Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Eklypse0 05-22-07, 03:46 PM	I'm sure it has been brought up before, but I went back 16 pages and couldn't find a thread on it. (Not having a search on the forums sucks..) I found some debate on other forums (not part of wizards of the coast forums) on whether A Wizard could pick up a Devine spell or not. To me the the Feat's text is pretty clear: EXTRA SPELL You learn an extra spell. Prerequesite: Caster Level 3rd Benifit: You learn one additional spell at any level up to one level lower then the highest level of spell you can currently cast. Thus, a 4th-level sorcerer (Maximum spell level 2nd) gains a new 0-level or 1st-level spell known with which to expand her repetoire. For classes such as wizards that have more options for learning spells, Extra Spell is generally used to learn a specific spell thatthe character lacks access to and would be unable to research. Note that the prerequesites don't specify Arcane or Divine levels. No where in the text does it limit spells of character's type. The fact that it does mention that wizards can use this to actually gain a spell that 'he lacks access to and would be unable to research' would point to three possible areas: He is a specialist and wants to learn a spell in his restricted catagory, wanting to learn a spell of a specific caster class or divine spells. In fact, there is no mention that no mention about Divine casters not able to take Arcane spells. But they tend to already have access to a lot of arcane spells though having specific Domaines. I would probably lean against spells of the opposite descriptors (Like a Good character casting an Evil spell) only because the divine power he works for would be a bit put off. I would allow that he 'could' cast it but until he attones for the deed, he's not getting any spells back for the time. Shain / Eklypse
Vegepygmy 05-22-07, 03:56 PM	The fact that it does mention that wizards can use this to actually gain a spell that 'he lacks access to and would be unable to research' would point to three possible areas: He is a specialist and wants to learn a spell in his restricted catagory, wanting to learn a spell of a specific caster class or divine spells.Um...no, it points to a fourth (and correct) possibility: He lacks access to a scroll or spellbook containing the spell and is unable, for whatever reason, to research it himself. The FAQ has clarified how Extra Spell works: Can the warmage (Complete Arcane) benefit from the Extra Spell feat? No. Extra Spell lets you add one spell to your list of spells known, but the spell must be taken from your class spell list. Since the warmage already knows all the spells on his class spell list, this feat has no effect.
Eklypse0 05-22-07, 04:07 PM	That is kind of an expensive use of burning a rare ability (Feat). If it were this restrictive, then I would have called it (Any spell the character could normally cast. 'and' allows access only to spells the character can cast based on their Class) I would also include spells based on the caster level they get the feat at. No sense in restricting it so heavilly when it gives hardly anything at all in terms of game play. To where is I can see that burning a Feat would allow a one time ability to learn a single spell outside their knowledge. This would ba a case where the extra text (of the wizard) added nothing and It would be a feat that I would have no interest in takeing. (Considering I've never had any one ever play a sorcerer in any of my campaigns.) Eklypse
Puca 05-22-07, 04:10 PM	For a sorcerer, it is a pretty decent feat, considering that you know so few spells of any given level. I think everyone who has played a sorcerer has wised they could know "just one more spell." Now, feats are pretty important, so whether it is worth it ends up being subjective. This would ba a case where the extra text (of the wizard) added nothing and It would be a feat that I would have no interest in takeing.I read the text relating to wizards as basical an admission of the fact that, while they can use the feat, it is essentially worthless for them.
Eklypse0 05-22-07, 04:18 PM	I'm probably influanced because I'm used to playing Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved setting. Where is a spell is a spell and isn't nessicarilly arcane or divine. On the other hand, classes that are only partial casters would have a limited subset of spells they can access (Simple spells). Full casters have a larger access to spells (Simple and Complex). Either of them can use a feat which would open up additional 'spells' that can be learned. Such as the Feat of Energy Mage (Specific energy type) allowing a caster who only normally has access to Simple Spells to also pick up Complex spells with the Fire Descriptor assuming he took Energy Mage(Fire). Shain / Eklypse
risner 05-23-07, 09:10 PM	1) I'm sure it has been brought up before 2) A Wizard could pick up a Devine spell or not. 1) Every week almost like clockwork. 2) Absolutely not for 3 solid reasons. The rules of the feat don't allow for selection of spells not currently on your spell list (by the lack of the required "from any spell list" text in these situations.) The FAQ clarifies that this is obviously not possible (Twice: once directly re: Extra Spell feat and once on the "can a wizard learn spells in his spell book if not on his class list" question.) There are no rules for how to handle spells when translating them from other class lists to the class list you wish defined in Extra Spell feat. The case is closed. he lacks access to and would be unable to research' would point to three possible areas: He is a specialist and wants to learn a spell in his restricted catagory, wanting to learn a spell of a specific caster class or divine spells. Wrong on both, it is "he has not found a scroll/spellbook with it and he doesn't want to spend the time/money on independent research." The point is that this is a nice spontaneous caster feat and a nearly useless prepared caster feat.
