 are both strictly superior setups, because 9th level spells on one side and 7th level spells on the other, will always offer more powerful options than 8th level spells on both sides. Of course, it's even more effective to go archivist 3/wizard 3/MT 10/spellcasting PrC 4, since you reduce MAD and gain a few nice special abilities from whatever final PrC you use. My character building ability? Dude I can tweak characters so bad most DM's won't allow them even though they are legal. I've been tweeking characters since first addition D&D. You are the one who put Wiz 5/ Cleric 5/ Mystic Theurge 10. That must have been one of your mistakeful builds.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-01-07, 06:52 PM	Your mere opinion cannot overturn reality. Reality says that yes, Ultimate Magi and Mystic Theurges can cast 9th level spells before 20th level. You can do it on one side without any difficulty at all, if you don't mind sacrificing the other side completely (there's no need to try and keep a balanced progression); and with a little more work, you can actually do it on both sides. Your opinion argues against reality; your opinion is wrong. Neither can your mere opinion. Your nobody special. You haven't impressed me yet.
Tempest Stormwind 02-01-07, 07:13 PM	XunVal, look down at the bottom corner of my post. See that little + symbol? Click that on every post you want to reply to, then click "post reply". It was put there for people who couldn't figure out how to do multiple quotes normally (which is silly; it's just BBcode...); use it. If you're replying to a single post, for the love of god, just split the quotes up in the post reply box. Do not spam the thread endlessly with inane remarks.Do you normally go around in a campaign playing a Beholder?If you'd bothered to do your homework (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=540563), you'd have noticed that you don't need to play a beholder to get access to Beholder Mage.Dude comparing a non-player character PrC such as Beholder Mage because the DM allows Ultimate Magus and other classes doesn't make any sense. You don't normally play beholders in campaigns. Also, not you can't cast spells before 20th with the Mystic Theurge PrC."you can't cast spells before 20th with the Mystic Theurge..." What the eff? And denying that you can play a beholder (because you can) or that you can use the beholder mage PrC as a human (which you can) doesn't exactly work if you're wanting to present factual evidence to back up your side of the argument, by the way.You are also missing the point. I know that one side will be able to cast 9th. Someone was talking about being able to cast 9th level cleric "and" 9th level Wizard spells before 20th. It can't be done no matter how much you argue. Also you haven't proven a damn thing about 9th level on both sides. You haven't even been on these threads until now. Whats this "we" crap. I see you are one of those types. You wait until an arguement has more on one side so you jump in on that side saying "yeah we told you so". Come on man come up with your own answers.First, you were saying "pre-epic" earlier. That's different than "before 20th". Second, Bard 7 / Mindbender 1 / Ur-Priest 2 / Sublime Chord 2 / Mystic Theurge 8 gets 9th level arcane and divine spells at obscene caster levels before 20th. I'm not familiar with the arcane heirophant, but I know you can do something similar with that as well.My character building ability? Dude I can tweak characters so bad most DM's won't allow them even though they are legal. I've been tweeking characters since first addition D&D. You are the one who put Wiz 5/ Cleric 5/ Mystic Theurge 10. That must have been one of your mistakeful builds.You claim to be a good tweak, and yet you can't spell, can't communciate properly, and, as evidenced by this thread, can't read the rules? Odd, that. And actually YOU were the one who brought it up (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=780018&page=5), not Lotus Crane. It's all fine and dandy to make **** up, but at least have the intelligence to hide the evidence beforehand.Neither can your mere opinion. Your nobody special. You haven't impressed me yet.We've shown you that we can get 9th level divine and arcane spells before level 20. We've shown you that the Ultimate Magus can get 9th level wizard spells. We've shown you that you're just plain wrong. And you dismiss us as if we've done nothing? Pull your head out of the sand.
Tuhljin 02-01-07, 07:27 PM	Why can't this thread just die? :(
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-01-07, 07:40 PM	XunVal, look down at the bottom corner of my post. See that little + symbol? Click that on every post you want to reply to, then click "post reply". It was put there for people who couldn't figure out how to do multiple quotes normally (which is silly; it's just BBcode...); use it. If you're replying to a single post, for the love of god, just split the quotes up in the post reply box. Do not spam the thread endlessly with inane remarks.If you'd bothered to do your homework (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=540563), you'd have noticed that you don't need to play a beholder to get access to Beholder Mage."you can't cast spells before 20th with the Mystic Theurge..." What the eff? And denying that you can play a beholder (because you can) or that you can use the beholder mage PrC as a human (which you can) doesn't exactly work if you're wanting to present factual evidence to back up your side of the argument, by the way.First, you were saying "pre-epic" earlier. That's different than "before 20th". Second, Bard 7 / Mindbender 1 / Ur-Priest 2 / Sublime Chord 2 / Mystic Theurge 8 gets 9th level arcane and divine spells at obscene caster levels before 20th. I'm not familiar with the arcane heirophant, but I know you can do something similar with that as well.You claim to be a good tweak, and yet you can't spell, can't communciate properly, and, as evidenced by this thread, can't read the rules? Odd, that. And actually YOU were the one who brought it up (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=780018&page=5), not Lotus Crane. It's all fine and dandy to make **** up, but at least have the intelligence to hide the evidence beforehand.We've shown you that we can get 9th level divine and arcane spells before level 20. We've shown you that the Ultimate Magus can get 9th level wizard spells. We've shown you that you're just plain wrong. And you dismiss us as if we've done nothing? Pull your head out of the sand. I know how to use it, i'm just lazy:D
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-01-07, 07:42 PM	And denying that you can play a beholder (because you can) or that you can use the beholder mage PrC as a human (which you can) doesn't exactly work if you're wanting to present factual evidence to back up your side of the argument, by the way.First, you were saying "pre-epic" earlier. That's different than "before 20th". Since when can a human take the Beholder Mage PrC? Dude I hate to break it to you but Pre means before. Up to 20th level is what I am talking about. I'm not talking using Bard with Mystic Theurge. I'm talking about a Wizard and a Cleric having 20th level spells pre-epic. I know of the Sublime Cord it's a PrC for obtaining 9th level spells as a bard I know. But the Bard is limited. Wizard has unlimited potential.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-01-07, 07:49 PM	XunVal, look down at the bottom corner of my post. See that little + symbol? Click that on every post you want to reply to, then click "post reply". It was put there for people who couldn't figure out how to do multiple quotes normally (which is silly; it's just BBcode...); use it. If you're replying to a single post, for the love of god, just split the quotes up in the post reply box. Do not spam the thread endlessly with inane remarks.If you'd bothered to do your homework (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=540563), you'd have noticed that you don't need to play a beholder to get access to Beholder Mage."you can't cast spells before 20th with the Mystic Theurge..." What the eff? And denying that you can play a beholder (because you can) or that you can use the beholder mage PrC as a human (which you can) doesn't exactly work if you're wanting to present factual evidence to back up your side of the argument, by the way.First, you were saying "pre-epic" earlier. That's different than "before 20th". Second, Bard 7 / Mindbender 1 / Ur-Priest 2 / Sublime Chord 2 / Mystic Theurge 8 gets 9th level arcane and divine spells at obscene caster levels before 20th. I'm not familiar with the arcane heirophant, but I know you can do something similar with that as well.You claim to be a good tweak, and yet you can't spell, can't communciate properly, and, as evidenced by this thread, can't read the rules? Odd, that. And actually YOU were the one who brought it up (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=780018&page=5), not Lotus Crane. It's all fine and dandy to make **** up, but at least have the intelligence to hide the evidence beforehand.We've shown you that we can get 9th level divine and arcane spells before level 20. We've shown you that the Ultimate Magus can get 9th level wizard spells. We've shown you that you're just plain wrong. And you dismiss us as if we've done nothing? Pull your head out of the sand. Let me read to you the Requirements for being a Beholder Mage. "Lords of Madness" Race: True Beholder (beholderkin cannot become beholder mages). Special: Must put out antimagic eye.
Ventilatory_Threshold 02-01-07, 07:52 PM	Let me read to you the Requirements for being a Beholder Mage. "Lords of Madness" Race: True Beholder (beholderkin cannot become beholder mages). Special: Must put out antimagic eye. And he does just that with that trick. It's sneaky, it's underhanded. Hell, if introduced to a DM, he will probably kill you violently (Irreversible style with a fire extinguisher), but by RAW, it works.
Lotus Crane 02-01-07, 07:55 PM	(Deleted by poster.)
Kary Wanzer 02-01-07, 08:05 PM	Neither can your mere opinion. Your nobody special. You haven't impressed me yet. :r: Actually, Lotus Crane is somebody special. He's relatively famous and well-respected here on the boards, which is the exact opposite of your own position right now. Your opinion is a mere opinion. Lotus's opinion (and Seerow's, Tempest's, Otto's, Polaris's, Tony's, and some others') are not mere; theirs are actually worthy of serious consideration from people more intelligent than you. I will vouch for LC, Seerow will vouch for him, heck after seeing his most recent post, I think even Tempest Stormwind will vouch for him, as being a heckuva lot smarter and well-mannered than you, churl. And actually YOU were the one who brought it up (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=780018&page=5), not Lotus Crane. It's all fine and dandy to make **** up, but at least have the intelligence to hide the evidence beforehand.We've shown you that we can get 9th level divine and arcane spells before level 20. We've shown you that the Ultimate Magus can get 9th level wizard spells. We've shown you that you're just plain wrong. And you dismiss us as if we've done nothing? See XunValDork of House Stupid? We all can see the evidence that you left behind for us, that you were the first person to say "cleric 5/wizard 5/Mystic Theurge 10." Lotus Crane would never make that kind of mistake himself. The fact that you don't realize that, shows how little you know about these boards and its long-time members, and how you probably don't deserve to be here. I know how to use it, i'm just lazy And unable to grasp the truth and acknowledge your mistake to your betters. Why can't this thread just die? :( Because justice demands that Xun apologize to us first. Now hurry up and admit you're wrong Xun, because you are. :b:
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-01-07, 08:11 PM	Not the exact combination of cleric/wizard, no. However, one of the simplest builds requiring the least amount of work is druid 3/wizard 3/Arcane Hierophant 10/Mystic Theurge 4, which does get 9th level druid and wizard spells by 20th level. Not quite as nice as 9th level cleric and wizard spells, since the druid list isn't quite as powerful as the cleric list, but at least you get a few other nice abilities, beyond just spells. (Arcane Hierophant is in Races of the Wild, and is a full dual-progression caster PrC like the Mystic Theurge, except that one side must be druid, instead of any divine.) No, you obviously can't tweak characters correctly; the rest of the players in your game are possibly even more incompetent than you are. Btw, you suggested cleric 5/wizard 5/Mystic Theurge 10 first. That's your "mistakeful" build, not mine. Maybe you can't remember what you typed yourself a few pages ago, but we do. Thats what the hell I was talking about. Can you not read? I have been mentioning Wizard Wizard Wizard the whole time.I also hate to break it to you, but you need to check your Arcane Hierophant build. Being a Wizard 3/ Druid 3 you wouldn't quallify for the PrC. You would need to go Mystic Theurge first. Because a Druid 3 and Wiz 3 don't have a BAB of +4. Yeah yeah talk all big and bad hiding behind a screen. Grow up man. Calling people names doesn't make you all big and bad. Do you even know what incompetent means? There isn't anyone incompetent here. If I wanted to I could cuss you out so bad a sailor would cover his ears. But I am what you call an adult. We don't sink to such childish things.
Lotus Crane 02-01-07, 08:23 PM	(Deleted by poster.)
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-01-07, 08:31 PM	There are situations that cause even mature adults to grow angry, and there are times when harsh words are necessary. Mature Adult? You? You haven't convinced me otherwise. And no this is not a time for harsh words. That just shows more and more of your immaturity. Seriously if you need to call people names to feel all big and bad please go and post at another thread. Stay off of mine.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-01-07, 08:48 PM	:r: Actually, Lotus Crane is somebody special. He's relatively famous and well-respected here on the boards, which is the exact opposite of your own position right now. Your opinion is a mere opinion. Lotus's opinion (and Seerow's, Tempest's, Otto's, Polaris's, Tony's, and some others') are not mere; theirs are actually worthy of serious consideration from people more intelligent than you. I will vouch for LC, Seerow will vouch for him, heck after seeing his most recent post, I think even Tempest Stormwind will vouch for him, as being a heckuva lot smarter and well-mannered than you, churl. See XunValDork of House Stupid? We all can see the evidence that you left behind for us, that you were the first person to say "cleric 5/wizard 5/Mystic Theurge 10." Lotus Crane would never make that kind of mistake himself. The fact that you don't realize that, shows how little you know about these boards and its long-time members, and how you probably don't deserve to be here. And unable to grasp the truth and acknowledge your mistake to your betters. Because justice demands that Xun apologize to us first. Now hurry up and admit you're wrong Xun, because you are. :b: They really need to keep children off of these threads. I really don't care who Lotus is. He doesn't have my respect. And i just caught him about one of his builds. Anyway wrong about what? What is there to be wrong about. You cannot have a a build that you can cast 9th levels from having the Wizard Cleric combo. And yes i know of my mistakes, and yes i believe he would make the mistake of the Wiz5/Cleric5/Mystic T 10 cause he just made the mistake with his Arcane H and I caught him on it. And what is this "us" crap. This is your first post I believe. You don't really having in business jumping in anyway. You are another one who waits and jumps in on the side with the most people. And you are going to vouch for him, ok thats supposed to mean???????????????????? Proven what? Anyone has yet to prove that you can Have a Wizard with 9th level spell and a cleric with 9th level spell pre-epic. And about the Ultimate Magus I have already stated that if they come out with an errata and that point is not corrected then I will accept it. Hey that will be awesome, but I believe they made a mistake. If I am wrong so be it. But calling people names is a lame way to argue with someone. Argue fine, but grow the hell up. If you need to call people names go somewhere else. Being respected by a few people doesn't give you the right to insult other people. If you think that then you are sadly mistaken. I don't really care who you are behind the screen. Some of you could be 40 year olds who still live with mommy and daddy and who don't work, or you could be a murderer. It doesn't matter, all I know is I have been playing D&D since first edition. I am confident with my answers and what I have to say. You want to try and insult my intelligence, I have a high IQ I am studying to be a video game programmer, which the correct degree is Game Software Development. I will also be learing general programming which I could use in many other fields. I have decided that if the gaming industry isn't for me then I am going to join the FBI as a programmer. I have a straight 4.0 in my grades, I have been dealing with computers since I was 6 years old. I can build a computer from scratch blind folded and I am on the way to programming. I could go on and on but I don't have to. I am confident in my abilities. But i don't go around calling people stupid or dork, or any other insulting names. That is what children do. I have younger siblings I know how children are, and the only thing that you have convinced me of is that you need to grow up.
Ventilatory_Threshold 02-01-07, 09:41 PM	Xun has already been proven wrong. He doesn't need to admit it. Come one, people. Seeking external validation from your opponent? I would have expected you to have walked away from the argument, having made your points clearly (at which point Xun would likely have claimed proof by assertion (a logical fallacy)). Everyone quit the name-calling. Harsh words towards the argument or idea are fine, but refrain from personal attacks, as they are not necessary, do not help your case in any way, and actually hurt your account status. I'd like to add that seniority on the boards doesn't mean you're correct, but if you're well-respected (which you will be if you actually know the rules), people will listen to you rather than someone else. It helps you, but it won't save you if you are wrong. I aspire to become a WizO someday.
Davith Bothain 02-01-07, 10:26 PM	They really need to keep children off of these threads. I really don't care who Lotus is. He doesn't have my respect. Good for you. That's your right, I suppose. However, there ARE actually people who do, and, thus, you should probably watch where you point that disrespect ray. Unless you like having a group of detractors who remember your past deeds and keep that in mind the next time you're asking for help. And about the Ultimate Magus I have already stated that if they come out with an errata and that point is not corrected then I will accept it. And yet you keep railing against the current system instead of doing what any other person who has adopted such an opinion would do and sit back, content in your own way of doing things; relax; and NOT keep pushing your opinions upon anyone unfortunate enough to scroll by. We get it. You have made your point. Ultimate Magus trick = bad. STOP REPEATING YOURSELF. We respectfully disagree with your point of view. It doesn't matter, all I know is I have been playing D&D since first edition. I am confident with my answers and what I have to say. You want to try and insult my intelligence, I have a high IQ I am studying to be a video game programmer, which the correct degree is Game Software Development. I will also be learing general programming which I could use in many other fields. I have decided that if the gaming industry isn't for me then I am going to join the FBI as a programmer. I have a straight 4.0 in my grades, I have been dealing with computers since I was 6 years old. I can build a computer from scratch blind folded and I am on the way to programming. I could go on and on but I don't have to. I am confident in my abilities. And as my redneck peers would say: Yee-haw! Lord Almighty, man, do you consider humility a flaw? I realize this might be a by-product of the cloak of relative anonymity that is the Internet, but seriously, arrogance running rampant will keep you more grounded than incompetence ever will. Rail against we boards denizens all you want for our online idiocies; do not start a competition of who fails least at life. But i don't go around calling people stupid or dork, or any other insulting names. That is what children do. I have younger siblings I know how children are, and the only thing that you have convinced me of is that you need to grow up. Is it just me, or does it always seem that the more a person talks about others being childish and oneself being mature, the more childish the speaker seems? Xun has already been proven wrong. He doesn't need to admit it. Come one, people. Seeking external validation from your opponent? I would have expected you to have walked away from the argument, having made your points clearly (at which point Xun would likely have claimed proof by assertion (a logical fallacy)). I suppose, to draw an analogy of sorts, this is a situation where vastly superior numbers have a much faster foe sparsely surrounded in a wide-open space and are attempting to grapple him. Obviously, the prey cannot escape: any attempt will cause the remainder of the group to close in upon him, but he's still quick enough to dodge between the cracks before anyone can nab him. At this point, everyone in the larger group, knowing victory is inevitable, just wants the sod to stop, throw up his hands, and cede defeat honourably and maturely, humbling oneself before a superior force. Such is the case here, where ol' XunVal can't quite get his story straight and refuses to even admit the true excess of his bias. Alas... (And to be fair, nonsense is more elusive than logic and reason (as evinced by such helpful gems as "Queequeg plus pi, therefore cheese!").) Everyone quit the name-calling. Harsh words towards the argument or idea are fine, but refrain from personal attacks, as they are not necessary, do not help your case in any way, and actually hurt your account status. Hear, hear! I aspire to become a WizO someday. REALLY?... I find that... interesting... Mr. Threshold, is it? ;)
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-01-07, 11:05 PM	Xun has already been proven wrong. He doesn't need to admit it. Come one, people. Seeking external validation from your opponent? I would have expected you to have walked away from the argument, having made your points clearly (at which point Xun would likely have claimed proof by assertion (a logical fallacy)). Everyone quit the name-calling. Harsh words towards the argument or idea are fine, but refrain from personal attacks, as they are not necessary, do not help your case in any way, and actually hurt your account status. I'd like to add that seniority on the boards doesn't mean you're correct, but if you're well-respected (which you will be if you actually know the rules), people will listen to you rather than someone else. It helps you, but it won't save you if you are wrong. I aspire to become a WizO someday. I am still waiting on this have been proved wrong thing. What are you talking about. If you are talking about Using Practiced Spellcaster with Ultimate Magus thing then that has been discussed. But other than that nothing has been proven wrong. Anyway enough, you people just can't stop. You fuss about me saying something over and over again. You are bringing something up over again. Just stop. Everyone has their own opinions and calling someone names for that person not agreeing with their opinion is childish. And about saying others are childish and that makes you childish. So you are calling probably your parents, teachers whom ever that told you to stop acting childish at one point in your life childish themselves? Mature adults don't insult one another with name calling. If you can't find fault in that then you have a lot to learn. Just remember this, anybody can hide behind their monitor, but if it came to face to face the attitude would most likely change.
Tempest Stormwind 02-01-07, 11:13 PM	I am still waiting on this have been proved wrong thing. What are you talking about. If you are talking about Using Practiced Spellcaster with Ultimate Magus thing then that has been discussed. But other than that nothing has been proven wrong. You claimed an ultimate magus could never cast 9th level spells. We proved that wrong. (And there was no discussion, it was you insisting that we were wrong when we clearly show you in the rules why we're right.) You claimed it was impossible to get 9th/9th pre-epic, and later pre-20th. We proved both of those wrong. And now you're denying this?
