Post/Author/DateTime	Post
NewtTon 10-09-04, 08:37 AM	Okay, here's the deal: 3 players, 1 mage, 1 thief, me, the tank. Asked if i could make barbarian/bear warrior/war shaper. All classes from legit book(s). Since I would be the only tanker, I thought that this should be okay, even if combo is quite powerful in combat (not overly so). DM: "No, it's broken." Ok, no complaints, house rules etc. Until I found out, that the mage in our party, was entirely planned by DM himself, all up to 20th lvl. 5 cleric/5 wizard/2 Hallowed mage/8 mystic theurge. So, 1 prestige from :censored: sidekick book, which allows the char to merge all his caster levels into one... so, at lvl 16, this char has, hmmm... let me see... 5+5+2+4 = 16 caster lvls in both cleric and wizard classes, PLUS few goodies from hallowed mage. :uh-huh: My my, if that's not power, what is? I really don't know if the dm has ruled this hallowed mage ability correctly, but it changes nothing anyway. ruled is ruled. Suddenly, my mewling bear man didn't seem so g'dam dangerous, eh? By the way, now I play ranger/barbarian corecombo, better not have delusions of grandeur, prestige-vice. Nothing p'sses me more off, than unequal treatment with your character creation. :nonono:
TheGreenGriffon 10-09-04, 09:39 AM	Yes it does seem as if your DM is being a little unfair here although the mage combo isnt exactly over powered, it is still a powerful combination. Obviously your DM has a problem with the PrC's you selected and doesnt think they will work. If he says "Its broken" tell him simply to help you "Fix it" Tell him that you feel your being treated unfairly and that your not being allowed to build your character and you feel a comprimise is in order, go through the PrC's you want and ask him what he doesnt like and if theres any way you can correct the problem. If he cant tell you what he feels is broken then most likley he is being unfair. if after all this he doesnt relent ask him what PrC options he does allow. ask him to comprise a list of all PrC's he allows and go from there. PS: Remember a Mystic Thuege gives up all class benefits he hasnt already earned by traveling down this path except for spell and caster level. No bonus feats, no extra turning power, no 2 spells per level for mages, no familiar progression and anything else that imrpoves or is gained by leveling alone in the sperate classes in exchange for the spell merger.
EvilDuck 10-09-04, 12:06 PM	Yeah, MT's ain't all that cool. Play a druid. Seriously, Druid 20 is one of the best things you can do, and you DM can't reasonably ban you from taking 20 levels in a core class, now can he?
monkeywrench 10-09-04, 01:11 PM	PS: Remember a Mystic Thuege gives up all class benefits he hasnt already earned by traveling down this path except for spell and caster level. No bonus feats, no extra turning power, no 2 spells per level for mages, no familiar progression and anything else that imrpoves or is gained by leveling alone in the sperate classes in exchange for the spell merger. I believe you may be wrong about that bold one there. I may be mistaken, but I don't think that's explicitly mentioned in the Prestige class text. MTs get everything related to spells in both of their classes, but no other benefits, I believe. Spells per Day: When a new mystic theurge level is gained, the character gains new spells per day as if he had also gained a level in any one arcane spellcasting class he belonged to before he added the prestige class and any one divine spellcasting class he belonged to previously. He does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained. This essentially means that he adds the level of mystic theurge to the level of whatever other arcane spellcasting class and divine spellcasting class the character has, then determines spells per day and caster level accordingly. If a character had more than one arcane spellcasting class or more than one divine spellcasting class before he became a mystic theurge, he must decide to which class he adds each level of mystic theurge for the purpose of determining spells per day. Yeah, it's like I thought, doesn't expicitly mention it anywhere. I think it's safe to assume that a MT would still be doing his magical research to gain his new spells though
Daydreamer 10-09-04, 02:46 PM	On a note though. Banning anything outside of the core books phb, dmg or mm is not a house rule. ALL MATERIAL OUT OF THESE BOOKS IS COMPLETELY OPTIONAL. However that said if the dm is utilizing optional material for other classes that allows them to surpass you noticably in power then that is somewhat unfair. One thing to consider though is that wizards tend to be weak low levels and warriors strong. Maybe he will let you prc class or move classes later on and just not at the start so you dont fly ahead of your fellow pc to early. Play his game. Judge it like this. Am i doing my fair share considering the type of char that i am. IF the answer is yes, then odds are your dm made a good call. IF not then odds are your dm is playing favorites. (however it is possible he is just mistaken).