Captain_Kobold 05-23-07, 10:16 PM	It can be used by wizards to bring in a spell from s source that they didn't have access to before. This would not be so much use in a game where all spellcasting classes are automatically granted access to all new content as soon as someone brings the book along to the game. However, if the wizard's research institution does not contain those spells, he might have to research them in order to take them as one of their new spells. If they don't have the time/money available for this, they could use the feat instead.
Eklypse0 05-24-07, 01:12 AM	1) Every week almost like clockwork. 2) Absolutely not for 3 solid reasons. The rules of the feat don't allow for selection of spells not currently on your spell list (by the lack of the required "from any spell list" text in these situations.) The FAQ clarifies that this is obviously not possible (Twice: once directly re: Extra Spell feat and once on the "can a wizard learn spells in his spell book if not on his class list" question.) There are no rules for how to handle spells when translating them from other class lists to the class list you wish defined in Extra Spell feat. The case is closed. Wrong on both, it is "he has not found a scroll/spellbook with it and he doesn't want to spend the time/money on independent research." The point is that this is a nice spontaneous caster feat and a nearly useless prepared caster feat. That wouldn't be a very good representation of the Feat. The feat said that it would let the wizard get the spell if he were unable to get it though normal means, it didn't mean unwilling. Burning a feat for it would be a waste, because if you really wanted the spell in question, most DMs would work it out with you on how to get it. If not, the DM isn't going to let you get the spell anyhow. Shain / Eklypse
risner 05-24-07, 05:31 AM	That wouldn't be a very good representation of the Feat. The feat said that it would let the wizard get the spell if he were unable to get it though normal means, it didn't mean unwilling. Burning a feat for it would be a waste, because if you really wanted the spell in question, most DMs would work it out with you on how to get it. If not, the DM isn't going to let you get the spell anyhow. That is a tired argument. The fact of the matter is this feat isn't designed for Wizards. You can state that the meaning of "unable" all you like. It doesn't change the fact that the spell doesn't allow a Wizard to take any spell that the wizard could not normally take when leveling up using his "free spells" at level up. I can think of a 100 ways a Wizard would be "unable" to take Fireball at any level from 5th to 20th. This feat would be one way to solve those issues. Since you will ask, I will give you a couple of the 100 below: 1) The DM wants to make Fireball cost more than normal to obtain, so he prefers a feat (Extra Spell) to be taken to grant the spell to the Wizards. 2) The DM created a world where Fireball is illegal, and the feat is the only way to obtain it. Take your pick, but the feat as written in both the 3.5 and 3.0 version does very little for a Wizard. The 3.0 version was in fact more clear, since it pretty simply stated a Wizard had no reason to take the feat. Debating it as a rules issue is pointless, there isn't anything to debate. Your position has no merit.
Eklypse0 05-24-07, 07:06 AM	I suppose it has no merit if someone must blindly consider that Arcane and Divine power as two completely different things. Personally, I prefer to run campaigns where the distinctions can be quite blurred. Priests can have access to 'many' Arcane spells due to Domains, and cast them in armor. Why not let Wizards cast Divine spells if they pay feats to cast individual spells?
Vegepygmy 05-24-07, 11:23 AM	I suppose it has no merit if someone must blindly consider that Arcane and Divine power as two completely different things.As a rules issue, that is exactly what one must do. Personally, I prefer to run campaigns where the distinctions can be quite blurred.And no sensible person will argue with your right to do so. But the actual rules are not so "blurred," so if you try to claim that the actual rules support your preferred style, other people are going to tell you that your position has no merit.
Eklypse0 05-24-07, 08:48 PM	I was just reading the exact wording of the Extra Spell Feat. Exact wording states that You can use it to Learn spells you didn't normally have access to. PHB Wizards don't normally have access to Cure Light Wounds, for example. I did web searches for errata on the feat with no success before I posted here. My logic was that, yes. Considering I'm an easy GM (and never have GMed _anyone_ who played a Sorcerer). I wasn't really thinking in terms of a feat only Sorcerers had a benefit for. Especially since the type of caster the Feat was for was very Vague. Also considering that source material I use allows characters to take a feat to gain a _group_ of spells they normally can't cast and know them so they can cast them, I figured that it was completely possible for core rules to have designed a feat which allows the caster to have access to a spell that normal caster's of their type can not cast at all. Might also be that I like fantasy stories and want D&D to be as close to them as possible. More fantasy then not has one of the 'PC's do something along the lines of.. He's a mage. He can't do that! PCs are the rule breakers of the world if anyone is. The story is about them. If a player wants a unique ability and wants to burn a Feat to gain it. The ability isn't out of the power level for a character of that level? Go ahead, give it to them. If it is a Priest of the fifth level who wants to smite down their god's enemies with effects that are equivalent to fire balls, Let him have the fire ball spell in trade of the feat. If a Wizard has put forth more effort then any other wizard, or perhaps it is just part of their destiny, let him have the Cure light wounds and surprise everyone with it's use. Each case allows the player to create a unique character that isn't one of the masses.