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-01-07, 11:17 PM	You claimed an ultimate magus could never cast 9th level spells. We proved that wrong. (And there was no discussion, it was you insisting that we were wrong when we clearly show you in the rules why we're right.) You claimed it was impossible to get 9th/9th pre-epic, and later pre-20th. We proved both of those wrong. And now you're denying this? How many times do i have to say it. A wizard and a cleric combo having 9th level spells each. It can't be done. I know about the builds with Bards, I know about the Arcane Hierophant because I corrected someone on their build. I didn't mean before 20th. I was meaning before epic topping out at 20th. The discussion has already been done with the Ultimate Magus my opinion was stated. "Done". Now, nothing else has been proven to me. I am still waiting on how a human can be a beholder mage.
runestar 02-01-07, 11:54 PM	Here we go again....and just when this discussion was just going uphill...:(
Tempest Stormwind 02-02-07, 12:21 AM	How many times do i have to say it. A wizard and a cleric combo having 9th level spells each. It can't be done. I know about the builds with Bards, I know about the Arcane Hierophant because I corrected someone on their build. I didn't mean before 20th. I was meaning before epic topping out at 20th. The discussion has already been done with the Ultimate Magus my opinion was stated. "Done". Now, nothing else has been proven to me. I am still waiting on how a human can be a beholder mage. 1) You never specified wizard and cleric, you specified arcane and divine. 2) Sublime Chord lets the bard learn wizard spells, if you'd bothered to read it. The Ur-Priest uses the cleric spell list. Thus, the 'Ur-Singer' (call him Ozzy) build I mentioned on the previous page can easily pull off 9th level wizard and 9th level cleric spells pre-epic. 3) On the beholder mage: this is the second time I've linked this. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=540563) It was also pointed out by VT independently that you should have looked at it. When the above evidence is combined with your repeated accusations of us being unable to read, I can safely conclude that you are a hippocrite.
Bryan_0697 02-02-07, 01:36 AM	Wow, this topic is still going on? I believe now, that there is another 'trick' or 'way' for this to be occomplished - which was brought up on the Char. Op. boards - with using the Master Spellthief feat (Complete Scoundrel) along with the class. Not having Complete Scoundrel (yet!), I have no knowledge of this feat or how this works; just thought it might interest some of you. Xun (no insult intended) you have got to be one of the the most intractable people I have ever met (Some people find 'stubborn' to be an endearing quality). P.S. Now we just need a build that allows somone to have 9th level spells alon with warlock invocations (I know I know char op. forums)... any ideas?
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-02-07, 01:42 AM	1) You never specified wizard and cleric, you specified arcane and divine. 2) Sublime Chord lets the bard learn wizard spells, if you'd bothered to read it. The Ur-Priest uses the cleric spell list. Thus, the 'Ur-Singer' (call him Ozzy) build I mentioned on the previous page can easily pull off 9th level wizard and 9th level cleric spells pre-epic. 3) On the beholder mage: this is the second time I've linked this. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=540563) It was also pointed out by VT independently that you should have looked at it. When the above evidence is combined with your repeated accusations of us being unable to read, I can safely conclude that you are a hippocrite. That trick is so bulls^%t. If you read the other posts carefully. You will find that this will not work. So therefore you still haven't shown me how a human can become a BeholderMage.
Tempest Stormwind 02-02-07, 01:49 AM	P.S. Now we just need a build that allows somone to have 9th level spells alon with warlock invocations (I know I know char op. forums)... any ideas?Although the class sucks in general, you can get pretty close with True Necromancer. It just takes a bit of a tweak to pull off -- you have to transform yourself into a necropolitan (Libris Mortis), and then get yourself Spellstitched (Complete Arcane). This gets you Command Undead as an arcane spell-like ability (meets the requirement as per Warlocks and Prestige Classes) and the other requirements are trivial with cleric levels. The only reason you'd do this, really, is to get amazing undead with The Dead Walk. It falls *one* level short of dark invocations, though. I haven't looked at this since before Complete Mage, which has proper warlock theurge PrCs in it, but 9th/Dark might be doable by combining the two. XunVal: point to where it is actually debunked in that thread. We *tried* to tear it apart, but we couldn't find a way to do it within the rules. What next? You read the Ghola Character (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=777565) and make unsubstantiated claims that it doesn't work?
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-02-07, 01:58 AM	Although the class sucks in general, you can get pretty close with True Necromancer. It just takes a bit of a tweak to pull off -- you have to transform yourself into a necropolitan (Libris Mortis), and then get yourself Spellstitched (Complete Arcane). This gets you Command Undead as an arcane spell-like ability (meets the requirement as per Warlocks and Prestige Classes) and the other requirements are trivial with cleric levels. The only reason you'd do this, really, is to get amazing undead with The Dead Walk. It falls *one* level short of dark invocations, though. I haven't looked at this since before Complete Mage, which has proper warlock theurge PrCs in it, but 9th/Dark might be doable by combining the two. XunVal: point to where it is actually debunked in that thread. We *tried* to tear it apart, but we couldn't find a way to do it within the rules. What next? You read the Ghola Character (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=777565) and make unsubstantiated claims that it doesn't work? Let me give a little fact. Ok read Polymorph any Object. Look at the little chart. Changing from a human to a beholder doesn't give you a 9 or better duration factor. So therefore it isn't permanent.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-02-07, 02:08 AM	Also if you look at the PHB II it states that they lose all class features. There goes all his class features. And it also states that If the new forms size is different from the target's. In other words if insufficiant space exists for the new form the spell fails. As per the new Polymorph subschool.
Packe_SCA 02-02-07, 03:15 AM	I believe that the "Spells that have come befre" section under the polymorph subschool answers your question adiqatly. For the purpose of adjudicating effects that apply to polymorph spells, any spell whose effect is based on either alterself or polymorph should be considered to have the polymorph subschool. HOWEVER, note that the spells' existing rules text takes priority over that of the subschool.
Gwumph 02-02-07, 04:52 AM	LOL The most and i mean this THE MOST!!! $%&&% funnny thread of all time. Xun has this ability to read rules and take only the parts the suit his arguement (polymporh sub-school as example). Other posters are great at finely reading every detail of a rule and matching it with a dozen other rules from a dozen other books. Xun has a deep seated belief that his opinion should carry the same weight of; maybe even over-rule various rules of different books. Other posters (in general) have no time for opinions and worship the God of Rules!! :D Where does that leave it. Different people discussing the same subject, but in 2 different languages!! And almost through 2 different cultural lenses. i.e. "Others: explain you argument point by point" "Xun: No your just wrong" "Others: Refute my case point by point please." "Xun: Your case is wrong, it goes against my opinion of the feat" "Others: Cite a rule to explain your opinion" "Xun: My opinion is right because i have years of experience, so I know what is right" etc. etc. LOL I am getting ***** and giggles just thinking about this thread!!! Please by all means Do Not Stop. Cheers Gwumph p.s. I think everyone should come visit me in Bangkok Thailand, we can all go out get drunk, screwed and tattoed!! Everything will seem alot simpler after that!!
runestar 02-02-07, 08:06 AM	I have talked to people and felt like I was speaking to a brick wall. But this is definitely the first time I have conversed with someone and wished that I was taking to a brick wall...:P
Krevon 02-02-07, 09:09 AM	I have talked to people and felt like I was speaking to a brick wall. But this is definitely the first time I have conversed with someone and wished that I was taking to a brick wall...:P You've inadvenrtantly created a new template....Aspect of Brick Wall:clap:
Ventilatory_Threshold 02-02-07, 11:12 AM	I suppose, to draw an analogy of sorts, this is a situation where vastly superior numbers have a much faster foe sparsely surrounded in a wide-open space and are attempting to grapple him. Obviously, the prey cannot escape: any attempt will cause the remainder of the group to close in upon him, but he's still quick enough to dodge between the cracks before anyone can nab him. At this point, everyone in the larger group, knowing victory is inevitable, just wants the sod to stop, throw up his hands, and cede defeat honourably and maturely, humbling oneself before a superior force. Such is the case here, where ol' XunVal can't quite get his story straight and refuses to even admit the true excess of his bias. Alas... (And to be fair, nonsense is more elusive than logic and reason (as evinced by such helpful gems as "Queequeg plus pi, therefore cheese!").) I guess that's a fair one. REALLY?... I find that... interesting... Mr. Threshold, is it? ;) Time and random chance will only tell. I am still waiting on this have been proved wrong thing. You don't have to wait. It has been done, and they do not need your approval. They know themselves that they made very strong cases. Your arguments have consisted only one thing: Denial of evidence. You simply say "no, it doesn't work that way". You don't even bother to support it. I'm sorry, my man, but you're always screwed unless you do your homework. You fuss about me saying something over and over again. You are bringing something up over again. They bring their point up over and over again because you keep saying "it doesn't work that way". You caused the stagnation of this debate, they didn't. I have a distinct feeling that you're trying a proof by assertion approach; as soon as they stop arguing, you'll just keep telling yourself and everyone else that you're right. Everyone has their own opinions and calling someone names for that person not agreeing with their opinion is childish. And about saying others are childish and that makes you childish. The name-calling has mostly come from you. If you are disrespectful towards other posters, then they will be disrespectful towards you. That's how it works, and calling someone names and then backing down doesn't let you off the hook. So you are calling probably your parents, teachers whom ever that told you to stop acting childish at one point in your life childish themselves? Sometimes adults do act childishly in some ways. So yes, you could sometimes call them childish. Mature adults don't insult one another with name calling. You'd be surprised at how untrue this is. That trick is so bulls^%t. If you read the other posts carefully. You will find that this will not work. So therefore you still haven't shown me how a human can become a BeholderMage. Please consider the possibility that you may have read it wrong. Or not at all. Also if you look at the PHB II it states that they lose all class features. Where does it say that? p.s. I think everyone should come visit me in Bangkok Thailand, we can all go out get drunk, screwed and tattoed!! Everything will seem alot simpler after that!! Oh hell yeah!
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-02-07, 11:08 PM	I believe that the "Spells that have come befre" section under the polymorph subschool answers your question adiqatly. For the purpose of adjudicating effects that apply to polymorph spells, any spell whose effect is based on either alterself or polymorph should be considered to have the polymorph subschool. HOWEVER, note that the spells' existing rules text takes priority over that of the subschool. It doesn't matter anyway. The Beholder Mage build can't work because you can't use Polymorph any Object to become a permanent beholder. You people are sad. You say the same things over and over and over. Like I have said before, you have yet to prove me wrong about anything. Oh and Ronin you should be getting a visit by a WizO soon.
Tempest Stormwind 02-02-07, 11:15 PM	It doesn't matter anyway. The Beholder Mage build can't work because you can't use Polymorph any Object to become a permanent beholder. You people are sad. You say the same things over and over and over. Like I have said before, you have yet to prove me wrong about anything. Oh and Ronin you should be getting a visit by a WizO soon. You can get a 9 duration factor by playing a Large creature (there are playable large creatures) or changing your size to Large first, and having at least 17 Intelligence (which you just might have if you're casting the 8th level Polymorph Any Object). Don't call us sad unless you're willing to do the legwork to prove you're right. Which you've never demonstrated you're willing to do. And this entire thread is a testament to your baiting. While the personal mockery against you was out of line, so has all of your behaviour. So don't act all high and mighty.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-02-07, 11:22 PM	You can get a 9 duration factor by playing a Large creature (there are playable large creatures) or changing your size to Large first, and having at least 17 Intelligence (which you just might have if you're casting the 8th level Polymorph Any Object). Don't call us sad unless you're willing to do the legwork to prove you're right. Which you've never demonstrated you're willing to do. And this entire thread is a testament to your baiting. While the personal mockery against you was out of line, so has all of your behaviour. So don't act all high and mighty. Read the freaking spell. Look at the chart. Same Kingdom: +5 "No a human is not in the same kingdom as an abberation. Same Class: +2 "No a human is not in the same class as a beholder" Same Size: +2 "No Human Medium, Beholder large" Related: +2 " No a human is in no way related to a beholder" Same or Lower Intelligence: +2 "Yes it can happen". Your total score: +2 Duration factor: 1 hour. Just read the spell dude. It's right there on page 263 og 3.5 PHB. Look it up.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-02-07, 11:23 PM	A human is not in the same kingdom as an aberration. Any newbie D&D player who has read up on humans and abberations would know that.
runestar 02-02-07, 11:31 PM	Actually, a human is in the same kingdom as a beholder. Both are neither vegetables nor minerals, which leaves only animal by default. +2 from same int, and you get +7, enough for the spell to last a week. If you can increase your size somehow, then bully for you - its permanent.:) There is no etc in this case, so it has to be one of the 3. Lets see you try and justify a beholder being a vegetable or mineral...;)
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-02-07, 11:35 PM	Same kingdom only lists three categories (no 'etc.'), so that +5 is a given. Assuming a Wizard, the duration increases to one week (+2 for the form being of the same or lower Intelligence), which is enough. You only have to cast the spell once a week, unless dispelled, in which case it's enough to just cast it again. This is tantamount to name-calling. As said before, you are the one stagnating the discussion. It can't move on because you can't accept your mistakes. They have not. I don't care if you believe this or not, but this is a lie. Dude whoever taught you how to play D&D needs to do some more research. You can't keep casting the spell once a week and take a PrC for that form. Ok say you turn into a beholder, how are you going to cast that spell in a week? You have no hands for components. Anyway, being in a form for a week doesn't qualify you for a PrC. Come on, you gotta know that.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-02-07, 11:38 PM	Actually, a human is in the same kingdom as a beholder. Both are neither vegetables nor minerals, which leaves only animal by default. +2 from same int, and you get +7, enough for the spell to last a week. If you can increase your size somehow, then bully for you - its permanent.:) There is no etc in this case, so it has to be one of the 3. Lets see you try and justify a beholder being a vegetable or mineral...;) Look at same kingdom please. Do you see an etc.. there? Animal (beholder No), (Veggie Beholder No), (Mineral Beholder No).
runestar 02-02-07, 11:40 PM	Anyway, being in a form for a week doesn't qualify you for a PrC. Come on, you gotta know that. You can enter the prc so long as you meet the prereqs(completer warrior). Are you a beholder? If yes, then you can qualify. Naturally, if the spell runs out later, you lose the benefits of the prc. But so long as you keep refreshing the spell, the duration too is restarted. It's the same logic with a fighter having 11dex using gloves of dex+2 to qualify for the dodge feat. Likewise, a wizard with a familiar can take a prc requiring the alertness feat without taking said feat, since it is granted by the familar. Of course, the familiar cannot leave the wizard, but that is another story.;) The prc does not care how you met the prereq, that you have it is good enough. Ok say you turn into a beholder, how are you going to cast that spell in a week? You are playing in a party of 4 or more. Is there some reason why another spellcaster cannot refresh the spell for you? Besides, the debate was never about whether it was feasible, simply whether it was possible. Your latest rebuttal is out of context. Please focus on the key issues at hand.:) Look at same kingdom please. Do you see an etc.. there? Animal (beholder No), (Veggie Beholder No), (Mineral Beholder No). The beholder would be classified under the animal kingdom.:)
Davith Bothain 02-02-07, 11:40 PM	Look at same kingdom please. Do you see an etc.. there? Animal (beholder No), (Veggie Beholder No), (Mineral Beholder No). Well, if we're doing a crazy thing like assuming that all things fall into one of these three categories and that all things are SOMETHING, then what the heck would you call a beholder?
Tytalus 02-02-07, 11:47 PM	A truly entertaining thread. Makes me want to play a Beguiler/Wizard/UM... I must applaud Seerow and Tempest Stormwind, and runestar for their patient (and overall very polite) attempts to explain the mechanics to the OP. Great job, guys! :cheer: Too bad that several others had to resort to petty insults and name-calling. What a shame. The template was in particular bad taste (and not even well done), IMHO. :nonono:
Ventilatory_Threshold 02-03-07, 12:10 AM	Same Kingdom: +5 "No a human is not in the same kingdom as an abberation. There are only three kingdoms listed. Beholders are not minerals or vegetables, and neither are humans. Same Class: +2 "No a human is not in the same class as a beholder" You're right. Same Size: +2 "No Human Medium, Beholder large" Easy to change. Enlarge Person and other methods can be used. Related: +2 " No a human is in no way related to a beholder" Not as the book defines it. Same or Lower Intelligence: +2 "Yes it can happen". Yes, it can happen. Your total score: +2 Duration factor: 1 hour. Total score: 9. Duration factor: permanent.
Packe_SCA 02-03-07, 12:19 AM	Actually, a human is in the same kingdom as a beholder. Both are neither vegetables nor minerals, which leaves only animal by default. +2 from same int, and you get +7, enough for the spell to last a week. If you can increase your size somehow, then bully for you - its permanent.:) There is no etc in this case, so it has to be one of the 3. Lets see you try and justify a beholder being a vegetable or mineral...;) The size could be increased with enlarged person. Then your large and permanently become a beholder. This is true because once you become a beholder you are now large and polymorph any object remains permanent. +5 for same kingdom (animal), +2 for size, and +2 for same int. Edit: sorry didn't see the post before this.
Krevon 02-03-07, 12:25 AM	A truly entertaining thread. Makes me want to play a Beguiler/Wizard/UM... I must applaud Seerow and Tempest Stormwind, and runestar for their patient (and overall very polite) attempts to explain the mechanics to the OP. Great job, guys! :cheer: Too bad that several others had to resort to petty insults and name-calling. What a shame. The template was in particular bad taste (and not even well done), IMHO. :nonono: I didn't mean to spark the template thing....i was acutally not responding to the OP. But it WAS funny!
Krevon 02-03-07, 12:29 AM	Now I can't support the OP's claims by RAW everyone else is right. Everyone else has upheld thier side of argument. But no one's budging hence brick wall. Now if we move into house ruling it could see concluding that it wouldn't work. But on the flip side if you spent precious feats to do this instead of meta magic feats then its theaseble to do it.
runestar 02-03-07, 12:29 AM	I didn't mean to spark the template thing....i was acutally not responding to the OP. Oops...then it was my fault then...:embarrass
rironin 02-03-07, 01:25 AM	I must applaud Seerow and Tempest Stormwind, and runestar for their patient (and overall very polite) attempts to explain the mechanics to the OP. Great job, guys! :cheer:I applaud everyone who kept up the patience and politeness in attempting to explain any of the rules debated in this thread. And you are correct, Tytalus, such an attitude is the right way to go on these boards. I like to think that in the vast majority of my posts, I assume such an attitude myself - though that is for others to decide. I was moved to make the template because I must conclude that Seerow's, Tempest's, runestar's, and just about everyone else's patience and politeness has not and will not be returned or rewarded with an eventual peaceful conclusion. So I did indulge in a bit of tomfoolery, true. :P But only after being targeted by Decry Uniqueness! (since I have certainly indulged in sarcasm in the past, this is an explicit notice that in the following paragraph, the sarcasm is off) To XunValDorl himself, I will say this: despite my jovial lampooning, I don't think that you were stretching the truth when you described yourself. I have no doubt that you are a very intelligent young college student with impeccable grades and a mind that can deliver most answers faster than a stroke of lightning. I'll bet that a lot of the people who've been tossing in their two cents on this thread can see a bit of themselves in you, or have known fellow dorks (I use the term in a positive way, as I would describe myself) in school, work and life who had the same combination of quick wit and rock-solid - sometimes too solid - certainty in their thoughts and ideas. I think the one thing many posters have wanted desperately to convey via their own style and approach is that a quick wit must be tempered with a careful, meticulous, slow-to-pounce attitude on these boards, lest the respect your intellect deserves should continue to elude you. I myself have learned that if I ever feel too proud of my own D&D knowledge, all I have to do is post something too brashly on these forums and in minutes flat, I'll have six or seven solid refutations to remind me of my own mortality (usually with page references, and if I'm really lucky, the always injurious "I'll give the same answer I gave when someone posted this question last week..." ;) ). Sometimes, that can be a handy thing to have. :)
Krevon 02-03-07, 02:34 AM	So to flip the topic just a bit......would anyone here houserule it for the flavor of the game?
runestar 02-03-07, 03:30 AM	I don't see the need to houserule otherwise for the ultimate magus. While I concede that it could easily have been a printing or wording oversight when they made the spellcaster lv increase based off caster lv rather than actual spellcasting capabilities(it does make for an odd precedent), I still do not see anything inherently broken about it. It does make wiz/sorc combinations much more viable, and I would sure like that to stay.:) As for the beholder mage/cleric combo, that is obviously a simple intellectual exercise which would never see use in actual gameplay. So why bother?;)
Krevon 02-03-07, 04:34 AM	I don't see the need to houserule otherwise for the ultimate magus. While I concede that it could easily have been a printing or wording oversight when they made the spellcaster lv increase based off caster lv rather than actual spellcasting capabilities(it does make for an odd precedent), I still do not see anything inherently broken about it. It does make wiz/sorc combinations much more viable, and I would sure like that to stay.:) As for the beholder mage/cleric combo, that is obviously a simple intellectual exercise which would never see use in actual gameplay. So why bother?;) I do agree with you.....as far as role play, the character could have applied the disipline he has learned from wizardry to his innate arcane abilities. Thats how I would rp it.
Lotus Crane 02-03-07, 04:55 AM	Looking back on things a day later, I am ashamed of my actions. I apologize for disappointing my colleagues by losing composure in the way that I did. Regardless of my adversary's behavior, there is no justification for my sinking to that level. I have failed to live up to your expectations; please forgive me.