was_fired 10-09-04, 03:43 PM	Last I checked letting in any PrCs are up to the DM. Unless you consider page 176 in the DMG to be invalid when they flat out state this.
TheGreenGriffon 10-09-04, 06:37 PM	I believe you may be wrong about that bold one there. I may be mistaken, but I don't think that's explicitly mentioned in the Prestige class text. Actually im right. It doesnt matter if its written in the Mystic Theuge text or not. Thats how PrC's work, you give up the benefits of your main classes as you level in the PrC. 2 spells per level for Wizards like all the other benefits IS a benefit of that one class alone so while leveling in ANY PrC you dont gain 2 spells per level as a Wizard because your not currently advanicing as a Wizard. Those seplls assume the Wizard s practicing at becomming a wizard, not a Mystic Theuge and give him free spells through research. While hes training in a PrC he wouldnt be able to pursue that research. all PrC's work like this unless the PrC itself says the character retains the abilitiy in question.
Lina_Inverse 10-09-04, 09:15 PM	Actually im right. It doesnt matter if its written in the Mystic Theuge text or not. Thats how PrC's work, you give up the benefits of your main classes as you level in the PrC. 2 spells per level for Wizards like all the other benefits IS a benefit of that one class alone so while leveling in ANY PrC you dont gain 2 spells per level as a Wizard because your not currently advanicing as a Wizard. Those seplls assume the Wizard s practicing at becomming a wizard, not a Mystic Theuge and give him free spells through research. While hes training in a PrC he wouldnt be able to pursue that research. all PrC's work like this unless the PrC itself says the character retains the abilitiy in question. spellcasting.+1level spells/day AND SPELLS KNOWN.a wizard gains 2 spells known per spell level,dont tell me you think sorcs give up there spells known :rolleyes:
Cold Napalm 10-09-04, 11:32 PM	Good god not this again...It's been debated and yes the debates seem to HIGHLY favor that you do indeed get the 2 spells since logically then sorcerers don't get ANY new spells when they PrC...now isn't that stupid. Course I wouldn't put it past wizards to have actually written the rules that way...
Dragontooth 10-10-04, 01:07 AM	Actually im right. It doesnt matter if its written in the Mystic Theuge text or not. Thats how PrC's work, you give up the benefits of your main classes as you level in the PrC. 2 spells per level for Wizards like all the other benefits IS a benefit of that one class alone so while leveling in ANY PrC you dont gain 2 spells per level as a Wizard because your not currently advanicing as a Wizard. Those seplls assume the Wizard s practicing at becomming a wizard, not a Mystic Theuge and give him free spells through research. While hes training in a PrC he wouldnt be able to pursue that research. all PrC's work like this unless the PrC itself says the character retains the abilitiy in question. Sorry your wrong on this one. If you have Wiazrd base class, and you go up a level in a PrC you gain the 2 spells as if you went up a level in the wizard class. You just don't gain any other wizard benefits like bonus feats. USE COMMON SENSE PEOPLE!! sheesh that is what your Wisdom score is used for.