risner 05-24-07, 11:11 PM	I was just reading the exact wording of the Extra Spell Feat. Exact wording states that You can use it to Learn spells you didn't normally have access to. Exact wording of the feat doesn't allow any spell from any spell list because it doesn't use those words. Every single example in the game uses those exact words when they allow you to select spells from other spell lists. The absence of the phrase "from any spell list" is irrefutable evidence of the prohibition on cross class selection.
jaelis 05-24-07, 11:54 PM	Exact wording states that You can use it to Learn spells you didn't normally have access to. One can even concede the point that your wizard could indeed learn a non-wizard spell, perhaps cure light wounds from the cleric list. However, he would still be unable to cast it, because he lacks any first-level cleric spell slots.
Eklypse0 05-25-07, 01:25 AM	Hmm, why is it that Wizards can't use Divine spells anyhow? Letting them have access to them would help them even the balance between them and Clerics. Think about it, Clerics get the best armor, really good weapons, Good Hit Points, Better Saves, special effects against certain types of creatures that outstrips a Ranger's ability. Not only that, but they can cast as many spells as a wizard while they wear armor. Wizards, what do they get? Spells. Not only that but they have to learn them by saving, exploring and stealing, unlike the Cleric who once they get the new spell level in question, has access to their entire list. Clerics can even make the most potent wizard practically helpless with one 2nd level spell / No save, assuming they don't have the silent spell feat... oh yea, and had the spells memorized with that feat in effect. To offest all the Cleric's advantages, Wizards should be able to Learn and Cast any spell they can find (and has the power to cast). There isn't a single spell in the Divine category that I've not seen a Wizard have access to in fiction. What is Cure light wounds to a Wizard? The simple joining of flesh with magic glue. Calling on the gods / Demonic forces to answer a question? All they have to do is be careful about not upsetting such beings of power. Using Holy power to smite the undead or demonic forces? Opening a conduit to the positive plane will do that trick, without a god's intervention. About the only spell I can see as being tricky for a Wizard would be raising the long dead, assuming the dead's soul in question was already in the hands of their deity and the Deity in question is rather selfish about not letting them return to life. Shain
jaelis 05-25-07, 02:38 AM	Who cares about cleric spells? If your DM lets you get away with this, grab Otto's irresistable dance at 6th level from the bard list and have fun! I guess taking identify from the magic domain list would be kind of nice too... avoid all those expensive material components. There's all sorts of fun to be had, I wouldn't futz around with healing magic.
Grim04 05-25-07, 02:46 AM	Since a sorcerer can get cleric domains from the sorcerer only feat (forget which dragon magazine), I'd say this would allow a sorcerer to get a spell off another class's spell list.
risner 05-25-07, 08:51 AM	Hmm, why is it that Wizards can't use Divine spells anyhow? Letting them have access to them would help them even the balance between them and Clerics. To offest all the Cleric's advantages, Wizards should be able to Learn and Cast any spell they can find (and has the power to cast). Because of balance reasons. Wizards get more damaging spells earlier and significantly more powerful area of effect spells. If you give Wizards all the Cleric spells, you have just shifted the balance so far to the side of the Wizards, I don't think there is any point in having Clerics at that point. Since a sorcerer can get cleric domains from the sorcerer only feat (forget which dragon magazine), I'd say this would allow a sorcerer to get a spell off another class's spell list. Well, you are right about Sorcerer's and wrong about this feat allowing a Sorcerer to get a spell off another class's spell list. ;-)
Eklypse0 05-25-07, 12:18 PM	Because of balance reasons. Wizards get more damaging spells earlier and significantly more powerful area of effect spells. If you give Wizards all the Cleric spells, you have just shifted the balance so far to the side of the Wizards, I don't think there is any point in having Clerics at that point. Well Clerics have several abilities not accessible to Wizards, Turn Undead (Or whatever they are specialized against) Spontaneous Casting. I was wrong before, they get _more_ spells they can cast per day then a Wizard of equivalent level. (That is just plain stupid: The (divine) Warrior/Spell Caster gets access to more spells per day then the pure (arcane) Spell Caster) Every spell for the Wizard must be memorized. Assuming a Wizard did have access to it, every Cure Light Wounds spell memorized is one less Burning Hands spell. On the other hand, A cleric of Fire / Healing Domains can memorize all their slots as burning hands spells and spontaneously cast the slots as Cure Light Wounds spells. Again, Clerics have so many advantages over Wizards, it isn't funny. 1st level Wizard versus a first level Cleric and the Wizard is expecting to lose about 70% of the time. (Wizard may get the first spell off as the Cleric gets within range. Cleric runs up and whacks the Wizard with a Heavy Mace each time He tries to cast a spell. Cleric with now 3-4 (average) points of damage casts the 1-level spell of Cure Light Wounds. The Cleric is now unscratched and the Mage is a bloody pulp.) I see the system as already unbalanced to begin with. I'm just trying to adjust for it. Shain
kalstrand 05-25-07, 07:14 PM	A Cleric with the healing and fire domains can't prepare Burning Hands in all his slots and spontaneously cast them as Cure Light Wounds because the domain doesn't add the spell to the general cleric list and you can't spontaneously cast with your domain slots.