Ventilatory_Threshold 02-03-07, 11:07 AM	Looking back on things a day later, I am ashamed of my actions. I apologize for disappointing my colleagues by losing composure in the way that I did. Regardless of my adversary's behavior, there is no justification for my sinking to that level. I have failed to live up to your expectations; please forgive me. Umm... I'm pretty cool with it. I don't think there's any need to apologize (though it is nice that you did). We all have our moments of insanity, and you just had yours. Nothing to worry about, really. And for an extra nice effect: :)
runestar 02-03-07, 12:18 PM	On a side note, I think it is pretty clear what the 3 kingdom categories are meant to apply to. Mineral should refer to inanimate objects. Plants and animals are pretty self-explanatory, though I concur there might be a bit of a gray area for certain cases such as those with plant HD. Thus, humans and beholders would both belong to the animal kingdom, since they are both living things with int scores, unlike vegetables.:)
rironin 02-03-07, 01:17 PM	So to flip the topic just a bit......would anyone here houserule it for the flavor of the game?I don't know if I'd house rule the whole Ultimate Magus + caster level tricks technique or not. Compared to straight wizard, which many people regard as one of the most powerful classes you can take, this PrC has a large number of benefits and rather few detriments. If you were just a human and took Practiced Spellcaster, and didn't use any other caster level tricks, here are the things you'd sacrifice to be an Ultimate Magus (assumes a 20th level build, Sorc 1/Wiz 9/UM 10): You'd end up casting as an 18th level wizard (right? :P I dearly hope after all this time I didn't make a mistake, but let me know if I did), so compared to a 20th level wizard you'd lose two 9th level spell slots, one 8th level spell slot, and one 7th level spell slot (although you'd have 22nd caster level with your wizard spells). You'd end up getting one fewer bonus feat than a 20th level wizard (or two if you count Practiced Spellcaster as a "wasted" feat). Your familiar would have the powers of a 9th level wizard's familiar instead of a 20th (no spell resistance, no scry on familiar, lose +5 natural armor and +5 Intelligence). In exchange for those sacrifices, the benefits are: You'd cast spells as a 9th level Sorcerer, at 17th caster level. Augmented Casting, which I'm seeing isn't as scary as I thought it was. Augmented casting is extremely useful, to be sure. As a Sorc 9 you have four 4th level spell slots, six 3rd, six 2nd, and six 1st, not counting bonus spells. The easiest way to compare to a wizard is to assume that you'd use as many of your sorcerer slots for augmented casting as you could (there is an 8 use per day cap). That would mean you could, for instance, quicken 4 of your wizard spells per day and maximize 4 others (all of which can't be higher than 5th level spells) without altering the level of those spells or having to prepare them specially ahead of time. Of course these could be any other combination of metamagic feats, which an Ultimate Magus would surely take quite a few of. After you'd used up your augmented casting, you'd have a few lower level spell slots of Sorcerer casting to play around with, namely 2 3rd, 6 2nd and 6 1st level spells (assuming you used augmented casting on the most expensive metamagic feats you could), which could come in handy. There are some defensive spells like greater mage armor, shield and reduce person that are great if you can put them up in every battle rather than just a few. Anyways, it would seem that in the process of looking over precisely how augmented casting works, I've convinced myself that it's not so scary after all. I'd probably allow an Ultimate Magus to use this trick in my game without too much fear, given the limits on the maximum level of the spell to be augmented and the uses per day limit. Doesn't seem like it would disrupt game balance too much. Can anyone think of advantages other than the ones listed that would make a UM even better than a straight wizard? I picked some vanilla metamagic feats as examples - are there others you'd use to augment your 5th level wizard spells that would make it broken? Thanks for input...
NobodyRemembersThis 02-03-07, 01:39 PM	nevermind-------wrong topic.
mittenninja 02-03-07, 02:22 PM	I concur, looking at classes such as the warlock at 20th level you get the ability to cast basically the equivalent of 6th level spells at will. So I see in no way how losing a few high level spell slots to cast a bunch more lower level spells broken. The augmented casting is not even up to par with some specialized PrCs. Some give you the ability to apply metamagic feats to certain spells without any adjustment or penalty whatsoever. With UM you are sacrificing something to use those metamagic feats.
Packe_SCA 02-03-07, 08:55 PM	I think its on the high power side of things. But its not broken, only slightly bent. What about using the last 5 levels or so as an abjurant champion so you could cast shield as a swift action that lasts twice as long and gives you a +9 shield bonus. Also you could cast dispel magic, prismatic wall (and sphere), and all other abjurations as a swift action. Did I mention you keep your wizard spell casting progression. And instead of useing sorc, i'd use the warmage. He knows all of his spells and can cast just as many as the sorc of the same level.
rironin 02-03-07, 11:24 PM	I think its on the high power side of things. But its not broken, only slightly bent. What about using the last 5 levels or so as an abjurant champion so you could cast shield as a swift action that lasts twice as long and gives you a +9 shield bonus. Also you could cast dispel magic, prismatic wall (and sphere), and all other abjurations as a swift action. Did I mention you keep your wizard spell casting progression. And instead of useing sorc, i'd use the warmage. He knows all of his spells and can cast just as many as the sorc of the same level.You can only quicken spells up to your Abjurant Champion level with the Swift Abjuration class ability, so prismatic wall and prismatic sphere are out. Still, it's a good ability, and I like the Abjurant Champion over all. But you just listed things that Abjurant Champions can do, and it didn't have anything to do with the Ultimate Magus class abilities... Going warmage might work depending on what you're going for - extra artillery is always fun, though you won't be able to take advantage of the warmage's armor ability easily and the warmage class doesn't appear to have any defensive magic on its spell list. The beguiler from the PHB II was suggested as a great alternate class because it is spontaneous yet based on Intelligence, which sounded perfect, but I balked when I saw the beguiler spell list. Most of your beguiler spells would go to power your wizard metamagic, but I wouldn't know what to do with the remaining slots.
Packe_SCA 02-03-07, 11:51 PM	You can only quicken spells up to your Abjurant Champion level with the Swift Abjuration class ability, so prismatic wall and prismatic sphere are out. I didn't notice this, i'll have to rework the character I was making. The beguiler from the PHB II was suggested as a great alternate class because it is spontaneous yet based on Intelligence, which sounded perfect, but I balked when I saw the beguiler spell list. Most of your beguiler spells would go to power your wizard metamagic, but I wouldn't know what to do with the remaining slots. I also read the beguiler earlyer, and also noticed its lack of spells to choose from. So on this whole house rule bit. I really no longer see the UM being overly powerful at all. And don't think you would need a house rule. But if you had to have one I would just say the trick with practiced spellcaster isn't in the "heart" of the prc. I, myself, would allow a player to use it.
Krevon 02-04-07, 12:22 AM	I agree, I haven't seen a need to house rule anything on the magus. I started playing in the red hand of doom this weekend but i've never played in it so i didnt have a clue as to what i would be facing so i am going with a straight wizard.
mittenninja 02-04-07, 03:13 AM	You can only quicken spells up to your Abjurant Champion level with the Swift Abjuration class ability Actually it's HALF your abjurant champion levels (rounded up). So that means 3rd level spells max.
rironin 02-04-07, 09:14 AM	Actually it's HALF your abjurant champion levels (rounded up). So that means 3rd level spells max.Gah, my bad. I was thinking of the AC bonus they get to add to their abjuration spells.
Bob Loblaw 02-04-07, 10:57 AM	While I doubt this will help, here is an official response from WotC on how Practiced Spellcaster works with Ultimate Magus (posted 11/20/06): http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ask/20061120a Q: Dear Sage, How does the Practiced Spellcaster feat (Complete Arcane) stack with the arcane spell power class feature of the ultimate magus prestige class (Complete Mage)? --Michael A: As noted in the official D&D FAQ, the bonus from Practiced Spellcaster applies whenever it would be most beneficial to the caster. In this case, you’d apply the feat’s benefit before adding the arcane spell power class feature. Note the last sentence. It fully supports all those who are using the "trick." Here is the FAQ explanation of Practiced Spellcaster: Does the bonus to caster level from the Practiced Spellcaster feat (from Complete Arcane and Complete Divine) apply before or after other caster level bonuses (such as those from the Good or Healing domains)? The bonus from Practiced Spellcaster applies whenever it would be most beneficial to the caster. A 4th-level cleric/4th-level fighter with the Healing domain and Practiced Spellcaster would cast Conjuration (Healing) spells as a 9th-level caster (base caster level 4th, +4 from Practiced Spellcaster, +1 from the Healing domain). A 4th-level cleric/4th-level rogue with Practiced Spellcaster who activates bead of karma (from a strand of prayer beads) would cast her spells as a 12th-level caster (base 4, +4 from Practiced Spellcaster, +4 from bead of karma). How does Practiced Spellcaster interact with the wild magic class feature of the wild mage (from Complete Arcane)? The –3 penalty and +1d6 bonus to the wild mage’s caster level are applied as a single step in the process of determining the wild mage’s caster level. Since Practiced Spellcaster’s bonus is always applied when it is most beneficial to the character (see previous answer), a wild mage with Practiced Spellcaster would typically apply the wild magic class feature first (subtracting 3 and adding 1d6 to her caster level) and then add the Practiced Spellcaster benefit, up to a maximum value equal to her character level. For example, if a 5th-level wizard/4th-level wild mage with Practiced Spellcaster rolled a 1 on the 1d6 bonus to her caster level, her caster level for that spell would be 9th (base 9th, –3 from wild magic penalty, +1 from wild magic bonus, +4 from Practiced Spellcaster up to a maximum equal to her character level). If she rolled a 6, her caster level would be 12th (base 9th, –3 from wild magic penalty, +6 from wild magic bonus; the Practiced Spellcaster bonus would not apply since it would increase her caster level above her character level). On the other hand, imagine a wild mage whose caster level (before applying the effects of the wild magic class feature) is less than her character level, such as a wild mage with levels of rogue or other non-spellcasting class. She might well choose to apply the Practiced Spellcaster bonus first, before applying the wild magic modifiers. A rogue 4/wizard 5/wild mage 4 would have a base caster level of 9th before any other modifiers are applied. Adding Practiced Spellcaster’s bonus would increase this to 13th, at which point the penalty and bonus from wild magic would be applied. The Sage recommends that players averse to frequently recalculating caster level avoid playing a character with this combination, as it is likely to cause headaches. More support from WotC that the feat works perfectly for the "trick."
Krevon 02-04-07, 04:39 PM	Thanks for the offical fact bob. I think this just about finishes off the thread unless there is more somewhere to add.
Ryll 02-04-07, 10:15 PM	I don't know if I'd house rule the whole Ultimate Magus + caster level tricks technique or not. Compared to straight wizard, which many people regard as one of the most powerful classes you can take, this PrC has a large number of benefits and rather few detriments. If you were just a human and took Practiced Spellcaster, and didn't use any other caster level tricks, here are the things you'd sacrifice to be an Ultimate Magus (assumes a 20th level build, Sorc 1/Wiz 9/UM 10): You'd end up casting as an 18th level wizard (right? :P I dearly hope after all this time I didn't make a mistake, but let me know if I did), so compared to a 20th level wizard you'd lose two 9th level spell slots, one 8th level spell slot, and one 7th level spell slot (although you'd have 22nd caster level with your wizard spells). You'd end up getting one fewer bonus feat than a 20th level wizard (or two if you count Practiced Spellcaster as a "wasted" feat). Your familiar would have the powers of a 9th level wizard's familiar instead of a 20th (no spell resistance, no scry on familiar, lose +5 natural armor and +5 Intelligence). In exchange for those sacrifices, the benefits are: You'd cast spells as a 9th level Sorcerer, at 17th caster level. Augmented Casting, which I'm seeing isn't as scary as I thought it was. I am with you on everything except where some of the caster level conclusions come from. I am not saying they are wrong, just asking where they come from. I see the Wizard casting as 18th level, but why is it at caster level 22? ...and the Sorcerer casting as a 9th level Sorcerer I see... but I only come up with caster level = 13 (due to Practiced Caster), where does the caster level 17 come from? Basically, I am off in caster level by 4 for both the Wizard and Sorcerer... can someone let me know where they come from? Thanks
betrayor 02-04-07, 10:27 PM	Practiced Spellcaster feat applied to sorcerer.(+ 4 caster level) Ultimate Magus gives a +4 caster level to both of his classes. So Sorcerer has 9+8=17 Caster level and Wizard has 18+4=22 caster level.
Ryll 02-04-07, 11:31 PM	Ultimate Magus gives a +4 caster level to both of his classes. That is the part I did not know...thanks very much :)
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-05-07, 12:49 AM	I have posted a question to the Sage about this exact thing. I typed it out for them. I am waiting on a response.
Bob Loblaw 02-05-07, 01:12 AM	I have posted a question to the Sage about this exact thing. I typed it out for them. I am waiting on a response. The Sage already answered the exact question. Go back to my previous post that has the link and quote. Also, read the FAQ entry that I quoted for more information.
Ventilatory_Threshold 02-05-07, 08:03 AM	The Sage already answered the exact question. Go back to my previous post that has the link and quote. Also, read the FAQ entry that I quoted for more information. Do you honestly think Xun actually reads any of our posts?
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-06-07, 01:12 AM	No that exact question has not been answered. The question from Sage was the Arcane Power class feature stacking with Practiced Spellcaster. Not the +1 to the lowest arcane spellcasting class.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-06-07, 01:12 AM	Do you honestly think Xun actually reads any of our posts? Actually I do read them.
Bob Loblaw 02-06-07, 09:37 AM	So how are the phrases: "the bonus from Practiced Spellcaster applies whenever it would be most beneficial to the caster" and "The bonus from Practiced Spellcaster applies whenever it would be most beneficial to the caster" and "Since Practiced Spellcaster’s bonus is always applied when it is most beneficial to the character..." not the right answers? It is very clear that the intent is to make caster level higher in the most beneficial way to the character. At least that's what is said, so that's what I understand.
Stalos 02-06-07, 06:24 PM	KEEP GOING! DON'T STOP! This is a very entertaining thread, actually informative to those of us who listen to good optimizers and logically convincing builds. I have learned: The Ultimate Magus build, which I hope to use someday The beholder mage trick, that while not something I intent to ever use, is all the same quite cool That some people simple don't understand logic, reason, proof, or rules Thank you Seerow, Tempest, Runestar and the thousands of others who showed me this trick and others.... But especially thank Xun..... Either he is laughing so hard right now at how he lead you all on trying to explain to him the basics of the build, and giggling at the efforts you wasted trying convince him of something he already knows....or rocks can talk, and we are witnessing one do so right now.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-06-07, 11:30 PM	So how are the phrases: "the bonus from Practiced Spellcaster applies whenever it would be most beneficial to the caster" and "The bonus from Practiced Spellcaster applies whenever it would be most beneficial to the caster" and "Since Practiced Spellcaster’s bonus is always applied when it is most beneficial to the character..." not the right answers? It is very clear that the intent is to make caster level higher in the most beneficial way to the character. At least that's what is said, so that's what I understand. It doesn't, unless you work for WoTc and you are a designer, then I will wait a response from them. I don't give a damn what you say or what you think. I have posted my question and like I said i will wait for a response. Breaking the rules 99% of the time does benefit the caster or character.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-06-07, 11:32 PM	KEEP GOING! DON'T STOP! This is a very entertaining thread, actually informative to those of us who listen to good optimizers and logically convincing builds. I have learned: The Ultimate Magus build, which I hope to use someday The beholder mage trick, that while not something I intent to ever use, is all the same quite cool That some people simple don't understand logic, reason, proof, or rules Thank you Seerow, Tempest, Runestar and the thousands of others who showed me this trick and others.... But especially thank Xun..... Either he is laughing so hard right now at how he lead you all on trying to explain to him the basics of the build, and giggling at the efforts you wasted trying convince him of something he already knows....or rocks can talk, and we are witnessing one do so right now. First off it's not basics. The Beholder Mage trick cannot work any newb to D&D can see that. It's clear in the rules. Look under Polymorph any Object. This is what most of you don't get, or you have poor reading comprehension. I know the build i know the build I know many build. I knew the build before I started this thread. Do you people understand???? I hope so. But I think it is used in an illegal way.
Salla 02-06-07, 11:43 PM	First off it's not basics. The Beholder Mage trick cannot work any newb to D&D can see that. It's clear in the rules. Look under Polymorph any Object. This is what most of you don't get, or you have poor reading comprehension. I know the build i know the build I know many build. I knew the build before I started this thread. Do you people understand???? I hope so. But I think it is used in an illegal way. The Beholder Mage trick works perfectly, as has been conclusively proven by people smarter, wiser, nicer, and less bullheaded than you. Like many people who have lost their arguments, you resort to mere contradiction because you can't stand the blow to your ego of being proven wrong. You may be intelligent (I stress the word may), but you are unwise. Seriously. At this point, Gandhi would want to slap the yellow off your teeth.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-07-07, 12:05 AM	The Beholder Mage trick works perfectly, as has been conclusively proven by people smarter, wiser, nicer, and less bullheaded than you. Like many people who have lost their arguments, you resort to mere contradiction because you can't stand the blow to your ego of being proven wrong. You may be intelligent (I stress the word may), but you are unwise. Seriously. At this point, Gandhi would want to slap the yellow off your teeth. No it doesn't. Read the damn feat. it works with the Metamorphosis power. It doesn't say anything about any of the Polymorphs unless the Metamorphosis power is the same as the Polymorphs, I can't remember, then i believe the feat doesn't work with it. In the D&D errata it only mentioned Metamorhposis, but it still doesn't get past the duration aspect. So apparently they aren't smarter, wiser, and nicer. They don't know simple science. A beholder is in no way in the same kingdom as human beings. The permanent duration can't be reached. Maybe you need to read it. I'm not worried about my ego. I really don't care what you think. Last time I checked I wasn't put on this earth to please or impress you.
Tempest Stormwind 02-07-07, 12:36 AM	No it doesn't. Read the damn feat. it works with the Metamorphosis power. It doesn't say anything about any of the Polymorphs. So apparently they aren't smarter, wiser, and nicer. They don't know simple science. A beholder is in no way in the same kingdom as human beings. The permanent duration can't be reached. Maybe you need to read it. I'm not worried about my ego. I really don't care what you think. Last time I checked I wasn't put on this earth to please or impress you. Prerequisite: Wis 13, manifester level 5th. Benefit: Each time you change your form, such as through the metamorphosis power, you gain one of the new form’s supernatural abilities, if it has any. You gain only three uses of the metamorphic ability per day, even if the creature into which you metamorph has a higher limit on uses (you are still subject to other restrictions on the use of the ability.) The save DC to resist a supernatural ability gained through Metamorphic Transfer (if it is an attack) is 10 + your Cha modifier + ˝ your Hit Dice. No matter how many times you manifest the metamorphosis power on a given day, you can gain only a total of three supernatural ability transfers per day. Normal: You cannot use the supernatural abilities of creatures whose form you assume. Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Each time, you can gain one additional supernatural ability. Pertinent quote: "Each time you change your form, [/u]such as[/u] through the metamorphosis power, you gain one of the new form’s supernatural abilities, if it has any." You change your form, using Metamorphosis as an example. That's why it says "SUCH AS" instead of "BY WAY OF" or similar terms. Now, apparently you don't know simple logic. There are three possible classifications for "kingdom" as defined in Polymorph Any Object -- animal, vegetable, or mineral. This is NOT the same as kingdom Animalia, kingom Plantae, or similar biological "kingdoms" in the (arbitrary) taxonomic structure. It's just animal/vegetable/mineral. Given just those three choices, we can easily see that it's not a vegetable or a mineral, therefore it must be an animal. This statement holds for humans and beholders. Thus, the are the same kingdom (+5). We showed you earlier, too: Manifest Expansion before you do this. you're now large (same size, +2). To cast the 8th level PAO, you need an 18 Int minimum -- and therefore you have the same or greater intelligence than the beholder's 17 (same or greater Int, +2). 5+2+2 = 9 = permanent. This was all carried about earlier, by the way, and you've yet to refute it except by saying "no". Thus, I can conclude that you aren't reading (while telling us to read), are acting smart (when you demonstrate that you can't even *add*), and are incapable of following any form of online discussion or rules description. Question, by the way: What did you send CustServ? If your communication skills are this poor, I doubt you asked the question at hand, even if you think you did.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-07-07, 12:41 AM	Pertinent quote: "Each time you change your form, [/u]such as[/u] through the metamorphosis power, you gain one of the new form’s supernatural abilities, if it has any." You change your form, using Metamorphosis as an example. That's why it says "SUCH AS" instead of "BY WAY OF" or similar terms. Now, apparently you don't know simple logic. There are three possible classifications for "kingdom" as defined in Polymorph Any Object -- animal, vegetable, or mineral. This is NOT the same as kingdom Animalia, kingom Plantae, or similar biological "kingdoms" in the (arbitrary) taxonomic structure. It's just animal/vegetable/mineral. Given just those three choices, we can easily see that it's not a vegetable or a mineral, therefore it must be an animal. This statement holds for humans and beholders. Thus, the are the same kingdom (+5). We showed you earlier, too: Manifest Expansion before you do this. you're now large (same size, +2). To cast the 8th level PAO, you need an 18 Int minimum -- and therefore you have the same or greater intelligence than the beholder's 17 (same or greater Int, +2). 5+2+2 = 9 = permanent. This was all carried about earlier, by the way, and you've yet to refute it except by saying "no". Thus, I can conclude that you aren't reading (while telling us to read), are acting smart (when you demonstrate that you can't even *add*), and are incapable of following any form of online discussion or rules description. Question, by the way: What did you send CustServ? If your communication skills are this poor, I doubt you asked the question at hand, even if you think you did. It is an not animal. An aberration is not in the same kingdom as a human. Read Lords of Madness. Can you prove that a human and a beholder are in the same kingdom?