Daydreamer 10-10-04, 01:25 AM	Meh my dm houserules wizards dont get spells outmatically every level. YOu can get the 2 spells if you spend extra time reasearching for them and spend some gold. However he isnt a tight wad about handing spells out we fight enemy wizards frequently. And killing one of them can land you a dozen spells easy sometimes. Meh in the grand scheme of house rules its one thats doesnt have a very large impact on play and actually has a logical justification. And like spending time and money matters once ur a decent level. Subtract gold, fast forward a month. Yay a new spell. ;)
Count Arioch the 28th 10-10-04, 03:25 AM	You gotta love any debate where one side simply says "Yeah, I know the book specifically says I'm wrong. I don't care, I'm still going with my bizarre nonsensical assumption, written rules be damned!" But on topic, yes, the DM is free to say "No PrCs". However, this should be across the board, because if one person is allowed to have optional stuff, and no one else is, of everyone but one person is allowed optional stuff, then the DM is not being fair.
Kainy 10-10-04, 05:25 AM	Just because a DM is, within the rules, free to be an assbag does not mean that he SHOULD. One of the biggest problems with freedom is that people see it as justification. I'm free, legally, to do a lot of really, really mean, evil things. Does that mean I should? No. It means I can. If I do them, I still suck as a human being. Now, in small words for those of us who are completely and utterly dense... CAN DOES NOT EQUAL SHOULD.
Al2902 10-10-04, 06:00 AM	Of the prestige classes mentioned, the one you seem to have the problem with - the Mystic Theurge - is the only one which is core rules. The Bear Warrior and Warshaper, whilst coming from a legit WotC product (Complete Warrior), are optional. Personally, I don't see any problem with either of those prestige classes (I haven't investigated the combo itself) and would probably allow it, but your DM is acting perfectly within his rights to allow or disallow prestige classes as he sees fit.
DrMorganes 10-10-04, 08:07 AM	But the issue here isn't whether PrCs are optional. The issue, as originally stated, is DM: "No, it's broken." Ok, no complaints, house rules etc. Until I found out, that the mage in our party, was entirely planned by DM himself, all up to 20th lvl. 5 cleric/5 wizard/2 Hallowed mage/8 mystic theurge. NewtTon feels he's been dealt a raw deal because his PrC request was turned down as "broken" but another PC was granted a PrC progression that is - in his opinion - just as broken (if not more so). Newt: If it's not too late, I'd recommed you have a chat with your DM. Be nice, but ask him to take you through a point-by-point comparison of your proposed class progression and the finger-wiggler's. I find that if I play dense and ask nicely, people will generally be happy to explain the specifics of why they're behaving like an assbag. Once you know exactly what the DM feels is broken, perhaps the two of you can work out some sort of house-ruled compromise. There is, of course, nothing wrong with simply going with the way things are right now. I do feel, though, that it sets a bad precedent for how your DM will expect to deal with you.
TheGreenGriffon 10-10-04, 09:42 AM	You cant place sorcerer as an example, they arent even the samw as wizards, Wizards can gain spells through several different methods, the 2 spells per level learned IS NOT crucial to a wizards development. Sorry but your all wrong. PrC gain NO NEW abilities from their previous class with taking a PrC Level and none of their previous abilities improve. Most spellcasting PrC's, only the spellcasting level goes up. Sorcerers gain spells by unlocking their potenetial, not by study or research like Wizards do, they gain their spells because its actually part of that ability. Wizard however, the spellbook ability is DIFFERENT than the spells section of the class description and thuis does not improve. Want proof here it is: Page 57, PHB 3.5 edition At each new wizard level, she gains two spells that she can cast (based on her new wizard level) for her spellbook. There is is. Word for word. From the book. Black and White. Clear as crystal. It says "Wizard level" Not Mystic Theuge level, not Archmage level. WIZARD LEVEL! When you take a PrC you are NOT taking a wizard level, you ARE NOT devoting yourself to the academic research wizards take to learn new spells, you are learning other skills. Remember that, the other skills your learning when you take a PrC? Your learning that stuff. Your learning nothing new about wizadry except which is taught in your New PrC which is usually only caster and spell level. I can tell what kind of gamer a person is by the way they assume things. How they automatically jump to a conclusion based on whats convenient for themselves, you dont want this rule to be true because it means you would be denied something for your character. The sorcerer thing? it doesnt cut it. Because spells known is actually in the spells section and actually applies to the Sorcerers level. the amount of spells a wizard can learn has nothing to do with his level except how high a spell level he can cast which has ntohing to do with spell books which is another class ability listed later in the cclass description. Thanks.