zzo38 05-25-07, 08:35 PM	........... Again, Clerics have so many advantages over Wizards, it isn't funny. 1st level Wizard versus a first level Cleric and the Wizard is expecting to lose about 70% of the time. ......... I can see such things, maybe you should allow sorcerer/wizards to learn absolutely any spells, but you need to be at least the level of the other class that it is normally a spell of, and you can also take a penalty to caster level or whatever if you cast a spell that isn't in your class list (even a low -1 penalty is probably OK). Do you like this? Can anyone tell me if is good?
Lina_Inverse 05-25-07, 09:05 PM	Because of balance reasons. Wizards get more damaging spells earlier and significantly more powerful area of effect spells. If you give Wizards all the Cleric spells, you have just shifted the balance so far to the side of the Wizards, I don't think there is any point in having Clerics at that point. Damaging spells have nothing to do with game balance. Being that there you know worthless. Cleric and wizard lists are equal to each other in all honesty.
zzo38 05-25-07, 09:26 PM	Because of balance reasons. Wizards get more damaging spells earlier and significantly more powerful area of effect spells. If you give Wizards all the Cleric spells, you have just shifted the balance so far to the side of the Wizards, I don't think there is any point in having Clerics at that point. Clerics get spontaneous healing, domain powers, turn/rebuke undead, and also more spells per day than a wizard, and a few other things as well (d6, armor, etc). Wizards get bonus feats and the ability to summon a familiar, but clerics don't.
Pentar 05-25-07, 09:45 PM	Let's keep in mind here that this is an entire Feat dedicated to allow the caster ONE additional spell they can learn. This isn't a single feat that is granting Wizards carte blanche access to all Clerical spells. Just ONE spell that is one level lower than the highest level spell they can cast. Now, personally, I would not allow it, but it's not nearly as uber as people seem to be making it out to be. What I would probably allow is that this Feat will allow a Wizard to learn a spell that is arcane, but not on their spell list... so perhaps a Bard, Hexblade, Assassin or Duskblade spell. This would make more sense in all mechanics, after all, divine spells are granted by a diety. It's not exactly something you can just pick-up and learn.
Lina_Inverse 05-25-07, 10:29 PM	Now, personally, I would not allow it, but it's not nearly as uber as people seem to be making it out to be. I would theres a psionic feat that lets a psion learn any power. What I would probably allow is that this Feat will allow a Wizard to learn a spell that is arcane/quote] Bards have cure spells, so the most obvious use would be preserved. [quote]divine spells are granted by a deity. Wrong. Faith.
risner 05-25-07, 11:52 PM	I would theres a psionic feat that lets a psion learn any power. Yes, it was also written before Extra Spell and contains the requisite "from any spell list" that all effects that allow you to add any spell from any spell list must have in their ability. They know how to use the language to allow any spell list and they deliberately avoided saying so in the Extra Spell feat (despite being the same author on both feats.) The rules (PHB) don't allow Extra Spell or the Master Specialist "Extra Spell" ability to add from any spell list. The feats/abilities don't contain the "from any spell list" phrase. WotC comes out and says it is not possible. A DM is free to rule they work, but it is absolutely 100% no doubt a house rule (which I have no problem in that DM ruling that way.) But don't try to convince others that rules is anything but a house rule.
runestar 05-25-07, 11:56 PM	Yes, it was also written before Extra Spell and contains the requisite "from any spell list" that all effects that allow you to add any spell from any spell list must have in their ability. Extra spell was first released in Tome and Blood. You mean XPH came out before then?:confused:
farfairer 05-26-07, 01:59 AM	I have a couple of question... I understand that a wizard can't take the Extra Spell feat to gain access to a Cleric, Bard, Assassin, Ranger, Druid, Paladin, Wu-Jen, or Hexblade spell, but what about a specialist wizard and Clerics? If my character is a conjurer who's opposition schools are Necromancy and Illusion, can I gain Magic Jar (Necro) or Greater Invisibility (Illusion) by taking hte feat? And if so am I still prohibited from ever casting it? If my character is a Cleric can I take a spell from a domain list I don't have access to with the Extra Spell feat? If not can I take a spell that I only have access to through one of my domains (say Identify) and add that to my regular spell list?