Tempest Stormwind 02-07-07, 12:51 AM	It is not animal. An aberration is not in the same kingdom as a human. Read Lords of Madness. Correct. HOWEVER: Reread Polymorph Any Object. It defines "kingdom" for purposes of the spell as "Animal, vegetable, or mineral". If you can accept two different definitions for "kingdom" (land ruled by a king / largest grouping of life in biological taxonomy), then why can't you accept that Polymorph Any Object defines it differently? The part of the spell that would reference what Lords of Madness is talking about would be "Same kind of creature". Humanoid is NOT the same kind as Aberration (though since neither are vegetable nor mineral, both are 'animals' despite not being of type Animal). Thus, the +2 for "same kind" doesn't apply.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-07-07, 12:52 AM	Pertinent quote: "Each time you change your form, [/u]such as[/u] through the metamorphosis power, you gain one of the new form’s supernatural abilities, if it has any." You change your form, using Metamorphosis as an example. That's why it says "SUCH AS" instead of "BY WAY OF" or similar terms. Now, apparently you don't know simple logic. There are three possible classifications for "kingdom" as defined in Polymorph Any Object -- animal, vegetable, or mineral. This is NOT the same as kingdom Animalia, kingom Plantae, or similar biological "kingdoms" in the (arbitrary) taxonomic structure. It's just animal/vegetable/mineral. Given just those three choices, we can easily see that it's not a vegetable or a mineral, therefore it must be an animal. This statement holds for humans and beholders. Thus, the are the same kingdom (+5). We showed you earlier, too: Manifest Expansion before you do this. you're now large (same size, +2). To cast the 8th level PAO, you need an 18 Int minimum -- and therefore you have the same or greater intelligence than the beholder's 17 (same or greater Int, +2). 5+2+2 = 9 = permanent. This was all carried about earlier, by the way, and you've yet to refute it except by saying "no". Thus, I can conclude that you aren't reading (while telling us to read), are acting smart (when you demonstrate that you can't even *add*), and are incapable of following any form of online discussion or rules description. Question, by the way: What did you send CustServ? If your communication skills are this poor, I doubt you asked the question at hand, even if you think you did. If my communications skills are poor? Damn why can't you people grow up? I get tired of the smart$%s comments.
Tempest Stormwind 02-07-07, 12:56 AM	Please stop quoting people's posts to reply to one part, then posting a second copy of that post to reply to another, and so on. It's very. Freaking. Annoying. It's a waste of server resources. It's just RUDE. And it exemplifies the poor skills I was talking about earlier. You know what else does? Changing the topic. You asked me to prove that Human->Beholder was permanent. I have made my case for that. Either you will refute it, or you will accept it. Anything else is changing the topic, and you can't weasel out of this one.
runestar 02-07-07, 01:10 AM	BTW, where is the reply from custservice? I usually get my replies within 1-2 days. It has been what? A week?:confused: And could you post the original question you asked them as well?:) If my communications skills are poor? Damn why can't you people grow up? I get tired of the smart$%s comments. To be fair, it does not mean they are wrong, you know...:P Combating a personal attack with another personal attack does nothing to disprove the former. In fact, it might only end up proving the original claim right...
Broken vacuum 02-07-07, 09:37 AM	There are three possible classifications for "kingdom" as defined in Polymorph Any Object -- animal, vegetable, or mineral. This is NOT the same as kingdom Animalia, kingom Plantae, or similar biological "kingdoms" in the (arbitrary) taxonomic structure. It's just animal/vegetable/mineral. Given just those three choices, we can easily see that it's not a vegetable or a mineral, therefore it must be an animal. This statement holds for humans and beholders. Thus, the are the same kingdom (+5). Although I am not really interested in debating the larger issue of beholder mage or not, I find the above logic somewhat suspect. You assume that these three 'kingdoms' cover all possibilities, but criteria are not given of any kind, so this assumption cannot be taken as a given in all cases. Potentially someone could regard an object as not being a member of any of the classes when doing an active comparison to them all. Just trying to match an object to two of the classes does not cut if you do not have a positive match in other words. As an easy example, consider someone trying to place a fungus in these three categories using your method. 1. It is not an animal. 2. It is not a vegetable. Therefore it must be a mineral. Of course, had the person gone on to see if it is reasonable to consider the fungus a mineral, he would probably have said no there as well. As a result he would have to expand his view on one of the categories. Taking a step back and looking at your approach to the issue also reveals that you have no objective grounds for claiming that someone is wrong when they claim that a Beholder is not an animal. As long as they are ready to incorporate it in either the vegetable or the mineral 'kingdom', they are just as right as you are.
Bob Loblaw 02-07-07, 10:30 AM	It is an not animal. An aberration is not in the same kingdom as a human. Read Lords of Madness. Can you prove that a human and a beholder are in the same kingdom? I did as you asked, and I cannot find anything that states beholders (or any other abberation) are not animals. How are you defining "kingdom." This may be where the confusion is coming from on both sides. From my somewhat limited knowledge in this area, I have found that there are really only 3 kingdoms but a 4th could be considered (for the micro world). Animal: A multicellular organism of the kingdom Animalia, differing from plants in certain typical characteristics such as capacity for locomotion, nonphotosynthetic metabolism, pronounced response to stimuli, restricted growth, and fixed bodily structure. Plant: Any of various photosynthetic, eukaryotic, multicellular organisms of the kingdom Plantae characteristically producing embryos, containing chloroplasts, having cellulose cell walls, and lacking the power of locomotion. Mineral: A substance that is neither animal nor vegetable; inorganic matter. So, using these definitions, strangely enough, an amoeba is a mineral. However, I think we can agree that since the beholder is not single-celled, it can fall into one of the three categories. Let's work through them: Animal? Probably. It fits the criteria. Plant? Well, it doesn't have cellulose cell walls and does not have chloroplasts (used for photosynthesis) so it can't be a plant. Mineral? Since it could be an animal, why make it a mineral? This wouldn't make any sense. Using this criteria, it looks like the beholder is an animal.
rironin 02-07-07, 10:58 AM	Although I am not really interested in debating the larger issue of beholder mage or not, I find the above logic somewhat suspect.You've got a point there. I don't think that that is what's preventing the discussion from going forward, as I don't think the clarification will make Xun change his mind, but your whole post is very valid. Still, having good logic makes us happy even if it doesn't do much for our case, so I'll try to extend it a bit. Xun, the assumption almost everyone in this argument is making is that the reference to "Same kingdom (animal, vegetable, mineral)" in the polymorph any object description is referencing three categories that have been classically used to define everything. Since we can't make any assumptions about the ground rules, I wanted to find out where "animal, vegetable, mineral" came from, and why most of us take it to mean three categories that cover everything in the world. It looks like wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chovot_ha-Levavot) is intimating that the first person to divide the world up into these three kingdoms was the Jewish philosopher Bahya ibn Paquda, who wrote in the year 1040 AD:The world is beautifully arranged and furnished like a great house, of which the sky forms the ceiling, the earth the floor, the stars the lamps, and man is the proprietor, to whom the three kingdoms—the animal, the vegetable, and the mineral—are submitted for use, each of these being composed of the four elements. Nor does the celestial sphere, composed of a fifth element —"Quinta Essentia," according to Aristotle, and of fire, according to others—make an exception. These four elements themselves are composed of matter and form, of substance and accidental qualities, such as warmth and cold, state of motion and of rest, and so forth.Bahya ibn Paquda is pretty clear here I think, as even the "celestial sphere" made of some crazy element is not an exception - everything is a member of one of the three kingdoms. That's a bit of an archaic reference, I know, but I was looking for the origins. Most people, myself included, probably remember the reference to "animal vegetable or mineral" from the game 20 Questions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal%2C_vegetable_or_mineral). However, some people include an "other" category when they play, which would actually support Xun, since one could easily claim beholders belong in the "other" category. Of course, the spell description doesn't list an "other" category. Xun, how do you define "animal, vegetable, mineral" ? I am trying to think of, in D&D, what these definitions would be, and nothing really makes sense. Tempest Stormwind and others, working from the assumption that all things in the D&D world fit into one of the three categories of animal, vegetable or mineral, look at a beholder and have decided that the beholder is more like an animal than a vegetable or a mineral. Therefore they put it in the animal category. You seem to be assuming that the three categories do not encompass all things in the D&D world, since you haven't claimed that beholders are vegetables, and you haven't claimed that beholders are minerals. You just said they aren't animals, which I think means you believe one of two things: either the three kingdoms suggested are not the only kingdoms that can qualify for the +2 bonus, or there are only three kingdoms but they are not inclusive, and some creatures like the beholder do not belong in any of them. If you are assuming that the three kingdoms are only examples, and that there are other kingdoms, that's very difficult to figure out - I mean, what kingdom does a beholder go in then? What about a dragon? An elemental? An earth-based gem creature? An ingot of negative energy from the Negative Energy Plane? If you're suggesting that there's some sort of kingdom/phylum/class/order system in D&D laid out to describe everything in the D&D universe... I'm not aware of one, and I wouldn't want to make one up, because it would be completely arbitrary. Perhaps you were thinking that it meant creatures had to be the same type? Except that that would be a very explicit rule expressed easily by saying "creature of the same type" - if that was what they meant, wouldn't they say it? Even if that is what you think they meant, we're talking about RAW here, and that's not what they wrote. The other alternative is that you don't think a beholder is an animal, or a vegetable, or a mineral, and therefore it doesn't fit into any of the kingdoms listed. This has its own problems. If a beholder doesn't fit into any of the three kingdoms, animal, vegetable, or mineral, then no one can get the bonus for being in the same kingdom when they polymorph into a beholder, even another beholder. Shouldn't a beholder polymorphing into a slightly different beholder get the bonus? There is also the problem of defining what is and isn't an animal. You said a beholder isn't an animal, it's an aberration. Well, a human isn't an animal (type) in D&D, it's a humanoid. Does that mean a human polymorphing into an elf shouldn't get the duration bonus for being in the same kingdom, since neither are animals? Where do you draw the line, and how do you defend that line with anything more than your own random opinion? Tempest Stormwind's, and pretty much everyone else's, method of putting everything into one of three categories makes it a lot easier to agree on things. If we assume that a beholder has to be one of the three, it's pretty easy to make the case for it being an animal: it's alive, it can be killed, it's a creature that shares many physical characteristics of other animals like eyes and a mouth, it presumably eats (meat, by the look of the teeth). It has almost no similarities to a "mineral," whether you define a mineral as anything non-living or use a strict geological interpretation. Beholders lack many vegetable characteristics: they don't grow in the ground, they don't use photosynthesis, etc. For beholders, it's tough to argue that animal isn't the best category if you assume it has to go in one category of the three. Obviously this method can run into trouble sometimes - are earth elementals animals or minerals? Is an intelligent sword a creature/animal or a non-living mineral? Still, there are far fewer ambiguities in the way Tempest and others want to interpret it than the other possibility mentioned above, where each DM needs to build the boundaries from the ground up and decide whether a creature is one of the three categories he just arbitrarily defined, or none. The D&D world is filled with creatures that are sort of animals and kinda vegetables - deciding whether these half and half creatures are animals or just outside the boundary of animal-ness is practically impossible. Kingdom\phylum\etc species naming is itself admittedly somewhat arbitrary and scientists argue over where things should go in the real world. Applying some similar model to a world where centaurs, pegasi, and other half-bred or completely fantastical creatures roam the earth is insane. I suggest that you send this one to the Customer Service people as well, Xun. Just ask them if, for the purposes of this spell, a human mage and a beholder are both classified as "animals." I would like to know what they say.
Salla 02-07-07, 11:37 AM	No it doesn't. Read the damn feat. it works with the Metamorphosis power. It doesn't say anything about any of the Polymorphs unless the Metamorphosis power is the same as the Polymorphs, I can't remember, then i believe the feat doesn't work with it. In the D&D errata it only mentioned Metamorhposis, but it still doesn't get past the duration aspect. So apparently they aren't smarter, wiser, and nicer. They don't know simple science. A beholder is in no way in the same kingdom as human beings. The permanent duration can't be reached. Maybe you need to read it. I'm not worried about my ego. I really don't care what you think. Last time I checked I wasn't put on this earth to please or impress you. A beholder is neither a vegetable nor a mineral, therefore it is an animal, like a human being. It's a simple as that, but apparently not as simple as you.
Salla 02-07-07, 11:38 AM	If my communications skills are poor? Damn why can't you people grow up? I get tired of the smart$%s comments. If you're tired of us being smartasses, quit being a dumbass.
Kary Wanzer 02-07-07, 11:52 AM	I don't give a damn what you say or what you think. :r: Then why did you even bother posting on these boards to begin with? The only possible reason for joining an online community like this is specifically that you must care about what others say or think. It is an not animal. An aberration is not in the same kingdom as a human. Read Lords of Madness. Can you prove that a human and a beholder are in the same kingdom? Kingdom != creature type. As far as creature types (a purely in-game distinction) are concerned, yes, humans are humanoids (human), and beholders are aberrations. But with regards to biological kingdoms, which is what certain spells care about, humans are animals, and I would dare say that beholders are much more like animals, than they are like plants or minerals. For the purpose of kingdoms, aberrations, animals, dragons, giants, humanoids, magical beasts, monstrous humanoids, and most outsiders probably all count as animals. Plant monsters count as plants (or fungi, which IIRC is its own kingdom?), constructs count as minerals, and I suppose different elementals fall into different kingdoms. " I am the bane of all that is good, I am the weilder of Angelsbane, I am Xun Val'Dorl of House Kilsek. The good and rightous fear me, they have good reason to". Apparently, you're also the bane of all that is intelligent and logical. :b:
Ventilatory_Threshold 02-07-07, 11:59 AM	If you're tired of us being smartasses, quit being a dumbass. I'm very tempted to sig that. You deserved a cookie... nay, pie! NO, you get a: http://www.yahoocake.com/images/cakesx350/CCC-CookiePie-350.jpg
Kary Wanzer 02-07-07, 12:09 PM	:drool: ZOMG COOKIE PIE! (Breaks into VT's and/or Salla's house(s) to steal it.) :D
Davith Bothain 02-07-07, 06:29 PM	Seriously. At this point, Gandhi would want to slap the yellow off your teeth. I don't know why, but this one made milk shoot out of my nose. Oh, and I've e-mailed CustServ myself on the chance (considerable, I believe) that Xun has either not done so or has and is holding back the answer. It asks both how Practiced Spellcaster interacts with Ultimate Magus and whether the beholder belongs in the same kingdom as a human for the purpose of the Polymorphs. ...Of course, it could be claimed by some logically-elusive individuals (:rolleyes:) that Customer Service would, in the end, not be "official" because it "wouldn't come from a Wizards writer". Just predicting another end-run.
Ventilatory_Threshold 02-07-07, 07:01 PM	:drool: ZOMG COOKIE PIE! (Breaks into VT's and/or Salla's house(s) to steal it.) :D Breaking into houses is perfectly legal as long as you there is cookie pie involved. It says so in the 5th amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Tempest Stormwind 02-07-07, 07:10 PM	Davith: Did you ask "how does Practiced Spellcaster interact with the Ultimate Magus," or did you specifically mention the casting progression and using it to steer UM toward one class or the other? If you asked the former, they'll just say it stacks with the boosted caster level.
LilJaguar 02-07-07, 08:09 PM	Hiya. I've got a little notion regarding combining Sublime Chord with Ultimate Magus, and thought I'd throw it out there for people to debunk, and or improve. I am embarrassed to admit this is basically my first posting to the forums, as I mostly find that others have said what I feel before me, and I mostly use the forums to glean benefits from the wisdom of others (leech off their good ideas). The idea comes from the Sublime Chord's spellcasting abilities, which adds the Sublime Chord level to the level of one other arcane caster. I have assumed, perhaps wrongly, that taking prestige classes that "gain new spells per day and an increase in caster level" will add with your Sublime Chord level for this purpose, but am willing to entertain rebuttal on that point. The Sublime Chord wording also is ambiguous in that it suggests ALL arcane casting uses the [SC+ one other class] caster level, which with the ultimate magus would allow for truly spectacular caster levels... but I have prepared this proposed advancement on the basis that not all arcane classes use the [SC + one other class] caster level. Here goes: Level Casting Bard/S Chord (CL) Casting Wizard (CL) 1 Bard 1 (1) - Prac SC: B 2 Wizard 1 (2) 1 (1) 3 Wizard 1 (3) 2 (2) 4 Wizard 1 (4) 3 (3) 5 Bard 2 (5) 3 (3) 6 Ultimate Magus 2 (6) 4 (4) 7 Ultimate Magus 3 (7) 5 (5) 8 Ultimate Magus 4 (8) 6 (6) 9 Ultimate Magus 4 (8) 7 (7) 10 Ultimate Magus 5 (8) 8 (8) 11 Sublime Chord 5 / 1 (10) 8 (8) 12 Ultimate Magus 5 / 2 (11) 9 (9) 13 Ultimate Magus 5 / 2 (11) 10 (10) 14 Ultimate Magus 5 / 3 (12) 11 (11) 15 Ultimate Magus 5 / 4 (13) 12 (12) 16 Ultimate Magus 5 / 5 (14) 13 (13) (add any 4 arcane caster prestiges after this point boosting Wizard) What this gives you is a Chr / Int set of casting classes, 17th level casting in wizard at 20th, and 5/5 in bard/sublime [3/3/1 spells/day bard, max 2nd; 0/0/0/0/3/3/2/1 in sublime, max 7th, which can be bard or Sorceror]. The sublime spells, though you don't get many, are paradise for metamagic. Persistent spell is only 6 spell levels, and having persistent improved invisibility , or if you are more martially inclined, [I]Wraithstrike, can make a substantial difference. And you are set up for epic when Intensify Spell becomes an option if that's your style. Of course, you're 14th level before Sublime Chord gives you a 6th to play with, and uless your charisma is stupendous you'll never get very many, so this isn't exactly overpowered. Basically this would seem best with a human with the Able Learner feat at first to help meet the skill requirements for Sublime Chord. But if you want more power in the end, with a less bard spells at lower levels... Level Casting Bard/S Chord (CL) Casting Wizard (CL) 1 Bard 1 (1) - 2 Wizard 1 (2) 1 (1) 3 Wizard 1 (3) 2 (2) 4 Wizard 1 (4) 3 (3) 5 Bard 2 (5) 3 (3) 6 Ultimate Magus 2 (6) 4 (4) 7 Unseen Seer 2 (6) 5 (5) 8 Unseen Seer 2 (7) 6 (6) 9 Unseen Seer 2 (8) 7 (7) 10 Unseen Seer 2 (9) 8 (8) 11 Sublime Chord 2 / 1 (7) 8 (8) Prac SC: SC 12 Ultimate Magus 2 / 2 (12) 9 (9) 13 Ultimate Magus 2 / 3 (13) 10 (10) 14 Ultimate Magus 2 / 3 (13) 11 (11) 15 Ultimate Magus 2 / 4 (14) 12 (12) 16 Ultimate Magus 2 / 5 (15) 13 (13) 17 Ultimate Magus 2 / 5 (15) 14 (14) 18 Ultimate Magus 2 / 6 (16) 15 (15) 19 Ultimate Magus 2 / 7 (17) 16 (16) 20 Ultimate Magus 2 / 8 (18) 17 (17) You end up with a much nicer combination of 1st level bard spells, 8th level suublime chord spells, and 9th level wizard. Practice spellcaster is taken a second time at 12th level for sublime chord - it's technically a different spellcasting class - preventing any more wizard spell progression loss. Or you could, of course, settle for a few sublime chord 9ths instead, and not take the practiced spellcaster, causing UM to give you Sublime levels instead of wizard... personally I prefer the wizard, but whatever tickles. I guess you could use any full caster class in place of unseen seer, too, but 6 skills/level and ability to take a divination spell from another class are pretty nice things to have, and the +/- 1 CL is not going to be a big difference. For 9th and 10th, Abjurant champion is an intriguing option if your DM allows fractional base attacks from multiple classes to stack, but it would require a feat [Combat casting; the weapon proficiency requirement is provided by bard], an acceptable cost for the +2 mage armour/Shield AC and ability to cast first level abjurations as swifts. So there is the basic idea, in 2 forms. I'd certainly appreciate any refinement/refutal others could offer. . . . * with a weary sigh * I also feel morbidly compelled to point out that Xun seems to gain some perverse pleasure from aggravating people, so responding to him is likely to reward his bad behaviour. [I am aware of the irony of responding myself :embarrass ]
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-07-07, 09:02 PM	Well real quick just to get the Beholder mage issue to a close. The build will not definitly work because you as a beholder will not have your flight ability. Flight is an extraordinary special ability. According to the Polymorph and Polymorph any Object you only gain extraordinary attacks such as improved grab, poison etc... Since you don't have flight you are not a true beholder. Having an item that will cause you to fly will not qualify you for the PrC.