TheGreenGriffon 10-10-04, 09:45 AM	spellcasting.+1level spells/day AND SPELLS KNOWN.a wizard gains 2 spells known per spell level,dont tell me you think sorcs give up there spells known The SPELLS KNOWN as you pointed out applies only to classes who actually have that table such as sorcerers and Bards, Wizards dont have a spells known section, they can learn any number of spells.
Kessalin Talira 10-10-04, 10:14 AM	Sorry your wrong on this one. If you have Wiazrd base class, and you go up a level in a PrC you gain the 2 spells as if you went up a level in the wizard class. You just don't gain any other wizard benefits like bonus feats. USE COMMON SENSE PEOPLE!! sheesh that is what your Wisdom score is used for. Sorry, but the letter of the rules states that you're wrong on this one, as is anyone else that states that a prestige class that gives caster levels also gives the 2 free spells. Player's Handbook, page 57: A wizard begins play with a spellbook... <snip> ...At each new wizard level she gains two new spells of any level... Note that that specifically states that the two new spells are only gained on the advancement of wizard level. An example: Dungeon Master's Guide, page 178, Archmage Spells per day/spells known: ...the character gains new spells per day (and spells known, if applicable) as if he had also gained a level in whatever arcane spellcasting class in which he could cast 7th-level spells before he added the prestige class level. He does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained... It does not state anywhere in that description, or that of the full ability, if read completely, that the bonus spells at every level are gained. It more heavily implies that no, the bonus two spells are not gained. Note that it does, however, state that spells known increase, if applicable. Now, check the PHB, and you will find that there is no part of the description of the wizard that states he or she KNOWS the spells in her spellbook; they are simply there, to be studied and prepared. The word "knows" does not appear anywhere in the wizard class description in relation to spells and spellcasting. The sorcerer, however, uses the concept of "known spells" on several occasions, most of which are in the "Spells" section of sorcerer class features on page 54 of the player's handbook. Therefore, regardless of what people believe, a wizard does not "know" any spells, and any reference to spells known increasing from a prestige class is directed solely at the sorcerer. I've found in the time that I've been playing 3rd edition, which spans both incarnations of it, from the day the PHB was released, that when it comes to spellcaster levels, a good way to remember it is that if it's in the "Class Features" section of the spellcasting class, you don't advance it any further than you already have at the time you take the prestige class level, unless the prestige class specifically states otherwise. Spells per day goes up, spells known usually do, caster level increases. That's it. No bonus feats, your familiar doesn't get any better, normally, and you don't get bonus spells to your spellbook, because as stated in my first point, only wizard level advancement gives the two bonus spells. Any other interpretation is a house rule. Whether or not it's common sense is irrelevant when talking about a world where the natural laws don't even apply all the time. *looks at the previous two posts* Yeah, what he said. :D ---------------------------------------------------- Ok, now that I've ranted/argued the rules, I would say that the DM is being a little partial to the spellcasters in the thread starter's game. Though I can understand the DM's hesitation to allow the combo. Essentially, one level of bear warrior allows you to gain all the abilities of the warshaper, even though bear warrior is, IMO, closer to having the alternate form ability of vampires, quasits, etc than to being a true shapechanger. It's borderline broken, I'd say, and would only let some of the abilities, such as Morphic Reach, work when in bear form, because of the way it's worded. Whatever this Hallowed Mage class is, sounds like it's a little too strong, though, allowing cleric levels to stack with wizard levels, and vice versa, and then going into Mystic Theurge. I'm with the others in saying you might want to talk to your DM. Sometimes it's surprising how much we'll allow. :D
Nagol 10-10-04, 10:18 AM	From the Main D&D FAQ found here (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/MainFAQv06272003.zip). (Its the first question under prestige classes). I can’t find any information about how many spells prestige class spellcasters know. I am going on the presumption that those that gain bonus spells per day of their existing class (such as loremaster and spellsword) do not automatically add additional spells to their spellbook as they gain levels. They do add spells to their lists. For example, a wizard /loremaster gains 2 spells for her spellbook when using a loremaster level to increase spellcasting. A sorcerer/loremaster would learn more spells as well. Adding spells to your spellbook or personal repertoire is part of spellcasting.