Pentar 05-26-07, 02:05 AM	I would theres a psionic feat that lets a psion learn any power. And your point is? My statement wasn't a ruling based on what already exists, but what I feel is right for my campaigns. A Wizard casting "Raise Dead" seems a bit out of place for me. What I would probably allow is that this Feat will allow a Wizard to learn a spell that is arcane Bards have cure spells, so the most obvious use would be preserved. And...? Wrong. Faith. Faith alone does nothing without some sort of divinity backing it up. Otherwise, "Faith" would not deny you the ability to cast certain spells based on your alignment. Note "divinity" does not neccesitate a "god" per say, as I understand in 3.5, there are primal forces of Good, Evil, Nature, Law and all that happy shizznanny. But the fact of the matter is that Divine spells are granted, not learned.
runestar 05-26-07, 02:11 AM	If my character is a Cleric can I take a spell from a domain list I don't have access to with the Extra Spell feat? That would be one conceivable use of the feat for a divine spellcaster - to effectively add a domain-only spell to their main clerical spell list. I am not sure about specialist wizards.
Merestil Haye 05-26-07, 06:26 AM	That would be one conceivable use of the feat for a divine spellcaster - to effectively add a domain-only spell to their main clerical spell list. I am not sure about specialist wizards.It doesn't work either for specialist wizards or for clerics to add a domain spell to their spells known. The FAQ answer makes it clear that Extra Spell allows the featholder to learn a spell that is on his class list. Specialist wizards voluntarily remove from their class list all spells of the forbidden schools. Since those spells are not on his class spell list, Extra Spell cannot be used to learn one. Similarly, by default Clerics do not get the spells in their domains on their class spell list - only those domains which they take. So again, the feat cannot be used to learn these spells. A discussion from the FAQ :To activate a spell completion or spell trigger item, the spell in the item must appear on your class spell list. How do you handle a cleric’s domain spells? Most deities have three or four domains, but a cleric chooses only two of them. Are only the spells from the domains the cleric has chosen on his class spell list for the purpose of activating these items? Or are the spells for all domains associated with the cleric’s deity on his class spell list? Also, which spells are on a specialist wizard’s class spell list? Do all wizard spells remain on the wizard class spell list, even when the wizard has chosen a specialty and his prohibited schools? If you’re a cleric, spells from the domains you have selected are part of your class spell list. Spells from domains you could have selected, but did not, are not part of your class spell list (unless you get them on your class spell list some other way, such as by gaining another domain or adding another class). Spells from a specialist wizard’s prohibited schools are not part of his class spell list. On faith.Faith alone does nothing without some sort of divinity backing it up. Otherwise, "Faith" would not deny you the ability to cast certain spells based on your alignment. Note "divinity" does not neccesitate a "god" per say, as I understand in 3.5, there are primal forces of Good, Evil, Nature, Law and all that happy shizznanny. But the fact of the matter is that Divine spells are granted, not learned.The language of the rules on how clerics select spells and prepare them does not support this. It never once talks about the spell being "granted" by some outside power. That is one of those things which appears to be a concept grandfathered in from old D&D. Clerics choose their spells freely. Nothing outside him chooses the spells for him. This suggests to me that the DM should be interfering in the Cleric's spell selection only in cases where it would egregiously violate the cleric's belief. In D&D what you have faith in doesn't matter. It's the quality of your faith that matters.
runestar 05-26-07, 06:50 AM	It doesn't work either for specialist wizards or for clerics to add a domain spell to their spells known. Your answer does not seem to tally with your quote...:confused: What I meant was say, a cleric with the war domain. Normally, he could memorize enlarge person as a 1st lv domain spell (which is also part of his cleric spell list). Now, could he not take extra spell to add enlarge person to his actual list of cleric spells known? Thus allowing him to memorize enlarge person in a normal cleric spell slot and cast it multiple times a day, rather than just 1/day?
Merestil Haye 05-26-07, 09:25 AM	Your answer does not seem to tally with your quote...:confused: What I meant was say, a cleric with the war domain. Normally, he could memorize enlarge person as a 1st lv domain spell (which is also part of his cleric spell list). Now, could he not take extra spell to add enlarge person to his actual list of cleric spells known? Thus allowing him to memorize enlarge person in a normal cleric spell slot and cast it multiple times a day, rather than just 1/day?Sorry, I misread your question. I interpreted it as "Can a cleric take the feat to add a spell to their spell list from a domain their deity grants access to but which they did not select?" (Eg a priest of Hieroneous who has not taken the War domain adding Enlarge Person to their spells known.) Your question is more interesting, and I would be inclined to agree the feat should allow it. I houserule more generously than the RAW in the case of Extra Spell and that would certainly fall into a viable use of the feat. There are other feats which do similar things - Domain Spontenaiety comes to mind - and class features too, if I recall correctly.