Tempest Stormwind 02-07-07, 10:15 PM	Well real quick just to get the Beholder mage issue to a close. The build will not definitly work because you as a beholder will not have your flight ability. Flight is an extraordinary special ability. According to the Polymorph and Polymorph any Object you only gain extraordinary attacks such as improved grab, poison etc... Since you don't have flight you are not a true beholder. Having an item that will cause you to fly will not qualify you for the PrC.You're reaching -- the mark of a desperate man. Show me where it says you have to have everything they have to be a true beholder. If I Polymorph Any Object my gnome mage into a human, and then cast Unfettered Heroism (which humans cast at +1 caster level), I get it at the +1 caster level, even if I don't have the human's bonus skill points or feats (and actually, if you believe the sage, changing into a human *does* grant you the feat and skill points).
Davith Bothain 02-07-07, 10:27 PM	Davith: Did you ask "how does Practiced Spellcaster interact with the Ultimate Magus," or did you specifically mention the casting progression and using it to steer UM toward one class or the other? If you asked the former, they'll just say it stacks with the boosted caster level. "Does the caster level bonus from the feat Practiced Spellcaster interact with the spellcasting progression of the prestige class Ultimate Magus? Specifically, could a lower-level spellcasting class (given, say, a Sorcerer1/Wizard4) have its caster level increased so that the higher-level class' spellcasting progresses fully?", said I. ...Ah, dang... I just realized I screwed up the levels when I sent the message... I should probably re-send the message with the correct ones, I suppose, then, eh? EDIT: Sorry about the above. I loaded up the first page to make sure my facts were right after I sent the message and saw the first level combination available and panicked.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-07-07, 10:45 PM	You're reaching -- the mark of a desperate man. Show me where it says you have to have everything they have to be a true beholder. If I Polymorph Any Object my gnome mage into a human, and then cast Unfettered Heroism (which humans cast at +1 caster level), I get it at the +1 caster level, even if I don't have the human's bonus skill points or feats (and actually, if you believe the sage, changing into a human *does* grant you the feat and skill points). Man you really need some help if you don't know the rules. You really need to read Lords of Madness under the beholder section. Also read the monster manual for beholder. It will show you characteristics of the beholder. All-around vision and flight are two of them.
runestar 02-07-07, 10:47 PM	Well real quick just to get the Beholder mage issue to a close. The build will not definitly work because you as a beholder will not have your flight ability. Flight is an extraordinary special ability. According to the Polymorph and Polymorph any Object you only gain extraordinary attacks such as improved grab, poison etc... Since you don't have flight you are not a true beholder. Having an item that will cause you to fly will not qualify you for the PrC. Even if it does not fly, there is nothing in the beholder mage prc which says that it must fly. It merely states "beholder", not "beholder that can and must fly". Are you are beholder? If yes, then you can take the prc, regardless of how you qualified as a beholder. That and I believe that polymorph grants you the beholder's fly speed as well. And that still does not answer the original question. Really, what is with all these red herrings?
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-08-07, 02:04 AM	Even if it does not fly, there is nothing in the beholder mage prc which says that it must fly. It merely states "beholder", not "beholder that can and must fly". Are you are beholder? If yes, then you can take the prc, regardless of how you qualified as a beholder. That and I believe that polymorph grants you the beholder's fly speed as well. And that still does not answer the original question. Really, what is with all these red herrings? Dude are you daft? To be a true beholder you do have to fly. And no you do not get the fly ability of the beholder. Read the spell. You are not granted the extraordinary qualities of the form. But you do with extraordinary attacks such as Improved Grab. Oh I see, now that your bubble has been burst you don't want to admit it.
Flamewarrior 02-08-07, 02:55 AM	Dude are you daft? To be a true beholder you do have to fly.Man, things in D&D work off qualifiers - if you qualify as an elf, your inability to detect secret doors doesn't matter: elfbane axes gain damage against you, no questions asked. Second, MiloHobo says it well: logic probably was banned from D&D in some errata (since so little looks like in the real world). And, if you must: if for being anything one needs to have every expected ability, then the unfortunate people who have the misfortune of being born without legs aren't people at all, sure? I think your bubble has been burst by now.
runestar 02-08-07, 03:48 AM	Duplicate post - stupid forum made only part of my original post show up.
runestar 02-08-07, 03:49 AM	Dude are you daft? To be a true beholder you do have to fly. And no you do not get the fly ability of the beholder. Read the spell. You are not granted the extraordinary qualities of the form. But you do with extraordinary attacks such as Improved Grab. Oh I see, now that your bubble has been burst you don't want to admit it. Not really. You may need to be a beholder in order to fly(amongst many other choices), but you do not need to fly to be a beholder. It's like claiming that while all apples are fruits, but not all fruits have to be apples. A beholder is still of the beholder race, regardless of whether it can fly or not. Are you saying that if I use the trait removal spell from Serpent Kingdoms to strip a beholder of its flight extraordinary ability, it suddenly becomes "less" of the beholder type and automatically disqualifies for the beholder mage prc, thereby losing all its benefits if it already had lvs in said prc? I will concede on the inability of the polymorph spell to grant extraordinary flight. However, it still does not change the original point - that you can use PAO to turn yourself into a beholder and qualify for the beholder mage prc. With respect to fly, you can use the fly spell to duplicate flight. Or crawl along at 5ft speed. Still, the main point still stands - that it does work. Flight or no flight.
kcinlive 02-08-07, 11:46 AM	http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=727042
LilJaguar 02-08-07, 02:47 PM	Hiya. I've got a little notion regarding combining Sublime Chord with Ultimate Magus, and thought I'd throw it out there for people to debunk, and or improve. I am embarrassed to admit this is basically my first posting to the forums, as I mostly find that others have said what I feel before me, and I mostly use the forums to glean benefits from the wisdom of others (leech off their good ideas). The idea comes from the Sublime Chord's spellcasting abilities, which adds the Sublime Chord level to the level of one other arcane caster. I have assumed, perhaps wrongly, that taking prestige classes that "gain new spells per day and an increase in caster level" will add with your Sublime Chord level for this purpose, but am willing to entertain rebuttal on that point. The Sublime Chord wording also is ambiguous in that it suggests ALL arcane casting uses the [SC+ one other class] caster level, which with the ultimate magus would allow for truly spectacular caster levels... but I have prepared this proposed advancement on the basis that not all arcane classes use the [SC + one other class] caster level. Here goes: Level Casting Bard/S Chord (CL) Casting Wizard (CL) 1 Bard 1 (1) - Prac SC: B 2 Wizard 1 (2) 1 (1) 3 Wizard 1 (3) 2 (2) 4 Wizard 1 (4) 3 (3) 5 Bard 2 (5) 3 (3) 6 Ultimate Magus 2 (6) 4 (4) 7 Ultimate Magus 3 (7) 5 (5) 8 Ultimate Magus 4 (8) 6 (6) 9 Ultimate Magus 4 (8) 7 (7) 10 Ultimate Magus 5 (8) 8 (8) 11 Sublime Chord 5 / 1 (10) 8 (8) 12 Ultimate Magus 5 / 2 (11) 9 (9) 13 Ultimate Magus 5 / 2 (11) 10 (10) 14 Ultimate Magus 5 / 3 (12) 11 (11) 15 Ultimate Magus 5 / 4 (13) 12 (12) 16 Ultimate Magus 5 / 5 (14) 13 (13) (add any 4 arcane caster prestiges after this point boosting Wizard) What this gives you is a Chr / Int set of casting classes, 17th level casting in wizard at 20th, and 5/5 in bard/sublime [3/3/1 spells/day bard, max 2nd; 0/0/0/0/3/3/2/1 in sublime, max 7th, which can be bard or Sorceror]. The sublime spells, though you don't get many, are paradise for metamagic. Persistent spell is only 6 spell levels, and having persistent improved invisibility , or if you are more martially inclined, [I]Wraithstrike, can make a substantial difference. And you are set up for epic when Intensify Spell becomes an option if that's your style. Of course, you're 14th level before Sublime Chord gives you a 6th to play with, and uless your charisma is stupendous you'll never get very many, so this isn't exactly overpowered. Basically this would seem best with a human with the Able Learner feat at first to help meet the skill requirements for Sublime Chord. But if you want more power in the end, with a less bard spells at lower levels... Level Casting Bard/S Chord (CL) Casting Wizard (CL) 1 Bard 1 (1) - 2 Wizard 1 (2) 1 (1) 3 Wizard 1 (3) 2 (2) 4 Wizard 1 (4) 3 (3) 5 Bard 2 (5) 3 (3) 6 Ultimate Magus 2 (6) 4 (4) 7 Unseen Seer 2 (6) 5 (5) 8 Unseen Seer 2 (7) 6 (6) 9 Unseen Seer 2 (8) 7 (7) 10 Unseen Seer 2 (9) 8 (8) 11 Sublime Chord 2 / 1 (7) 8 (8) Prac SC: SC 12 Ultimate Magus 2 / 2 (12) 9 (9) 13 Ultimate Magus 2 / 3 (13) 10 (10) 14 Ultimate Magus 2 / 3 (13) 11 (11) 15 Ultimate Magus 2 / 4 (14) 12 (12) 16 Ultimate Magus 2 / 5 (15) 13 (13) 17 Ultimate Magus 2 / 5 (15) 14 (14) 18 Ultimate Magus 2 / 6 (16) 15 (15) 19 Ultimate Magus 2 / 7 (17) 16 (16) 20 Ultimate Magus 2 / 8 (18) 17 (17) You end up with a much nicer combination of 1st level bard spells, 8th level suublime chord spells, and 9th level wizard. Practice spellcaster is taken a second time at 12th level for sublime chord - it's technically a different spellcasting class - preventing any more wizard spell progression loss. Or you could, of course, settle for a few sublime chord 9ths instead, and not take the practiced spellcaster, causing UM to give you Sublime levels instead of wizard... personally I prefer the wizard, but whatever tickles. I guess you could use any full caster class in place of unseen seer, too, but 6 skills/level and ability to take a divination spell from another class are pretty nice things to have, and the +/- 1 CL is not going to be a big difference. For 9th and 10th, Abjurant champion is an intriguing option if your DM allows fractional base attacks from multiple classes to stack, but it would require a feat [Combat casting; the weapon proficiency requirement is provided by bard], an acceptable cost for the +2 mage armour/Shield AC and ability to cast first level abjurations as swifts. So there is the basic idea, in 2 forms. I'd certainly appreciate any refinement/refutal others could offer. . . . * with a weary sigh * I also feel morbidly compelled to point out that Xun seems to gain some perverse pleasure from aggravating people, so responding to him is likely to reward his bad behaviour. [I am aware of the irony of responding myself :embarrass ]
LilJaguar 02-08-07, 02:50 PM	Sorry about that... I don't even know HOW i did it...
Davith Bothain 02-08-07, 05:45 PM	Well, oddly enough, the answer from CustServ in regards to the beholder issue both supports and debunks Xun's position. In regards to the question "For the purpose of determining the effect and duration of the Polymorph Any Object spell, would a beholder belong in the same "kingdom" as a human being?", they answered "Unfortunately the rules regarding classification for the polymorph any object spell are somewhat vague in this regard. Ultimately it would be up to your DM to decide.". Basically, they themselves fall victim to this very problem and, accordingly, have left it up to us to slug out the ambiguity. But, happy us, it's rules supported ambiguity. So, Xun, go on banning this trick from your game until eternity's end or open revolt and subsequent coup. The rest of us, if your DM allows (which effectively equates to "if you wish" for rules purposes), run with it.
Ventilatory_Threshold 02-08-07, 07:43 PM	You know, if a player asked me to let him play a Beholder Mage using that trick, I'd laugh really hard. Then I'd let him. I can't help it, I find insolence incredibly funny and anyone who acts that way towards me automatically goes up a notch in my opinion.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-08-07, 10:19 PM	Well, oddly enough, the answer from CustServ in regards to the beholder issue both supports and debunks Xun's position. In regards to the question "For the purpose of determining the effect and duration of the Polymorph Any Object spell, would a beholder belong in the same "kingdom" as a human being?", they answered "Unfortunately the rules regarding classification for the polymorph any object spell are somewhat vague in this regard. Ultimately it would be up to your DM to decide.". Basically, they themselves fall victim to this very problem and, accordingly, have left it up to us to slug out the ambiguity. But, happy us, it's rules supported ambiguity. So, Xun, go on banning this trick from your game until eternity's end or open revolt and subsequent coup. The rest of us, if your DM allows (which effectively equates to "if you wish" for rules purposes), run with it. Well the subject of Flight is another roadblock that blocks that stupid trick from working. A Polymorphed individual isn't granted extraordinary qualities such as beholder's Flight.
rironin 02-08-07, 11:49 PM	Well the subject of Flight is another roadblock that blocks that stupid trick from working. A Polymorphed individual isn't granted extraordinary qualities such as beholder's Flight.How do you keep blithely copying and pasting the same posts as if they're new ideas?? Another roadblock?? It's the same post you made less than 24 hours ago!! And since then runestar and Flamewarrior have both made posts directly responding to the last post you made. Please address them! They're making these posts for you. Flamewarrior says: A human who polymorphs into an elf does not gain an elf's extraordinary special qualities, which include the ability to detect secret doors. But they're still affected by weapons that do special harm to elves, have elven blood, and are humanoids of the race elf. Are you saying they couldn't take a prestige class or use an item that is only available to elves? Additionally, if an elf (a real, true elf, not a polymorphed one) became blind it would lose Low-light vision, which is an extraordinary special quality. Do you believe it is no longer an elf? runestar says: Building on the elf example, there are even ways in the rules to take a beholder and strip it of its extraordinary ability to fly. Clearly it's still a beholder. There is no reason in the world (that I can think of; if you're holding back something, Xun, please tell us) why such a flightless beholder shouldn't be able to take the beholder mage prestige class, or use a magical item from Lords of Madness that's only usable by beholders, or get the special beholder discount at the movie theater. It's a beholder. So if someone could polymorph into a beholder that can't fly, why isn't it still a beholder? I'm not saying I want people to do this. No one is. But logic is logic, man. Refute their positions or go home :P
Davith Bothain 02-09-07, 02:50 PM	Double post.
Davith Bothain 02-09-07, 02:51 PM	Ho-HA! Victory! Assuming Sor 1/Wiz 4 w/Practiced Spellcaster (sorcerer), this is what your CLs would be at various levels: Before Ultimate Magus: Sor CL 5 (base 1 for class, +4 for feat), Wiz CL 4 (from class) Ultimate Magus 1: Sor CL 5, Wiz CL 5 (UM adds +1 to Wiz ‘cause it’s lower. UM 2: Sor 6, Wiz 6 UM 3: Sor 7, Wiz 7 UM 4: +1 to either (they’re tied for lowest; I’ll assume Wiz but the choice is ultimately moot in the long term) UM 5: Sor 8, Wiz 9 UM 6: Sor 9, Wiz 10 UM 7: Sor 10, Wiz 10 (regardless of your choice at UM 4, now they’re equal) UM 8: Sor 11, Wiz 11 UM 9: Sor 12, Wiz 12 UM 10: Sor 13, Wiz 13 So at 15th level, your Sor 1/Wiz 4/UM 10 has the spell progression and CL of a 13th level wizard, the spell progression of a 9th-level sorcerer, and the CL of a 13th-level sorcerer (from Practiced Spellcaster). Add 4 more levels of wizard and at 19th level you can cast 9th level spells. Hopefully this clears things up. (Ode to Joy plays)
rironin 02-09-07, 02:59 PM	(Ode to Joy plays)Huzzah! With the tiny minor detail that they forgot to boost the CL for both wiz and sorc due to the UM's arcane spell power thingy, but apart from that, good times. Okay, Xun, how long have you had the exact same response sitting in your Inbox? :P
Anaxander 02-10-07, 02:47 PM	Ho-HA! Victory! Of course, it is not a true official erratum... :evillaugh
Davith Bothain 02-10-07, 04:14 PM	Well aware, as previously indicated. But it's as close as we'll ever get to positive confirmation of this trick unless we badger WotC to the extent that they actually come out and say "Yes, this DOES, in fact, work this way..." in the errata. It's a sort of situation where you're waiting for a bus, running late, and have been sitting there for about half an hour, still determined to get on, even after you hear a group of passersby chat about how the bus depot exploded an hour past. Technically, you don't truly know that the bus won't come plodding along, intact or in flames, until it... well, doesn't. Now, I don't know about you, but I'm in no mood to sit around waiting for something that has a negative likelihood of happening.
Anaxander 02-11-07, 01:31 PM	Well aware, as previously indicated. But it's as close as we'll ever get to positive confirmation of this trick unless we badger WotC to the extent that they actually come out and say "Yes, this DOES, in fact, work this way..." in the errata. It's a sort of situation where you're waiting for a bus, running late, and have been sitting there for about half an hour, still determined to get on, even after you hear a group of passersby chat about how the bus depot exploded an hour past. Technically, you don't truly know that the bus won't come plodding along, intact or in flames, until it... well, doesn't. Now, I don't know about you, but I'm in no mood to sit around waiting for something that has a negative likelihood of happening. I was only anticipating the inevitable answer from the OP...
Tempest Stormwind 02-11-07, 02:35 PM	I was only anticipating the inevitable answer from the OP... Actually, I think we scared him off. Check the initial Beholder Mage topic on the Theoretical Optimization forum -- he's started trying to attack it there (with the same damn arguments, bit surprise).
runestar 02-11-07, 11:53 PM	Actually, I think we scared him off. Check the initial Beholder Mage topic on the Theoretical Optimization forum -- he's started trying to attack it there (with the same damn arguments, bit surprise). What? Where? This should be good. Direct me there now!!!:D
runestar 02-12-07, 12:13 AM	Hmm...the CO boards has been relatively tame and civil to this stage(of all the times to behave...:mad: ) I was expecting that they would have torn his argument to shreds by now, but it seems that said thread does not really receive a great deal a traffic... This must be rectified!!!:P :P :P
Amerikajin 02-13-07, 10:25 AM	So I am going to play an Ultimate Magus, but there's not enough room on my character sheet for all the spells! Anyone got any character sheets that have a spot for both sorcerer and wizards spells? I love the older 3.5 character sheets where everything fits on 1 two-sided character sheet, so if there was one like that, I would jump for joy! But having one page dedicated to all the spellcasting that you get as an Ultimate Magus would be a worthwhile addition to my "stack". :D
Bob Loblaw 02-13-07, 10:34 AM	So I am going to play an Ultimate Magus, but there's not enough room on my character sheet for all the spells! Anyone got any character sheets that have a spot for both sorcerer and wizards spells? I love the older 3.5 character sheets where everything fits on 1 two-sided character sheet, so if there was one like that, I would jump for joy! But having one page dedicated to all the spellcasting that you get as an Ultimate Magus would be a worthwhile addition to my "stack". :D You may want to try www.rpgsheets.com and see if there's anything there for you. I know that there are some extensive spells sheets available.
Archangel62 02-16-07, 12:18 PM	As a rather sad side note it appears that Lord of Procrastination is gone...a moment of silence for this grand rules master.
Ventilatory_Threshold 02-16-07, 01:06 PM	*Silence*
Gadren 02-16-07, 05:09 PM	Wow. I'd just like to thank XunValDorl of HouseKilsek for helping me get BINGO! before my other friends. http://www.shortpacked.com/comics/20060405bingo.png Seriously, if you only want to hear from WotC employees (or people that agree with you), why are you posting?
UCsimplyme 02-16-07, 05:25 PM	Well, since all the arguments are over, I thought I would post an ultimate magus build that strays a little away from the norm. Most UM's go on to become the best casters they can be. Rather than pursuing the same old route, I thought I would build a guild using UM. Let me hear your thoughts. Enjoy! Highlights -Final Bab +16 -Saves of +9/+5/+17 -8d8+5d10+7d4 HD averages same as 1d7 per level -Spell casting progression of a level 15 Duskblade at a caster level of 17 -Spell casting progression of a level 9 Wizard at a caster level of 17 -Ability to quicken 7 spells per day without increasing casting time or spell level -Added Shield, Wraithstrike, and Haste to Duskblade spells known -Wraith strike/Power attack/Arcane Strike on 7 attacks per round at 20th -All abjuration spells are automatically extended and abjuration spells of 3rd level and lower are automatically quickened 1. Duskblade 1 2. Duskblade 2 3. Duskblade 3 4. Duskblade 4 5. Duskblade 5 6. Wizard 1 7. Abjurant Champion 1 (+1 wiz casting) 8. Abjurant Champion 2 (+1 wiz casting) 9. Ultimate Magus 1 (+1 wiz casting) 10. Ultimate Magus 2 (+1 dusk/wiz casting) 11. Ultimate Maguc 3 (+1 dusk/wiz casting) 12. Ultimate Magus 4 (+1 wiz casting) 13. Ultimate Magus 5 (+1 dusk/wiz casting) 14. Ultimate Magus 6 (+1 dusk/wiz casting) 15. Abjurant Champion 3 (+1 dusk casting) 16. Abjurant Champion 4 (+1 dusk casting) 17. Abjurant Champion 5 (+1 dusk casting) 18. Duskblade 6 19. Duskblade 7 20. Duskblade 8 1. Power Attack 1. Two-Weapon Fighting 2. Combat Casting 3. Somatic Weaponry 6. <Any Metamagic> 9. Improved Two-Weapon Fighting 12. Arcane Strike 13. Quicken Spell 15. Greater Two-Weapon Fighting 18. Oversized Two-Weapon Fighting
Gadren 02-20-07, 10:51 PM	One problem with the Practiced Spell caster logic for only losing one level of your "primary" casting class. I read most of this thread and skimmed the rest, and I didn't see this mentioned, but if it was or I am misunderstanding a point please let me know. When you are going up in Ultimate Magus, the practiced spell caster feat will work at first because it bring your lower caster level up to your total HD, but with spell power + 1,2, etc it loooks like you still have to lose at least three levels in your "primary" caster class, because its caster level will become higher than your HD.
Osedox 02-20-07, 11:38 PM	Well, since all the arguments are over, I thought I would post an ultimate magus build that strays a little away from the norm. Most UM's go on to become the best casters they can be. Rather than pursuing the same old route, I thought I would build a guild using UM. Let me hear your thoughts. Enjoy! Highlights -Final Bab +16 -Saves of +9/+5/+17 -8d8+5d10+7d4 HD averages same as 1d7 per level -Spell casting progression of a level 15 Duskblade at a caster level of 17 -Spell casting progression of a level 9 Wizard at a caster level of 17 -Ability to quicken 7 spells per day without increasing casting time or spell level -Added Shield, Wraithstrike, and Haste to Duskblade spells known -Wraith strike/Power attack/Arcane Strike on 7 attacks per round at 20th -All abjuration spells are automatically extended and abjuration spells of 3rd level and lower are automatically quickened 1. Duskblade 1 2. Duskblade 2 3. Duskblade 3 4. Duskblade 4 5. Duskblade 5 6. Wizard 1 7. Abjurant Champion 1 (+1 wiz casting) 8. Abjurant Champion 2 (+1 wiz casting) 9. Ultimate Magus 1 (+1 wiz casting) 10. Ultimate Magus 2 (+1 dusk/wiz casting) 11. Ultimate Maguc 3 (+1 dusk/wiz casting) 12. Ultimate Magus 4 (+1 wiz casting) 13. Ultimate Magus 5 (+1 dusk/wiz casting) 14. Ultimate Magus 6 (+1 dusk/wiz casting) 15. Abjurant Champion 3 (+1 dusk casting) 16. Abjurant Champion 4 (+1 dusk casting) 17. Abjurant Champion 5 (+1 dusk casting) 18. Duskblade 6 19. Duskblade 7 20. Duskblade 8 1. Power Attack 1. Two-Weapon Fighting 2. Combat Casting 3. Somatic Weaponry 6. <Any Metamagic> 9. Improved Two-Weapon Fighting 12. Arcane Strike 13. Quicken Spell 15. Greater Two-Weapon Fighting 18. Oversized Two-Weapon Fighting Cool, I love gish, this one is pretty neato
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-21-07, 12:10 AM	Oh I am still here. You don't impress me enough to "scare" me off. Seriously if you people still believe that the Beholder Mage trick works then you really really need to go and read the rules. And if you don't know the difference between a True beholder and a polymorphed human into a beholder then you really need to do more reading.
Tempest Stormwind 02-21-07, 12:13 AM	Oh I am still here. You don't impress me enough to "scare" me off. Seriously if you people still believe that the Beholder Mage trick works then you really really need to go and read the rules. And if you don't know the difference between a True beholder and a polymorphed human into a beholder then you really need to do more reading. You're focusing on an argument that is off-topic, and then attacking it. This is a classic strawman fallacy. Does this mean you concede that the ultimate magus CAN and DOES grant 9th level spells if you use tricks like that Practiced Spellcaster feat?
NineInchNall 02-21-07, 12:25 AM	Wow. Reading this thread has been like rehashing a discussion I had with a DM about Heighten Spell. For example, it would be my contention that a cure light wounds heightened to 9th level woukd heal 1d8 + 5 + 18 hp with Augmented Healing. He kept responding with statements like, "the actual level of the spell is still first," or, "heightening a fireball doesn't make it do more damage." :rolleyes: I mean, I'm fine with house rules, but don't tell me I'm wrong when I demonstrably am not.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-21-07, 12:37 AM	You're focusing on an argument that is off-topic, and then attacking it. This is a classic strawman fallacy. Does this mean you concede that the ultimate magus CAN and DOES grant 9th level spells if you use tricks like that Practiced Spellcaster feat? Unless i hear anything different from WoTc I don't believe it's legal.
NineInchNall 02-21-07, 12:40 AM	Then please provide a coherent, textually based argument for your position. Provide citations and quotations where appropriate. Tempest and Seerow have. It'd help if you'd be as classy.
Bob Loblaw 02-21-07, 12:47 AM	Oh I am still here. You don't impress me enough to "scare" me off. Seriously if you people still believe that the Beholder Mage trick works then you really really need to go and read the rules. And if you don't know the difference between a True beholder and a polymorphed human into a beholder then you really need to do more reading. Let me ask you a question. Here is the first paragraph from polymorph (any emphasis is mine): This spell functions like alter self, except that you change the willing subject into another form of living creature. The new form may be of the same type as the subject or any of the following types: aberration, animal, dragon, fey, giant, humanoid, magical beast, monstrous humanoid, ooze, plant, or vermin. The assumed form can’t have more Hit Dice than your caster level (or the subject’s HD, whichever is lower), to a maximum of 15 HD at 15th level. You can’t cause a subject to assume a form smaller than Fine, nor can you cause a subject to assume an incorporeal or gaseous form. The subject’s creature type and subtype (if any) change to match the new form. How would you interpret that last line? Remember that the word "type" has a distinct meaning in DnD (here it is from the glossary for clarification): One of several broad categories of creatures. The creature types are aberration, animal, construct, dragon, elemental, fey, giant, humanoid, magical beast, monstrous humanoid, ooze, outsider, plant, undead, and vermin. So, with this information, can you please elaborate on how the trick does not work? And remember, DM fiat is not a viable argument (it is for whether or not it will be allowed, but not whether or not it works as written). Note that I would never allow (and I believe that everyone else here said the same thing) this to fly in their games. They would enforce Rule 0 and say "no."
runestar 02-21-07, 07:00 AM	I don't think he is paying attention anymore...:P
rironin 02-21-07, 08:20 AM	Does this mean you concede that the ultimate magus CAN and DOES grant 9th level spells if you use tricks like that Practiced Spellcaster feat?Unless i hear anything different from WoTc I don't believe it's legal.We already heard from WoTC. If you had ever actually emailed customer service way back when you claimed to, you've probably got an email in your Inbox that looks exactly like the one Davith Bothian already got and posted: Originally Posted by CustServ Assuming Sor 1/Wiz 4 w/Practiced Spellcaster (sorcerer), this is what your CLs would be at various levels: Before Ultimate Magus: Sor CL 5 (base 1 for class, +4 for feat), Wiz CL 4 (from class) Ultimate Magus 1: Sor CL 5, Wiz CL 5 (UM adds +1 to Wiz ‘cause it’s lower. UM 2: Sor 6, Wiz 6 UM 3: Sor 7, Wiz 7 UM 4: +1 to either (they’re tied for lowest; I’ll assume Wiz but the choice is ultimately moot in the long term) UM 5: Sor 8, Wiz 9 UM 6: Sor 9, Wiz 10 UM 7: Sor 10, Wiz 10 (regardless of your choice at UM 4, now they’re equal) UM 8: Sor 11, Wiz 11 UM 9: Sor 12, Wiz 12 UM 10: Sor 13, Wiz 13 So at 15th level, your Sor 1/Wiz 4/UM 10 has the spell progression and CL of a 13th level wizard, the spell progression of a 9th-level sorcerer, and the CL of a 13th-level sorcerer (from Practiced Spellcaster). Add 4 more levels of wizard and at 19th level you can cast 9th level spells. Hopefully this clears things up.He said "Hopefully this clears things up." What an optimistic guy! :) You also haven't even made a peep in response to the two questions posed by runestar and Flamewarrior and reparaphrased by me both on this post and on the Character Optimization forum where you tried to spread your insanity, as far as the beholder mage trick goes. As always, we've got several interesting points to discuss, if you'd rather say anything other than "geez guys read the freakin rules." :P We did. Now we're at the part where we're applying our brains to the question. Please join us.
Gadren 02-22-07, 01:10 AM	IMPORTANT NOTE: It should be noted that though customer service is still right about getting 9th level wiz spells at 19, he is wrong about the caster levels. Originally Posted by CustServ Assuming Sor 1/Wiz 4 w/Practiced Spellcaster (sorcerer), this is what your CLs would be at various levels: Before Ultimate Magus: Sor CL 5 (base 1 for class, +4 for feat), Wiz CL 4 (from class) Ultimate Magus 1: Sor CL 5, Wiz CL 5 (UM adds +1 to Wiz ‘cause it’s lower. UM 2: Sor 6, Wiz 6 UM 3: Sor 7, Wiz 7 UM 4: +1 to either (they’re tied for lowest; I’ll assume Wiz but the choice is ultimately moot in the long term) UM 5: Sor 8, Wiz 9 UM 6: Sor 9, Wiz 10 UM 7: Sor 10, Wiz 10 (regardless of your choice at UM 4, now they’re equal) UM 8: Sor 11, Wiz 11 UM 9: Sor 12, Wiz 12 UM 10: Sor 13, Wiz 13 So at 15th level, your Sor 1/Wiz 4/UM 10 has the spell progression and CL of a 13th level wizard, the spell progression of a 9th-level sorcerer, and the CL of a 13th-level sorcerer (from Practiced Spellcaster). Add 4 more levels of wizard and at 19th level you can cast 9th level spells. Hopefully this clears things up. Lets go back over this, corrections are in red... Originally Posted by CustServ Assuming Sor 1/Wiz 4 w/Practiced Spellcaster (sorcerer), this is what your CLs would be at various levels: Before Ultimate Magus: Sor CL 5 (base 1 for class, +4 for feat), Wiz CL 4 (from class) Ultimate Magus 1: Sor CL 5, Wiz CL 5 (UM adds +1 to Wiz ‘cause it’s lower. (*Buzz* Actually, that Sor caster level stills goes up one, to 6, and that Wiz CL also jumps to 6. It seems that Custserv did not read all the class abilities, focusing only on the spellcasting progression. He forgot about UM's "arcane spell power" ability.) UM 2: Sor 6, Wiz 6 (Sor 7, Wiz 7) UM 3: Sor 7, Wiz 7 (Sor 8, Wiz 8) UM 4: +1 to either (they’re tied for lowest; I’ll assume Wiz but the choice is ultimately moot in the long term) (Now here's the kicker. At this level Arcane Spell Power also jumps to +2. Assuming you go up in wiz (duh), Sor is 9, but Wiz jumps to 10 - even though your total level is only 9) UM 5: Sor 8, Wiz 9 (Sor 10, Wiz 11) UM 6: Sor 9, Wiz 10 (Sor 11, Wiz 12) UM 7: Sor 10, Wiz 10 (regardless of your choice at UM 4, now they’re equal) (Nope. You are still forced to go up in Sorc - as it is lower, but that Practiced Spell Caster feat will not boost your CL past your HD. Wiz CL will always be higher. Sor 12, Wiz 13) UM 8: Sor 11, Wiz 11 (Sor 13, Wiz 14) UM 9: Sor 12, Wiz 12 (Sor 14, Wiz 15) UM 10: Sor 13, Wiz 13 (Sor 15, Wiz 17)(EDIT: Forgot there is one last spell power here. Your Wiz caster level actually ends up two higher than your HD this way.) So at 15th level, your Sor 1/Wiz 4/UM 10 has the spell progression and CL of a 13th level wizard, the spell progression of a 9th-level sorcerer, and the CL of a 13th-level sorcerer (from Practiced Spellcaster). (He's right about the spell progressions, but like we established, wrong about caster levels.) Add 4 more levels of wizard and at 19th level you can cast 9th level spells. (This is still true. But wouldn't you rather take those levels in Archmage? ;) ) Hopefully this clears things up. (Well NOW it is..)
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-22-07, 02:24 PM	Hey if the WotC team officially says that you can use the Practiced Spellcaster feat that way then awesome.
Tempest Stormwind 02-22-07, 02:25 PM	Customer Service *is* official, XunVal. Or didn't you notice where it came from?
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-22-07, 02:26 PM	But wouldn't you rather take those levels in Archmage? ;) )[/COLOR] Hopefully this clears things up. (Well NOW it is..) You only have one more level for Archmage.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-22-07, 02:27 PM	Customer Service *is* official, XunVal. Or didn't you notice where it came from? I never got an e-mail back unless it was sent to my junk folder which is automatically deleted.
Tempest Stormwind 02-22-07, 02:35 PM	I never got an e-mail back unless it was sent to my junk folder which is automatically deleted. Did you even read the post above which quoted a mail that came from CustServ that answered exactly the same question you asked, assuming you did actually ask it? Oh, and what part of Wiz 4 / Sor 1 / Ultimate Magus 10 (note: 15 levels) meant that you could only take one level of archmage? You meet the requirements (undoubtedly) and have the full five free levels to fill.
rironin 02-22-07, 02:42 PM	But wouldn't you rather take those levels in Archmage?You only have one more level for Archmage.If you only read the portion that you quoted, then that makes sense (Edit: You know what, it really doesn't, even then). If you read the words that preceded it...Add 4 more levels of wizard and at 19th level you can cast 9th level spells. (This is still true. But wouldn't you rather take those levels in Archmage? )By "those levels" he meant the 4 levels that the Customer Service guy mentioned taking wizard with...
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-22-07, 02:48 PM	Did you even read the post above which quoted a mail that came from CustServ that answered exactly the same question you asked, assuming you did actually ask it? Oh, and what part of Wiz 4 / Sor 1 / Ultimate Magus 10 (note: 15 levels) meant that you could only take one level of archmage? You meet the requirements (undoubtedly) and have the full five free levels to fill. I was saying go to 8th as a wizard then take one in Archmage.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-22-07, 02:49 PM	Well now that WotC is allowing this to be done I will use Warmage instead of Sor in a game I am in now.
Gadren 02-22-07, 03:12 PM	I was saying go to 8th as a wizard then take one in Archmage. .... I just started to bleed from the eyes. Does ANYONE understand XunValDorl's logic at all, ever? Ok, I'll humor you, why were you saying go to 8th as a wizard then take one in Archmage?
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-22-07, 03:21 PM	Because I wanted to take the extra levels in Wizard to A gain that extra bonus feat and B. take improved familiar and have an ok familiar. It's not rocket science.
mittenninja 02-22-07, 03:24 PM	Because I wanted to take the extra levels in Wizard to A gain that extra bonus feat and B. take improved familiar and have an ok familiar. It's not rocket science. or you could take 5 lvls of archamge and get 5 awesome special abilities. Choice seems plain as day to me....
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-22-07, 03:33 PM	Archmage really isn't all that great. You have to give up spell slots and you have to take 3 feats. The best thing to do is Take another level in Wizard to gain the bonus feat, give one more level to Sorcerer you can have 5th level spells for the Sorcerer, and then maybe take the last three in archmage. if you don't like the idea of the Sorcerer taking one more cause he will gain only one 5th level spell look at it from the Warmage point of view. You get all spells in the warmage spell-list for 5th. I wouldn't give up a 9th level slot for Arcane Fire. I would take Elemental Mastery, Arcane reach, and Mastery of Shaping. Using the Warmage instead of Sorcerer you would get great use out of these three abilities.
mittenninja 02-22-07, 03:45 PM	Archmage really isn't all that great. You have to give up spell slots and you have to take 3 feats. The best thing to do is Take another level in Wizard to gain the bonus feat, give one more level to Sorcerer you can have 5th level spells for the Sorcerer, and then maybe take the last three in archmage. if you don't like the idea of the Sorcerer taking one more cause he will gain only one 5th level spell look at it from the Warmage point of view. You get all spells in the warmage spell-list for 5th. I wouldn't give up a 9th level slot for Arcane Fire. I would take Elemental Mastery, Arcane reach, and Mastery of Shaping. Using the Warmage instead of Sorcerer you would get great use out of these three abilities. generally i see a Spell Focus as a feat worth taking. Plus, using spell power with the bonuses you already get from UM your caster level will be even higher, then yes arcane reach def. Now the great thing about arcane fire is that it's raw magical energy, which means resistances and immunities will not apply. And at higher levels a lot of baddies have resistances/immunites to a lot of stuff.
rironin 02-22-07, 04:02 PM	generally i see a Spell Focus as a feat worth taking. Plus, using spell power with the bonuses you already get from UM your caster level will be even higher, then yes arcane reach def. Now the great thing about arcane fire is that it's raw magical energy, which means resistances and immunities will not apply. And at higher levels a lot of baddies have resistances/immunites to a lot of stuff.True, but with Mastery of Elements and likely a bunch of insane knowledge skills you should have no problem identifying most baddies and tailoring the elements of any direct energy attacks to their weaknesses. Or you can just make everything sonic :P
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-22-07, 04:13 PM	Unless you are a specialist mage or your wizard is going to have a lot of spells from the 2 schools you choose I wouldn't take spell focus. Ok being human and doing this build you should come out with 11 feats if you take the one more level Wizard. To get Archmage you need three. Now one of the feats must be metamagic or item creation and 2 must be metamagic. That leaves 8. Take the three you have to take for Archmage that leaves you only 5 feats to play with. In a game i am in we just started we are still 1st level, but this is the turn out for my character. 5th Wizard/ 2nd Warmage/ 10 Ultimate Magus/ 3rd Rauthar(Races of Nature). Because of my characters affiliation with the elves Rauthar fit my character. I took the following feats. Rapid metamagic(awesome feat), Magical Device Attunement(Since Charisma is one of my main stats and Use Magic Device skill comes from Ultimate magus this feat comes in handy), Practiced Spellcaster(of course), Quicken Spell, Extend Spell, Dimensional Jaunt(neat spell), Improved Initiative, Widen Spell, Sculpt Spell, Empower Spell, Hadn't really decided on the last one. I was going to choose Med Armor Profic, And Battle Caster so I could cast my Warmage spells in Medium Armor and get a suit of magical mithral full plate which is considered medium armor and only has a 25% chance of spell failure and gives me a dex bonus of +3 and armor bonus of +8, but I changed my mind on that part.
runestar 02-22-07, 10:41 PM	I have a gut feeling that Xun has been holding out and repeatedly sending out the same query over and over again in the hope that sheer probability will see cust service screwing up and sending him the reply he so seeks, but uncharacteristically, cust service has been quite consistent for once...:D Where are we now? I can't quite follow the discussion(I know what you are all talking about, but I have no idea where the archmage discussion suddenly sprang up from):confused:
rironin 02-22-07, 10:54 PM	I have a gut feeling that Xun has been holding out and repeatedly sending out the same query over and over again in the hope that sheer probability will see cust service screwing up and sending him the reply he so seeks, but uncharacteristically, cust service has been quite consistent for once...:D Where are we now? I can't quite follow the discussion(I know what you are all talking about, but I have no idea where the archmage discussion suddenly sprang up from):confused:We're just talking about how best to cap off your 20 levels after going wizard 4/sorcerer 1/UM 10. As for the other thing, well, yeah, we've had all the concession we're going to get, so I guess we better savor that :P
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-22-07, 11:19 PM	I have a gut feeling that Xun has been holding out and repeatedly sending out the same query over and over again in the hope that sheer probability will see cust service screwing up and sending him the reply he so seeks, but uncharacteristically, cust service has been quite consistent for once...:D Where are we now? I can't quite follow the discussion(I know what you are all talking about, but I have no idea where the archmage discussion suddenly sprang up from):confused: They never sent me a reply and if they did it was probably sent to junk mail.
Tempest Stormwind 02-23-07, 12:22 AM	They never sent me a reply and if they did it was probably sent to junk mail. And this is why, folks, one lie is always more convincing than two. Look, XunVal, if you were expecting a reply that you thought might show up in your junk mail, why didn't you look in your junk mail? And if you thought it went there anyway, but you didn't check, then why assert adamantly that they did not reply?
Seerow 02-23-07, 12:52 AM	This thread is still going on?
runestar 02-23-07, 12:56 AM	And I don't see why it should get sent to junk mail when you have such a nice email account at the wotc website which you can make use of, where you can store all your queries for future reference...:confused: As for the other thing, well, yeah, we've had all the concession we're going to get, so I guess we better savor that Seems oddly hollow, somehow...:(
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 02-23-07, 01:23 AM	And this is why, folks, one lie is always more convincing than two. Look, XunVal, if you were expecting a reply that you thought might show up in your junk mail, why didn't you look in your junk mail? And if you thought it went there anyway, but you didn't check, then why assert adamantly that they did not reply? Look every time someone answers a thread it shows up in my hotmail account. i delete most of them, sometimes they show up in junk mail sometimes not. usually I just delete the whole junkmail folder without reading. Anyway that doesn't make a difference anyway. The fact is I never saw a response from WotC. Period.