Eklypse0 05-26-07, 09:37 AM	What I would probably allow is that this Feat will allow a Wizard to learn a spell that is arcane, but not on their spell list... so perhaps a Bard, Hexblade, Assassin or Duskblade spell. This would make more sense in all mechanics, after all, divine spells are granted by a diety. It's not exactly something you can just pick-up and learn. I mentioned before that PCs are world rule breakers anyhow. Extra Spell Feat could be just as much a form of Divine Favor. If the PC is working towards goals the deity favors, but not a Cleric, the deity may just grant you the power to learn a divine spell. And on the Cleric side, The deity extra favors them and grants them the ability to learn an arcane spell. Heck, a series of books by Gary Gygax himself had the main character favored by deities and high wizards. (Greyhawk world setting) He was simply a neutral Rogue who's destiny was to defeat a being so powerful that he could take over the Hells, Abyss and Torturous with barely a blink, then send those armies to destroy the guardians of the heaven, while making the leaders of those planes his lap dogs. Shain / Eklypse0
risner 05-26-07, 11:31 AM	Extra spell was first released in Tome and Blood. You mean XPH came out before then?:confused: Yes, it was in the 3.0 T&B, but since we had not brought in 3.0 as a topic, I excluded the 3.0 version from discussion: Extra Spell T&B p40 (2001) The 3.5 texts show Expanded Knowledge was published first: Extra Spell CArc p79 (November 2004) Expanded Knowledge EPH p46 (April 2004) 1) If my character is a conjurer who's opposition schools are Necromancy and Illusion, can I gain Magic Jar (Necro) or Greater Invisibility (Illusion) by taking hte feat? 2) And if so am I still prohibited from ever casting it? 3) If my character is a Cleric can I take a spell from a domain list I don't have access to with the Extra Spell feat? 4) If not can I take a spell that I only have access to through one of my domains (say Identify) and add that to my regular spell list? 1) No, since prohibited schools are no longer part of your class spell list. 2) If you could manage to get it in your spell book, you could not cast it (exception would be Red Wizard and prohibited spells learned prior to joining Red Wizards PrC.) 3) No, since spells from domains you don't have are not on your Cleric class spell list. 4) Yes, you can take Extra Spell on a domain only spell from one of your domains to enable you to cast the spell multiple times a day (since it is on your class spell list, but restricted to once a day because it is a domain only spell.)
Pentar 05-26-07, 11:57 AM	On faith.The language of the rules on how clerics select spells and prepare them does not support this. It never once talks about the spell being "granted" by some outside power. That is one of those things which appears to be a concept grandfathered in from old D&D. Clerics choose their spells freely. Nothing outside him chooses the spells for him. This suggests to me that the DM should be interfering in the Cleric's spell selection only in cases where it would egregiously violate the cleric's belief. In D&D what you have faith in doesn't matter. It's the quality of your faith that matters. Well, the point of contention wasn't how the cleric chooses his or her spells. It's the force behind it that grants them the ability to cast it. The concept of "granted" spells is that the cleric/divine caster, medidates, prays, ritualizes, etc. each day for their spells. They aren't drawing on the power of a weave, personal energies, or some mystical understanding to achieve their spell effects - they are drawing power from their gods/primal forces, which can, in certain situations say "Uhm, no." They then select what spells they want; but it is not through their own link to magic that they cast it (as is the case of Arcane magic), but channeling the power of a divinity/divine force. Again, as I said before, if that were not the case, why would clerics be banned from using spells opposing their alignment? If they eally wanted to cast that spell in the heat of the moment, nothing is really stopping them? Except... they can't, because the divine force from which the spell is cast stops them.
Pentar 05-26-07, 12:16 PM	I mentioned before that PCs are world rule breakers anyhow. Extra Spell Feat could be just as much a form of Divine Favor. If the PC is working towards goals the deity favors, but not a Cleric, the deity may just grant you the power to learn a divine spell. And on the Cleric side, The deity extra favors them and grants them the ability to learn an arcane spell. Shain / Eklypse0 Well, you can justify it any way you want; and naturally, throwing the power of a god behind it is the best way to achieve any effect you desire in D&D. I just assume that Extra Spell/I] is a feat like any other feat (that is, can be learned by anyone meeting the pre-reqs without requiring the intervention of a god). Besides which, if a god is trying to reward you, why would he/she force you to burn a feat in order to get your reward? Just give you the damn spell and be done with it. Whatever the case, I'm not looking for [I]justifications as to why a Wizard should start raising the dead, or why a Cleric should start Enervating people... I personally find mixing Divine and Arcane spellcasting distastful. They are wholly separate forms of magic and should be treated as such.
Merestil Haye 05-26-07, 12:28 PM	Well, the point of contention wasn't how the cleric chooses his or her spells. It's the force behind it that grants them the ability to cast it. The concept of "granted" spells is that the cleric/divine caster, medidates, prays, ritualizes, etc. each day for their spells. They aren't drawing on the power of a weave, personal energies, or some mystical understanding to achieve their spell effects - they are drawing power from their gods/primal forces, which can, in certain situations say "Uhm, no."You misunderstand me. There is no concept of "granted spells" at all in the rules about spell preparation. The deities in D&D cannot stop their clerics from choosing and casting a spell - just punish them if they transgresses the strictures laid down. The only supported restriction is the opposing alignment restriction. That's it. If cleric spells are granted, clerics of forces, philosophies or other impersonal ideas would actually be impossible. Since they aren't impossible, cleric spells cannot be granted up front.
Eklypse0 05-26-07, 01:11 PM	Well, you can justify it any way you want; and naturally, throwing the power of a god behind it is the best way to achieve any effect you desire in D&D. I just assume that Extra Spell/I] is a feat like any other feat (that is, can be learned by anyone meeting the pre-reqs without requiring the intervention of a god). Besides which, if a god is trying to reward you, why would he/she force you to burn a feat in order to get your reward? Just give you the damn spell and be done with it. Whatever the case, I'm not looking for [I]justifications as to why a Wizard should start raising the dead, or why a Cleric should start Enervating people... I personally find mixing Divine and Arcane spellcasting distastful. They are wholly separate forms of magic and should be treated as such. Because it is how the player's/DM's justification for the feat to grant a spell not on their normal list. The player burns the Feat on the leveling up. In game terms, the god(ess) rewards the character with the ability. This is a lot more fair then the DM just giving away powers to the character.. At what point does a Character EL go up in the case of christmas gifts of power? It is much easier to adjudicate if it was based off of a feat use. Shain / Eklypse0
Pentar 05-26-07, 01:25 PM	You misunderstand me. There is no concept of "granted spells" at all in the rules about spell preparation. The deities in D&D cannot stop their clerics from choosing and casting a spell - just punish them if they transgresses the strictures laid down. The only supported restriction is the opposing alignment restriction. That's it. If cleric spells are granted, clerics of forces, philosophies or other impersonal ideas would actually be impossible. Since they aren't impossible, cleric spells cannot be granted up front. From the SRD under Clerics: However, his alignment may restrict him from casting certain spells opposed to his moral or ethical beliefs; see Chaotic, Evil, Good, and Lawful Spells... A cleric can’t cast spells of an alignment opposed to his own or his deity’s (if he has one). They are restricted from casting certain spells. That is to say, they cannot cast them. That is a far cry from being able to cast them and then being punished for it afterwards. Their deity/divine force simply refuses them their power. Furthermore... from the SRD under Divine Magic: Unlike arcane spells, divine spells draw power from a divine source. Clerics gain spell power from deities or from divine forces. The divine force of nature powers druid and ranger spells. The divine forces of law and good power paladin spells. No where does it say personal faith, or personal power creates the spell magic. It clearly indicates that the power is drawn from a deity/divine force. And there is nothing to say that a cleric of philosophies/forces isn't drawing from the primal divine nature of that force. Who's to say what forces exist out there? They are constantly adding new domains which indicates to me that they are adding more and more primal forces where clerics can draw power from, rather than from a specified deity. Last point from the SRD A cleric who grossly violates the code of conduct required by his god loses all spells and class features, except for armor and shield proficiencies and proficiency with simple weapons. He cannot thereafter gain levels as a cleric of that god until he atones (see the atonement spell description). If clerics are not "granted" their powers, how is it they can lose their abilities? At no point in time can a Wizard, who grossly flies against their principal morals/beliefs/alignment, ever lose their ability to cast arcane spells. Whileas a Cleric who does the same suddenly loses all access to their granted powers. Same goes for Paladins, Rangers, Druids and all other Divine casters.
Merestil Haye 05-26-07, 03:31 PM	They are restricted from casting certain spells. That is to say, they cannot cast them. That is a far cry from being able to cast them and then being punished for it afterwards. Their deity/divine force simply refuses them their power.I specifically stated that I noted this exemption. No where does it say personal faith, or personal power creates the spell magic. It clearly indicates that the power is drawn from a deity/divine force. And there is nothing to say that a cleric of philosophies/forces isn't drawing from the primal divine nature of that force. Who's to say what forces exist out there? They are constantly adding new domains which indicates to me that they are adding more and more primal forces where clerics can draw power from, rather than from a specified deity. If clerics are not "granted" their powers, how is it they can lose their abilities? At no point in time can a Wizard, who grossly flies against their principal morals/beliefs/alignment, ever lose their ability to cast arcane spells. Whileas a Cleric who does the same suddenly loses all access to their granted powers. Same goes for Paladins, Rangers, Druids and all other Divine casters.The reason they are not granted is because it would be impossible for a nonperson to grant anything. It is an impersonal thing incapable of making a decision. How are they denied? The deity can remove the class features as a punishment for breaking the rules. That's what I said earlier, remember? In the case of clerics of things rather than persons, it could be the cleric's own conscience, working on a subconscious level, that denies him his powers - until he faces up to what he has done wrong, the cleric himself will block his powers. How else is a thing - which has no mind and cannot make a decision - going to do the blocking? The plain fact is that nothing grants the powers - something can block them after they are acquired, but nothing grants them.