Gadren 02-24-07, 03:32 PM	For those who care, my DM and I came up with this extra 5 level advancement for those who'd like to just stay Ultimate Magi and not have to multiclass into something else. Feel free to use it, or not... http://fc01.deviantart.com/fs14/f/2007/055/5/2/umtbl_by_gadren.jpg Class Skills (2+ Int modifier per level): Concentration, Craft, Decipher Script, Knowledge (any), Profession, Spellcraft, Use Magic Device Class Features: .........Spellcasting: As stated under Ultimate Magus, pg. 78 of the Complete Mage: “At each level, except 1st, 4th, and 7th, you gain new spells per day and an increase in cast level (and spells known, if applicable) as if you had also gained a level in both a prepared arcane casting class and a spontaneous arcane casting class to which you belonged before adding the prestige class level. You do not, however, gain any other benefit a character of those classes would have gained." ......... Arcane Spell Power (Ex): As stated under Ultimate Magus, pg. 78 of the Complete Mage: “At (13th) level, your caster level for all arcane spells increases by 1” (For a total of +5). ......... Expanded Spell Knowledge (Ex): As stated under Ultimate Magus, pg. 78 of the Complete Mage: “At (12th) level, you can select one (6th) level arcane spell from your spellbook, and add it to the list of arcane spells known for a spontaneous casting, even if you can’t yet spontaneously cast spells of that level. (In this case, you would know the spell, but wouldn’t be able to cast it until you had spell slots of the appropriate level.)” .........“You can add another spell from your spellbook to your list of spells known every two levels thereafter. At (14th) level, this can be any spell of (7th) level or lower.” .........Augmented Casting (Su): As stated under Ultimate Magus, pg. 78 of the Complete Mage: “Starting at 3rd level, you can choose to sacrifice a spell or spell slot from one of your classes to apply the effect of a metamagic feat that you know to spell that you cast using another arcane class.” .........“The level of the spell to be augmented can’t exceed ˝ your class level.” (So a 15th level Ultimate Magus can affect spells of 7th level or lower with this ability.)” .........“The level of the spell slot sacrificed must equal or exceed the spell level adjustment of the metamagic feat. To empower a spell, for example, you would have to spend a 2nd level or higher spell. You can’t use this ability to augment a spell already affected by a metamagic feat.” .........“You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + ˝ you class level.) .........Bonus Feat: As stated under Ultimate Magus, pg. 78 of the Complete Mage: “At (11th) level, and again and (15th) level, you can select a bonus metamagic feat for which you meet the prerequisites.”
Bob Loblaw 02-24-07, 05:20 PM	Look every time someone answers a thread it shows up in my hotmail account. i delete most of them, sometimes they show up in junk mail sometimes not. usually I just delete the whole junkmail folder without reading. Anyway that doesn't make a difference anyway. The fact is I never saw a response from WotC. Period. Just a suggestion, send it again. This time be ready for it to arrive.
Krevon 02-24-07, 06:35 PM	Just a suggestion, send it again. This time be ready for it to arrive. AND....if they resopnd add the address to your safe folder.
rironin 02-24-07, 09:59 PM	Arcane Spell Power (Ex): As stated under Ultimate Magus, pg. 78 of the Complete Mage: “At (13th) level, your caster level for all arcane spells increases by 1” (For a total of +5).I think that this power is intended to offset the expected loss of spellcasting power you'd get from the lack of advancement at 1st, 4th, and 7th levels. Perhaps it shouldn't be boosted again unless you have another level knocked off. I would suggest maybe extrapolating the lack of advancement, so that you only advance in one arcane spellcasting class for one or two of the levels from 11th-15th. Either that, or just drop the boost to +5. Not sure how powerful it is to let one continue to advance along both lines... that's going to equal a lot more free metamagic. Might be a bit much.
Gwumph 02-26-07, 11:17 PM	Hey Folks In the last page Gadren posted his version uf continuing in Ult Magus past 10th level. Then way back on page 2 there was another poster taking Ult Magus to level 15. Are there any rules or suggestions about this anywhere? Do you keep on taking 10th level again and again . What bonuses of 10 level do you keep. How does this work if you want to take Ult Magus past 10th level??? Cheers Gwumph
Bob Loblaw 02-27-07, 10:01 PM	Look every time someone answers a thread it shows up in my hotmail account. i delete most of them, sometimes they show up in junk mail sometimes not. usually I just delete the whole junkmail folder without reading. Anyway that doesn't make a difference anyway. The fact is I never saw a response from WotC. Period. Have you resent your question yet? I am curious to see if they are at least consistent.
Gadren 02-27-07, 11:19 PM	So, anyone think they'd make use of levels 11-15?
Lotus Crane 02-28-07, 01:57 AM	So, anyone think they'd make use of levels 11-15? You generally can't, pre-epic.
Gwumph 02-28-07, 02:57 AM	Why not? level 16-20th I would like to continue the class. Is there a ruling to allow that.
Lotus Crane 02-28-07, 03:22 AM	Why not? level 16-20th I would like to continue the class. Is there a ruling to allow that. The DMG and/or ELH explain how you can't take more than 10 levels in a particular prestige class until you reach 21st character level, because just like how the 21st+ level of a base class uses epic progression rules (including epic bonus feats), the 11th+ level of a prestige class is also technically epic. If your DM is lenient he can deliberately ignore or change the rules of the game, but officially speaking, no, you can't be a wizard 4/sorcerer 1/Ultimate Magus 15; you have to settle for wizard 4/sorcerer 1/Ultimate Magus 10/some other PrC 5.
Gwumph 02-28-07, 03:31 AM	Thanks!! Do you know the page number for reference?
dolio 02-28-07, 06:52 PM	The DMG and/or ELH explain how you can't take more than 10 levels in a particular prestige class until you reach 21st character level, because just like how the 21st+ level of a base class uses epic progression rules (including epic bonus feats), the 11th+ level of a prestige class is also technically epic. If your DM is lenient he can deliberately ignore or change the rules of the game, but officially speaking, no, you can't be a wizard 4/sorcerer 1/Ultimate Magus 15; you have to settle for wizard 4/sorcerer 1/Ultimate Magus 10/some other PrC 5. In this case, though, someone posted a proposed non-epic extension of the ultimate magus to level 15, specifically so that it could finish out a character. Epic levels would then start at 16. There is some precedent. Unearthed arcana has variants of the paladin, bard and ranger as 15-level prestige classes. Also, the 3.5 true necromancer is a 14-level prestige class intended to fill out a character in the same way. As published, though, 10 is the pre-epic limit for the ultimate magus, of course.
Gadren 02-28-07, 08:28 PM	In this case, though, someone posted a proposed non-epic extension of the ultimate magus to level 15, specifically so that it could finish out a character. Epic levels would then start at 16. There is some precedent. Unearthed arcana has variants of the paladin, bard and ranger as 15-level prestige classes. Also, the 3.5 true necromancer is a 14-level prestige class intended to fill out a character in the same way. As published, though, 10 is the pre-epic limit for the ultimate magus, of course. Yeah, this is just meant to be an "expansion" of sorts, along the lines of the true necromancer or void disciple. There's nothing inherently more powerful about continuing in the same prestige class than there is in multiclassing again. Its just that by 15 you identify yourself as an ultimate magus more than anything else, why should you HAVE to pick a new direction? Also, for the comment about +4 only meant to round things out, so I shouldn't go +5, if you are using the practiced spellcaster feat (that the majority of this thread has been about), your caster level will be exceeding your HD anyway, so I don't see how this makes a difference.
AngelofCthulhu 02-28-07, 09:09 PM	Unless I am mistaken can;t your caster level never exceed your HD? I can't find Practiced Spellcaster (what book is it in again?) so I can't be sure about the feat.
Tempest Stormwind 02-28-07, 09:10 PM	Unless I am mistaken can;t your caster level never exceed your HD? I can't find Practiced Spellcaster (what book is it in again?) so I can't be sure about the feat. Practiced Spellcaster cannot raise your caster level above your HD, but other effects can. Look at the Healing domain, for instance -- or, in this case, the Ultimate Magus' spell power ability.
AngelofCthulhu 02-28-07, 09:21 PM	Then how would you apply them. Time the ability is received, whatever maximized the ability, or DM's discretion.
Ventilatory_Threshold 02-28-07, 09:25 PM	Practiced Spellcaster cannot raise your caster level above your HD, but other effects can. Look at the Healing domain, for instance -- or, in this case, the Ultimate Magus' spell power ability. To be more precise, Practiced Spellcaster, in and of itself, can't raise your caster level above your HD. It's applied when most beneficial (the 3.5 FAQ states that, twice, though in the latter case it kind of contradicts itself by applying it in an almost utterly nonbeneficial manner).
rironin 03-01-07, 12:11 AM	Also, for the comment about +4 only meant to round things out, so I shouldn't go +5, if you are using the practiced spellcaster feat (that the majority of this thread has been about), your caster level will be exceeding your HD anyway, so I don't see how this makes a difference.I wasn't implying there was anything wrong with the arcane spell power ability itself, or that you shouldn't be able to boost your caster level beyond your HD if you have the practiced spellcaster feat. However, all (balanced) PrCs give advantages and disadvantages that keep them balanced. Ultimate Magus tries to force you to advance the lesser of the two spellcasting class's abilities every now and then (at 1st, 4th, and 7th levels) which will prevent you from advancing as far as you could with just one class. I believe (though I have no proof, just conjecture) that arcane spell power is meant to mitigate this disadvantage - allowing the Ultimate Magus to have a high caster level even though his spellcasting advancement is limited by his devotion to both prepared and spontaneous arcane magic. Your suggested 11th-15th level progression for the Ultimate Magus lacked the one real disadvantage of being an Ultimate Magus (and the whole reason people take practiced spellcaster to get around it) - that is, the single class progression that occurs at 1st, 4th, and 7th level. You didn't extend this to 11th-15th level, but you did extend arcane spell power to 11th-15th level. Seems like you're taking all the advantages and dropping all the disadvantages to me. It should also be noted that by allowing your Ultimate Magus class level to rise to 15th, you're making the augmented casting ability significantly more powerful. Instead of fuelling metamagic for spells of up to 5th level you can spend spell slots to apply metamagic feats to spells of up to 7th level. This means you can now quicken or maximize your 7th level spells, or apply any lower cost metamagic feats to them without using up 8th or 9th level spell slots. With 14th level sorcerer spells slots, you can do that a lot. When I tried to figure out for myself how powerful the Ultimate Magus was if you used practiced spellcaster to get around the progression limitations (see post #191 of this thread), I concluded that it wasn't so bad, mainly because of the limitations of the augmented casting power. Extending the class out to 15th level adds to this ability in ways I can't gauge very well quantitatively, but as a DM I'd hesitate to allow this. ::EDIT:: Just reread and re-remembered the limitation on times per day for augmented casting, that does tone it down a bit (although the 11th-15th progression gives you two more uses of this ability per day, a total of 10 times). But consider this: a Sorc 1/Wiz 9/UM 10 can quicken 4 of his 5th level (or lower) spells and maximize 4 more. That's a cool power, but not so broken for a 20th level character. A Sorc 1/Wiz 4/UM 15 can quicken (or metamagic up some other way) all of his 7th and 6th level wizard spells for the day (depending on if he's got huge numbers of bonus spells he might not be able to do this to all his 6th level spells, but you get the idea). All he has to do to is to burn through his 4th and some of his 5th level sorcerer slots (and he'll still have plenty of 6th and 7th level sorcerer slots to spend on actual spellcasting)! That's a bit much, methinks. Wizards give DMs enough headaches and overshadow the melee characters enough when they're throwing around 8th and 9th level spells - if they're throwing in quickened 6th and 7th level spells every round along with the 8th-9th level spells, and still have an arsenal of sorcerer spells above and beyond that, I think it's too much.
Lotus Crane 03-01-07, 12:45 AM	There's nothing inherently more powerful about continuing in the same prestige class than there is in multiclassing again. Actually, in same cases, there definately is. The prestige Bard, Paladin, and Ranger, as well as the True Necromancer and Void Disciple, are unique exceptions in that they were specifically written to be balanced even when taken for 15 (or 13) levels pre-epic. However, prestige classes that have special abilities that scale with class level (such as Assassin with increasing death attack DC, or Ultimate Magus with augmented casting), can become broken if allowed to be taken for 15 levels pre-epic, because suddenly there's nothing preventing an Assassin from making DC 40+ death attacks before 20th level, or an Ultimate Magus from casting a twinned delayed blast fireball before 20th level.
Gadren 03-01-07, 09:34 PM	Actually, in same cases, there definately is. The prestige Bard, Paladin, and Ranger, as well as the True Necromancer and Void Disciple, are unique exceptions in that they were specifically written to be balanced even when taken for 15 (or 13) levels pre-epic. However, prestige classes that have special abilities that scale with class level (such as Assassin with increasing death attack DC, or Ultimate Magus with augmented casting), can become broken if allowed to be taken for 15 levels pre-epic, because suddenly there's nothing preventing an Assassin from making DC 40+ death attacks before 20th level, or an Ultimate Magus from casting a twinned delayed blast fireball before 20th level. Sure, there's nothing stopping a 14th level UM (a 19th level char) from casting that twinned delayed blast fireball, there's also nothing stopping a level 17 straight wizard with the sudden maximize feat from casting an empowered maximized delayed blast fireball either. As for the assassin, 5 extra levels would increase his death attack DC by 5, so I guess that means, using your calculations, there's nothing stopping a level 10 assassin from making DC 35+ death attacks before 20th level.
Gadren 03-01-07, 09:39 PM	I wasn't implying there was anything wrong with the arcane spell power ability itself, or that you shouldn't be able to boost your caster level beyond your HD if you have the practiced spellcaster feat. However, all (balanced) PrCs give advantages and disadvantages that keep them balanced. Ultimate Magus tries to force you to advance the lesser of the two spellcasting class's abilities every now and then (at 1st, 4th, and 7th levels) which will prevent you from advancing as far as you could with just one class. I believe (though I have no proof, just conjecture) that arcane spell power is meant to mitigate this disadvantage - allowing the Ultimate Magus to have a high caster level even though his spellcasting advancement is limited by his devotion to both prepared and spontaneous arcane magic. Your suggested 11th-15th level progression for the Ultimate Magus lacked the one real disadvantage of being an Ultimate Magus (and the whole reason people take practiced spellcaster to get around it) - that is, the single class progression that occurs at 1st, 4th, and 7th level. You didn't extend this to 11th-15th level, but you did extend arcane spell power to 11th-15th level. Seems like you're taking all the advantages and dropping all the disadvantages to me. It should also be noted that by allowing your Ultimate Magus class level to rise to 15th, you're making the augmented casting ability significantly more powerful. Instead of fuelling metamagic for spells of up to 5th level you can spend spell slots to apply metamagic feats to spells of up to 7th level. This means you can now quicken or maximize your 7th level spells, or apply any lower cost metamagic feats to them without using up 8th or 9th level spell slots. With 14th level sorcerer spells slots, you can do that a lot. When I tried to figure out for myself how powerful the Ultimate Magus was if you used practiced spellcaster to get around the progression limitations (see post #191 of this thread), I concluded that it wasn't so bad, mainly because of the limitations of the augmented casting power. Extending the class out to 15th level adds to this ability in ways I can't gauge very well quantitatively, but as a DM I'd hesitate to allow this. ::EDIT:: Just reread and re-remembered the limitation on times per day for augmented casting, that does tone it down a bit (although the 11th-15th progression gives you two more uses of this ability per day, a total of 10 times). But consider this: a Sorc 1/Wiz 9/UM 10 can quicken 4 of his 5th level (or lower) spells and maximize 4 more. That's a cool power, but not so broken for a 20th level character. A Sorc 1/Wiz 4/UM 15 can quicken (or metamagic up some other way) all of his 7th and 6th level wizard spells for the day (depending on if he's got huge numbers of bonus spells he might not be able to do this to all his 6th level spells, but you get the idea). All he has to do to is to burn through his 4th and some of his 5th level sorcerer slots (and he'll still have plenty of 6th and 7th level sorcerer slots to spend on actual spellcasting)! That's a bit much, methinks. Wizards give DMs enough headaches and overshadow the melee characters enough when they're throwing around 8th and 9th level spells - if they're throwing in quickened 6th and 7th level spells every round along with the 8th-9th level spells, and still have an arsenal of sorcerer spells above and beyond that, I think it's too much. Thankyou for your well thought-out analysis. The 15 level progresion is homebrewed and just a suggestion, so if someone used it in their game I'm sure the DM would have tweaks of his own to make. It should also be noted that though my DM allowed me to do this, I'm a bard/wizard (its a flavor thing) and this obvious power hit may have encouraged more generosity on my DM's part than if I were the standard sorc/wiz.
Gadren 03-01-07, 09:43 PM	Unless I am mistaken can;t your caster level never exceed your HD? I can't find Practiced Spellcaster (what book is it in again?) so I can't be sure about the feat. If you read my earlier post critiquing WotC customer service, the practiced spellcaster feat (applied to your sorcerer levels)combined with Ultimate Magus does raise you wizard caster level higher than your HD, because it is technically has the lower caster level at two levels when sorcerer normally would. I'll repost it here again for your convenience: ________________________________________ _______________________________ IMPORTANT NOTE: It should be noted that though customer service is still right about getting 9th level wiz spells at 19, he is wrong about the caster levels. Originally Posted by CustServ Assuming Sor 1/Wiz 4 w/Practiced Spellcaster (sorcerer), this is what your CLs would be at various levels: Before Ultimate Magus: Sor CL 5 (base 1 for class, +4 for feat), Wiz CL 4 (from class) Ultimate Magus 1: Sor CL 5, Wiz CL 5 (UM adds +1 to Wiz ‘cause it’s lower. UM 2: Sor 6, Wiz 6 UM 3: Sor 7, Wiz 7 UM 4: +1 to either (they’re tied for lowest; I’ll assume Wiz but the choice is ultimately moot in the long term) UM 5: Sor 8, Wiz 9 UM 6: Sor 9, Wiz 10 UM 7: Sor 10, Wiz 10 (regardless of your choice at UM 4, now they’re equal) UM 8: Sor 11, Wiz 11 UM 9: Sor 12, Wiz 12 UM 10: Sor 13, Wiz 13 So at 15th level, your Sor 1/Wiz 4/UM 10 has the spell progression and CL of a 13th level wizard, the spell progression of a 9th-level sorcerer, and the CL of a 13th-level sorcerer (from Practiced Spellcaster). Add 4 more levels of wizard and at 19th level you can cast 9th level spells. Hopefully this clears things up. Lets go back over this, corrections are in red... Originally Posted by CustServ Assuming Sor 1/Wiz 4 w/Practiced Spellcaster (sorcerer), this is what your CLs would be at various levels: Before Ultimate Magus: Sor CL 5 (base 1 for class, +4 for feat), Wiz CL 4 (from class) Ultimate Magus 1: Sor CL 5, Wiz CL 5 (UM adds +1 to Wiz ‘cause it’s lower. (*Buzz* Actually, that Sor caster level stills goes up one, to 6, and that Wiz CL also jumps to 6. It seems that Custserv did not read all the class abilities, focusing only on the spellcasting progression. He forgot about UM's "arcane spell power" ability.) UM 2: Sor 6, Wiz 6 (Sor 7, Wiz 7) UM 3: Sor 7, Wiz 7 (Sor 8, Wiz 8) UM 4: +1 to either (they’re tied for lowest; I’ll assume Wiz but the choice is ultimately moot in the long term) (Now here's the kicker. At this level Arcane Spell Power also jumps to +2. Assuming you go up in wiz (duh), Sor is 9, but Wiz jumps to 10 - even though your total level is only 9) UM 5: Sor 8, Wiz 9 (Sor 10, Wiz 11) UM 6: Sor 9, Wiz 10 (Sor 11, Wiz 12) UM 7: Sor 10, Wiz 10 (regardless of your choice at UM 4, now they’re equal) (Nope. You are still forced to go up in Sorc - as it is lower, but that Practiced Spell Caster feat will not boost your CL past your HD. Wiz CL will always be higher. Sor 12, Wiz 13) UM 8: Sor 11, Wiz 11 (Sor 13, Wiz 14) UM 9: Sor 12, Wiz 12 (Sor 14, Wiz 15) UM 10: Sor 13, Wiz 13 (Sor 15, Wiz 17)(EDIT: Forgot there is one last spell power here. Your Wiz caster level actually ends up two higher than your HD this way.) So at 15th level, your Sor 1/Wiz 4/UM 10 has the spell progression and CL of a 13th level wizard, the spell progression of a 9th-level sorcerer, and the CL of a 13th-level sorcerer (from Practiced Spellcaster). (He's right about the spell progressions, but like we established, wrong about caster levels.) Add 4 more levels of wizard and at 19th level you can cast 9th level spells. (This is still true. But wouldn't you rather take those levels in Archmage? ;) ) Hopefully this clears things up. (Well NOW it is..)