Pentar 05-26-07, 03:59 PM	I specifically stated that I noted this exemption. The reason they are not granted is because it would be impossible for a nonperson to grant anything. It is an impersonal thing incapable of making a decision. How are they denied? The deity can remove the class features as a punishment for breaking the rules. That's what I said earlier, remember? In the case of clerics of things rather than persons, it could be the cleric's own conscience, working on a subconscious level, that denies him his powers - until he faces up to what he has done wrong, the cleric himself will block his powers. How else is a thing - which has no mind and cannot make a decision - going to do the blocking? The plain fact is that nothing grants the powers - something can block them after they are acquired, but nothing grants them. All the quoted verbiage I have shown clearly states the opposite of what you call "plain fact". The powers are given to a cleric by a deity or natural force - they are not inherit to the Cleric. You have not shown a single shred of written source that would indicate otherwise - so I leave you to your own beliefs as nothing quoted nor shown so far will deviate you from how you want to think clerics and divine casters operate.
runestar 05-26-07, 11:33 PM	There are other feats which do similar things - Domain Spontenaiety comes to mind - and class features too, if I recall correctly. Odd - I had always thought that spontaneous domain was an epic feat. Since when did it become a regular feat?:confused:
farfairer 05-27-07, 05:29 AM	Odd - I had always thought that spontaneous domain was an epic feat. Since when did it become a regular feat?:confused: There are actually 2 feats Domain Spontaneity (Complete Divine page 80): Prerequisit: Turn/ rebuke undead Choose 1 domain, you can cast the spells from that domain spontaniouslyin the same manner as spontaniously casting cure/inflict spells. Each use of this feat costs 1 turn/rebuke attempt Spontanious Domains (Complete Champion): As long as you have an unprepaired domain slot you may spontainiously cast any one of your domain spells of that slot's level. You may only do this once per day per spell level.
Merestil Haye 05-27-07, 05:53 AM	Domain Spontaneity (Complete Divine page 80): Prerequisit: Turn/ rebuke undead Choose 1 domain, you can cast the spells from that domain spontaniouslyin the same manner as spontaniously casting cure/inflict spells. Each use of this feat costs 1 turn/rebuke attempt.Ah, that's the one I was thinking of. I just spent a fruitless hour looking for it under feats beginning with "S". :banghead:
Vegepygmy 05-29-07, 12:29 PM	All the quoted verbiage I have shown clearly states the opposite of what you call "plain fact".No, it doesn't. You are inferring much more from the "quoted verbiage" than is actually there.
Pentar 05-29-07, 02:35 PM	No, it doesn't. You are inferring much more from the "quoted verbiage" than is actually there. Absolutely not. It says it in plain english. Clerics draw their power from a divine source. It does not say if the source is intelligent, sentient, or even aware - only that it is Divine and it gives them their power. Their power is not internal like an arcane casters. It can be denied to them. A cleric cannot choose to cast a spell that their divine source restricts them to. How have I inferred anything that was not plainly communicated to everyone capable of reading?
farfairer 05-29-07, 03:25 PM	Absolutely not. It says it in plain english. Clerics draw their power from a divine source. It does not say if the source is intelligent, sentient, or even aware - only that it is Divine and it gives them their power. Their power is not internal like an arcane casters. It can be denied to them. A cleric cannot choose to cast a spell that their divine source restricts them to. How have I inferred anything that was not plainly communicated to everyone capable of reading? I'm sorry but you are operating under a misconception. The source of power for magic depends on the game world. Period. End of Sentence. In the Forgotten Realms all arcane magic comes from either Mystra (weave) or Shar (shadow weave). Divine magic comes from the individual deity, however it can be argued that since Mystra is the goddess of all magic that she has the power to override other deities and deny magic to a cleric who worships someone else. Even so, arcane magic in FR follows all of the basic rules from the PHB. A wizard is not restricted by alignment even though his power comes from a good deity. Eberron and Greyhawk function differently. In Eberron a chaotic evil cleric may worship a lawful good god and still get spells. In this game world belief is what gives a cleric his power. Only in Greyhawk or a home-made-world does your argument hold any merit.
Pentar 05-29-07, 04:02 PM	I'm sorry but you are operating under a misconception. The source of power for magic depends on the game world. Period. End of Sentence. In the Forgotten Realms all arcane magic comes from either Mystra (weave) or Shar (shadow weave). Divine magic comes from the individual deity, however it can be argued that since Mystra is the goddess of all magic that she has the power to override other deities and deny magic to a cleric who worships someone else. Even so, arcane magic in FR follows all of the basic rules from the PHB. A wizard is not restricted by alignment even though his power comes from a good deity. Eberron and Greyhawk function differently. In Eberron a chaotic evil cleric may worship a lawful good god and still get spells. In this game world belief is what gives a cleric his power. Only in Greyhawk or a home-made-world does your argument hold any merit. Actually no - all the quoted material I provided in previous posts are direct from the PHB or SRD which does not specify any world setting or campaign. Ergo, it is RAW. You actually have it back-asswards ;) A campaign setting may MODIFY RAW to change how Magic works. But RAW has it working precisely the way I described it.