Lotus Crane 03-01-07, 10:00 PM	Sure, there's nothing stopping a 14th level UM (a 19th level char) from casting that twinned delayed blast fireball, there's also nothing stopping a level 17 straight wizard with the sudden maximize feat from casting an empowered maximized delayed blast fireball either. Sudden metamagic works only once per day though; augmented casting can be used far more often. As for the assassin, 5 extra levels would increase his death attack DC by 5, so I guess that means, using your calculations, there's nothing stopping a level 10 assassin from making DC 35+ death attacks before 20th level. Yes, but 35+ before 20th is more acceptable than 40+ before 20th. 5 points difference in save DC is huge; look at how D&D 3.5 nerfed Spell Focus and changed Spell Power.
Gadren 03-03-07, 01:21 AM	Sudden metamagic works only once per day though; augmented casting can be used far more often. True, but there are other options too, greater metamagic rods, metamagic school focus, and such. At any rate, its not that extra 5 levels that give it this power. There's nothing stopping a 10th level U.M. (15th level char) from casting a twinned cone of cold, or a 7th level U.M. (12th level) from casting a twinned fireball, in both cases just as "over-powered" for that level (if not more so). Yes, but 35+ before 20th is more acceptable than 40+ before 20th. 5 points difference in save DC is huge; look at how D&D 3.5 nerfed Spell Focus and changed Spell Power. Yes, but your argument seemed to hinge on the huge 40+ DC. (I'd be very interested in how you got that number, btw.) Also, that's 35+ by 15th as compared to 40+ by 20th (not before). At any rate, I think this tangent about assassins 11-15 is getting a bit off topic, and wasn't really what I was talking about, but if you want we can start a new thread if you really want to pursue it.
rironin 03-03-07, 01:37 AM	There's nothing stopping a 10th level U.M. (15th level char) from casting a twinned cone of cold, or a 7th level U.M. (12th level) from casting a twinned fireballTrue, but those are things a wizard could do if he wished. I don't think that the designers necessarily intended it, since it seems doubtful that they were thinking about practiced spellcaster, but it's interesting that if you have a sorc 1/wizard 9/UM 10 with practiced spellcaster, he ends up with 4th level sorcerer spells and the ability to apply augmented casting to his spells of up to 5th level. Like I said, I doubt this was intended, but it seems fitting that this limits the Ultimate Magus to casting spells that a regular wizard could cast if he/she wanted to - going by core books only, the most expensive metamagic feat is quicken which uses up a spell slot 4 levels higher. So the augmented casting power doesn't give a 10th level Ultimate Magus the equivalent of spell slots higher than 9th level. It seems like a nice natural limit. Feats and items can certainly mimic the same benefits, but I don't know if that's a good argument - if you translated the powers conferred by a 15th level Ultimate Magus' augmented casting into feats and/or items, you'd have a hugely broken number of sudden metamagics, or a very expensive pile of greater metamagic rods. You pointed out that the character you're applying this to isn't optimal to begin with, so that could certainly make all the difference when it comes to game balance. Everyone evaluating the extended class you presented is by default thinking about the worst case scenario, and what a nightmare tricked-out munchkin powergamer would do with it :)
Lotus Crane 03-03-07, 03:22 AM	Yes, but your argument seemed to hinge on the huge 40+ DC. (I'd be very interested in how you got that number, btw.) 10 + Assassin level (10) + Int bonus (12) + Ability Focus (2) + assassin's dagger (1) = 35. No, that Int bonus isn't unrealistically high (modified score 34 after magic items); while a normal rogue prioritizes Dex, any effective Assassin build should focus on Int, placing an 18 at 1st level (even if it means placing a 16 in Dex), and upgrading it at every opportunity, including usings wishes or a tome of clear thought. Int is almost as important to an Assassin as it is to a wizard, since it powers both his primary class ability (death attack) and his spells, which are actually very respectable with the additions from the Spell Compendium. Also, that's 35+ by 15th as compared to 40+ by 20th (not before). Fair enough, but while they're both still 35+ at 15th level, the fact remains that only one of them will be 40+ at 20th level; the other will still be a much more manageable (ie people don't need to roll natural 20's to save) 35+ at 20th level.
rironin 03-06-07, 01:44 PM	For feats, an ultimate magus should seriously consider Practiced Spellcaster (Complete Arcane/Complete Divine) for one or both of her classes.link (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/prc/20070306) LOL! Of course, they recommend taking it for both classes and fail to note the effect it has on your class progression completely. I haven't looked, but I'm not even sure if their sample build took this into account.
mittenninja 03-06-07, 02:54 PM	I just checked and the sample build does not have practiced spellcaster as a feat. =(
rironin 03-06-07, 03:04 PM	I just checked and the sample build does not have practiced spellcaster as a feat. =(???Feats Alertness (if familiar within 5 ft.), Combat Casting, Extend Spell, Practiced Spellcaster (duskblade), Practiced Spellcaster (wizard), Scribe Scroll, Weapon Focus (dwarven waraxe)The sample build (link (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/prc/20070306)) definitely has the feat, twice. What I still don't know is whether they correctly progressed their spellcasting as a result. But I don't think it's possible to tell, since we don't know when this build took either feat, and when they took the ultimate magus prestige class.
mittenninja 03-06-07, 03:47 PM	oh, i thought you were refering to the build actually printed in CM. That one does not have the feat.
Gadren 03-07-07, 09:37 PM	True, but those are things a wizard could do if he wished. I don't think that the designers necessarily intended it, since it seems doubtful that they were thinking about practiced spellcaster, but it's interesting that if you have a sorc 1/wizard 9/UM 10 with practiced spellcaster, he ends up with 4th level sorcerer spells and the ability to apply augmented casting to his spells of up to 5th level. Like I said, I doubt this was intended, but it seems fitting that this limits the Ultimate Magus to casting spells that a regular wizard could cast if he/she wanted to - going by core books only, the most expensive metamagic feat is quicken which uses up a spell slot 4 levels higher. So the augmented casting power doesn't give a 10th level Ultimate Magus the equivalent of spell slots higher than 9th level. It seems like a nice natural limit. Feats and items can certainly mimic the same benefits, but I don't know if that's a good argument - if you translated the powers conferred by a 15th level Ultimate Magus' augmented casting into feats and/or items, you'd have a hugely broken number of sudden metamagics, or a very expensive pile of greater metamagic rods. You pointed out that the character you're applying this to isn't optimal to begin with, so that could certainly make all the difference when it comes to game balance. Everyone evaluating the extended class you presented is by default thinking about the worst case scenario, and what a nightmare tricked-out munchkin powergamer would do with it :) I think you misunderstand me, for what I was talking about can be done as a normal UM without the practiced spellcaster feat.
Gadren 03-07-07, 10:26 PM	Hmmm, what do you guys thinks about taking Ultimate Magus as a Wizard/Witch (pg. 175 DMG)? Or even more flavorful, a witch/wujen?
FriendlyBiscuit 03-28-07, 07:52 AM	HOLY HELL IN A HANDBASKET FULL OF CRAP DOG CHEESE FLYING THROUGH A STEVE DOOR! I just read this thread... I just read this entire thread. I can't believe I did it. I laughed, I cried, but mostly I just clutched the sides of my monitor, vainly hoping against hope that I could physically crush the sheer idiocy out of my screen. But, just like a Jerry Springer show, or a guy getting repeatedly run over by oncoming traffic, you just can't stop watching the horrorshow! I mean, Lord! Jiminy Christmas! Jumping Jehova Jehosephat Jar-Jar Binks! It's like someone set up a little place in which to have a tea party. The guest list included a dictionary, a thesaurus, a few different encyclopedias, and a demon magic 8-ball, an 8-ball that, when shook, always says, "No." "It cannot be." "I say so." "I think not." "I don't believe it." I'm pawing my hair, I'm fiddling with my stubble, I'm rubbing my eyes, I'm fidgeting in my chair; I could scream. Sir, if you don't like the rules, rewrite them. "I don't think they should work that way" does NOT equal "they do not work that way." Kudos to everyone who tried to patiently and concisely make sense.
CantripN 03-28-07, 09:07 PM	Hmmm, what do you guys thinks about taking Ultimate Magus as a Wizard/Witch (pg. 175 DMG)? Or even more flavorful, a witch/wujen? Sure, why not? I made an NPC Witch using that class about a month ago... Not optimised, but not bad. With an UM, it may be better since it gets some divine spells.
Ryll 04-02-07, 02:44 AM	No. No you don't. You start as a Wizard4/Sorc1. You have Practiced Spellcaster, and you're an Illumian with the Word that gives +2 CL. Both of these applied to Sorcerer. I just quickly read a friend's Races of Destiny to see that Word that grants +2 Caster Level. The description appears to give the character +2 to all caster levels... it makes no class distinction. Would this not add 2 caster levels to the wizard AND sorcerer side, and therefore not help in saving the last level of wizard? - or is there somewhere in the Illumian description that states that Word only applies to one class?
Hand of Vecna 04-02-07, 04:09 PM	Wow, what a long, strange thread this has been.... Is it just me, or do the people (as I'm sure there are more than one, even if they don't post here) complaining that a non-epic Ultimate Magus (Sor 5/Wiz 5/UM 10, or whatever ratio and other PrC's you want) can never cast 9th level spells seem to be a bit silly? Even if, for instance, you wind up casting as a Sor 14/Wiz 13 (starting with the straightforward no-frills and admittedly inefficient Sor 5/Wiz 5/UM 10, tossing 2 of the 3 "lowest caster level" increases to each class to keep 'em even, and then the last 1 to Sor so we get 7th-level spells)... that's still (14 + 13 = ) 27 levels of spellcasting power from a level 20 character. Sure, you miss out on the 8th and 9th level spells, and those would be nice things to have, but you've got nearly twice as many 1st-6th level spells, which (to me at least) seems to be a fairly equitable trade-off. (Sure, the same can be done with 6 rings of wizardy... but what level 20 char can wear 6 rings of wizardry?) And in 8 levels (Sor 9/Wiz 9/UM 10), you cast as a Sor 18/Wiz 17 (and get those coveted 9th-level spells), so you're a 28th level char with the spellcasting power of a 35th level char. In 5 more levels (Sor 11/Wiz 12/UM 10), you cast as Sor 20/Wiz 20, a 33rd level char with the casting power of a 40th-level one. 'Course, feats (like Practiced Spellcaster) and items (like the ring of arcane might from CompArc, and the Ioun stone that boosts caster level), will be needed to get the effective caster level up, so you can get through Spell Resistances and whatnot.
teshen 04-02-07, 05:23 PM	I just quickly read a friend's Races of Destiny to see that Word that grants +2 Caster Level. The description appears to give the character +2 to all caster levels... it makes no class distinction. Would this not add 2 caster levels to the wizard AND sorcerer side, and therefore not help in saving the last level of wizard? - or is there somewhere in the Illumian description that states that Word only applies to one class? To the best of my knowledge, the bonus to caster levels would apply to both sides. Is it just me, or do the people (as I'm sure there are more than one, even if they don't post here) complaining that a non-epic Ultimate Magus (Sor 5/Wiz 5/UM 10, or whatever ratio and other PrC's you want) can never cast 9th level spells seem to be a bit silly?No, they can. You just have to plan for it. Sorcerer (or beguiler) 1/(possibly Specialist) Wizard 4/Utimate Magus 10/(full casting) Wizard PrC 5 (with practiced caster at first level or third for boosting of sorcerous casting). Ultimate magus can boost the wizard side twice. This is because the sorcerer's caster level is one better than wizard going into ultimate magus thanks to practiced caster (sorcerer). The first 'lowest caster level' will be wizard, and then since they are tied, you choose wizard for the second. This means you've lost two spellcasting levels of wizard, one for the level of sorcerer to get into ultimate magus, and one level while in ultimate magus. You'll have the spell slots of an 18th level wizard which will give you 2 ninth level slots if I'm not mistaken at level 20, and you'll have a sorcerous/spontaneous casting level of a 9th level character, which will give you access to fourth level spell slots on your sorcerous side. If you wanted to get any higher on your sorcerous side, you could simply choose to boost that side once more and it would give you a fifth level spell slot to play with and delay your wizard level's a ninth level spell slot until 20th level. That would be a bad choice as far as power is concerned... but you could do it. If you choose specialist wizard over wizard, give up the schools that your sorcerous side has if you use one of the specialty sorcerers like beguiler, dread necromancer, and warmage. Plan ahead so the loss of the higher level spells of that school impact you less... As has been mentioned before, Beguiler/Wizard is good for intelligence, and giving up illusion and enchantment on your wizard side to specialize does lose you some fun higher level spells, but you get all the basics of those schools you need from beguiler. :mage:
Hand of Vecna 04-02-07, 08:45 PM	No, they can. You just have to plan for it. You... missed my point completely.
teshen 04-02-07, 08:56 PM	Is it just me, or do the people (as I'm sure there are more than one, even if they don't post here) complaining that a non-epic Ultimate Magus (Sor 5/Wiz 5/UM 10, or whatever ratio and other PrC's you want) can never cast 9th level spells seem to be a bit silly? You... missed my point completely. I did indeed, sir. :embarrass I apologize for my moment of stupid... :surrender
Tytalus 04-03-07, 02:46 AM	Is it just me, or do the people (as I'm sure there are more than one, even if they don't post here) complaining that a non-epic Ultimate Magus (Sor 5/Wiz 5/UM 10, or whatever ratio and other PrC's you want) can never cast 9th level spells seem to be a bit silly? I don't think so. Even if, for instance, you wind up casting as a Sor 14/Wiz 13 (starting with the straightforward no-frills and admittedly inefficient Sor 5/Wiz 5/UM 10, tossing 2 of the 3 "lowest caster level" increases to each class to keep 'em even, and then the last 1 to Sor so we get 7th-level spells)... that's still (14 + 13 = ) 27 levels of spellcasting power from a level 20 character. Sure, you miss out on the 8th and 9th level spells, and those would be nice things to have, but you've got nearly twice as many 1st-6th level spells, which (to me at least) seems to be a fairly equitable trade-off. What good are all those spells when you are so many spell levels behind? Spells get a *lot* more powerful each spell level, being behind even a single caster level is painful to say the least (try it out - it's not fun). As a Sor5/Wiz5/UM10 your highest spell level is 7, while your pure wizard friend has had 9th level spells two or three levels earlier. I don't think I have to explain the vast power difference between Timestop/Wish/etc. and iconic 7th level spells. You end up being basically an arcane caster that doesn't do well what he's supposed to be good at (cast powerful spells). The increased number of low-level spells is (IMHE*) nowhere near a fitting tradeoff. With the suggested 4 encounters per day you won't even get a chance to cast them all. --- IMHE = In My Humble Experience
teshen 04-03-07, 12:33 PM	What good are all those spells when you are so many spell levels behind? Spells get a *lot* more powerful each spell level, being behind even a single caster level is painful to say the least (try it out - it's not fun). True enough... being behind the curve does hurt, but you traded that bit of power for some other thing... most know it when they do it. And that trade can just about be worth it... if you do it in a way that fits with what your character does. As a Sor5/Wiz5/UM10 your highest spell level is 7, while your pure wizard friend has had 9th level spells two or three levels earlier. I don't think I have to explain the vast power difference between Timestop/Wish/etc. and iconic 7th level spells. You're right. There is a big difference between 7th and 9th level spells. Mechanically, it's the difference of four caster levels. If you've lost four levels anywhere in a casting build, you haven't been trying to make your character effective. Multiclassing in 3.5 tends to hurt a lot of character concepts. Combination classes are naturally weak. Anybody who's played the game for a while, I think, comes to this realization. Ultimate magus is a combo class... like Mystic theurge, only with more design experience under WotC belt. That's why it sucks less than the mystic theurge. You can get some good stuff out of Ultimate magus, but it depends on how you do it... You end up being basically an arcane caster that doesn't do well what he's supposed to be good at (cast powerful spells). The increased number of low-level spells is (IMHE*) nowhere near a fitting tradeoff. With the suggested 4 encounters per day you won't even get a chance to cast them all. And you can get 9th level spells. If you don't like being two levels behind, make it so that you get out of Ultimate Magus before level 7 where the last single caster boost comes out of your primary casting class... you have less to metamagic your spells with, but you've delayed your casting in your primary class by only one level... at level 20, that's three 9th level spell slots as opposed to four slots. I know it hurts, but it's a sacrifice you can live with... :P Besides, in a build where you get to 9th level spells on one side and 4th level spells on the other, feel free to use those fourth level slots to quicken everything you can... that'll help you burn through those spells burning a hole in your... mind... :uh-huh: Even if, for instance, you wind up casting as a Sor 14/Wiz 13 (starting with the straightforward no-frills and admittedly inefficient Sor 5/Wiz 5/UM 10. . . emphasis mineSo why would you purposely kneecap yourself? . . . that's still (14 + 13 = ) 27 levels of spellcasting power from a level 20 character. Sure, you miss out on the 8th and 9th level spells, and those would be nice things to have, but you've got nearly twice as many 1st-6th level spells, which (to me at least) seems to be a fairly equitable trade-off. And I'm not sure that the 27 levels you refer to really do what a 20th level caster does... the Spell Power feature of Ultimate magus helps keep the character somewhat current verses things like overcoming spell resistance and counterspelling... but missing those higher slots means... even if you aren't using those slots for the stronger spells (which again, is purposely weakening your character)... less metamagic potential. Actually, even if you cast many of those extra low to middle level spells, most could be stripped away in an instant by a 9th level Disjunction or if you boost a party member to death, the bonus isn't what you get with a single casting of shapechange. You can do lots of neat things with all those extra spells, but in most cases they don't match the raw power of a single 9th level spell... With the ability to burn up to 5th level spells to metamagic others, anything in excess of those 5th level spells takes away from your strongest asset... your higher level spells.
Hand of Vecna 04-03-07, 03:25 PM	So why would you purposely kneecap yourself? Because I was typing on my afternoon break and the 5/5/10 split was the simplest and fastest one that popped into my mind. ;) And I'm not sure that the 27 levels you refer to really do what a 20th level caster does... the Spell Power feature of Ultimate magus helps keep the character somewhat current verses things like overcoming spell resistance and counterspelling... but missing those higher slots means... even if you aren't using those slots for the stronger spells (which again, is purposely weakening your character)... less metamagic potential. Meh. With 6th level slots you can get greater dispel magic, which is great for counterspelling. Plenty of feats and whatnot out there to boost your ability to bypass SR. Actually, even if you cast many of those extra low to middle level spells, most could be stripped away in an instant by a 9th level Disjunction or if you boost a party member to death, the bonus isn't what you get with a single casting of shapechange. You can do lots of neat things with all those extra spells, but in most cases they don't match the raw power of a single 9th level spell... 'Course they won't be, and I never said they would. But having so many can come close. Not equal, no, but close, and not as horrendous a loss as most others here seem to say (at least IMO & E). With the ability to burn up to 5th level spells to metamagic others, anything in excess of those 5th level spells takes away from your strongest asset... your higher level spells. Eh? I was under the impression the Augment Casting thing could apply only to spells of 5th level or lower, but the spell/slot you 'burn' can be of any level? Which would mean anything in excess of a 5th level spell can't be metamagicked via Augment Casting, so you get less for those spells from UM.
DMsDelight 04-03-07, 03:31 PM	Bah, I knew Ultimate Magus would be called into question. They're not that great. Fun, but not that great. If you need two arcane classes that use the same spell list, the wizard isn't writing enough nto his spellbook.
teshen 04-03-07, 05:16 PM	Actually, even if you cast many of those extra low to middle level spells, most could be stripped away in an instant by a 9th level Disjunction or if you boost a party member to death, the bonus isn't what you get with a single casting of shapechange. You can do lots of neat things with all those extra spells, but in most cases they don't match the raw power of a single 9th level spell...'Course they won't be, and I never said they would. But having so many can come close. Not equal, no, but close, and not as horrendous a loss as most others here seem to say (at least IMO & E). Ok then. I would say it depends on how one plays a character and how a dm runs a game... which, in this case, doesn't contradict your statement... :tie: With the ability to burn up to 5th level spells to metamagic others, anything in excess of those 5th level spells takes away from your strongest asset... your higher level spells. Eh? I was under the impression the Augment Casting thing could apply only to spells of 5th level or lower, but the spell/slot you 'burn' can be of any level? Which would mean anything in excess of a 5th level spell can't be metamagicked via Augment Casting, so you get less for those spells from UM. :doh: I was under the impression that the augment casting feature allowed you to burn a spell up to one half your ultimate magus level to augment another spell, and you could not modify a spell already augmented by a metamagic feat in such a fashion... This is what I get for not playing in a while... :( But if that is the case, then the ultimate magus is even weaker than I remember... and people should probably disregard most of my last post. :raincloud
teshen 04-03-07, 05:29 PM	They're not that great. Fun, but not that great. Agreed. If you need two arcane classes that use the same spell list, the wizard isn't writing enough nto his spellbook. Beguiler 1/Conjurer (prohibited schools illusion and enchantment) 4/Ultimate Magus 10/Archmage 5 Beguiler + Ultimate Magus helps cover the spells he couldn't scribe... without actually scribing them no less. :)