Kessalin Talira 10-10-04, 10:46 AM	From the Main D&D FAQ found here (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/MainFAQv06272003.zip). (Its the first question under prestige classes). I can’t find any information about how many spells prestige class spellcasters know. I am going on the presumption that those that gain bonus spells per day of their existing class (such as loremaster and spellsword) do not automatically add additional spells to their spellbook as they gain levels. They do add spells to their lists. For example, a wizard /loremaster gains 2 spells for her spellbook when using a loremaster level to increase spellcasting. A sorcerer/loremaster would learn more spells as well. Adding spells to your spellbook or personal repertoire is part of spellcasting. First and foremost, this was drawn from the Version 3.0 FAQ, which hasn't been updated in over a year. With references to Mystic Theurge, Bear Warrior, and Warshaper abounding in this thread, it's a safe assumption that the game in question is 3.5. Secondly, having been compiled on June 27, 2003, with a contact address being given as Sage Advice, it's been well documented on the Wizards.com boards that the Sage at the time was wrong on occasion. Thirdly, according to the 3.0 Player's Handbook: Each time the wizard achieves a new level, she gains two new spells of any level or levels... In 3.0, your quote from the FAQ was correct. In 3.5, the passage from the Player's Handbook was corrected to indicate that only wizard levels give the two bonus spells. Considering the implications that 3.5 is the rule set being used, and it overrides all previous versions of the rules where specific questions are concerned, I'd say the FAQ quote doesn't carry much weight. Sorry.
trapspringer 10-10-04, 11:33 AM	Take this oppourtunity to deonstrate true 'broken.' Play a kobold in full plate with a tower sheild. Take feats like 'improved natural armor' and 'dodge.' You will be the ultimate tank. If you take all these feats and employ nothing else, your AC is 27. Now, stick a +1 here and a +2 there, throw in a few more imprived natural armors, and you have a fairly untouchable... poor choice of words... fairly un-hittable tank. Watch out for casters. But, as for your actual question, I would suggest simply playing something else. You can easily come up with more interesting tanks. Check out frostburn, for example. The whole 'ferality' thing is a heavy theme among prestige classes. There is one similar to bear warrior which allows you te regress, becoming faster, stronger, and tougher. Combine that with your warshaper. Or play some sort of unorthodox tank. Psionic character can be truly effective if built for the pourpose. If you are playing at high enough levels, try a were-creature. The suggestion about a druid isn't half wrong, as by level five they can out-tank a tank, if built for that pourpose. If your heart is truly set on turning into a bear via your strain of shifting classes,you can try talking to your DM. I do not believe you will have much success here, but I would suggest you make four characters, one at level one, five, ten, and fifteen. After he sees the actual numbers, he may calm down a bit. The ability to gain an additional sixteen strength a few times a day isn't that overpowering. It's like a guy who can blow up a city one a day. That is good and all, but from a mechanical standpoin it is uselss, 'Ha ha, I win the encounter!' Then an ogre walks around the conrner. No more uber spell. Still has to fight.
Daydreamer 10-10-04, 04:00 PM	I actually believe the wording isnt complete and should have included an example. I think the debate here doesnt have a objective answer based on what the texts say. Its a matter of how you interpret that rule and apply that produces an answer. Just watching your debate here....really it comes down to what you practically mean by the word known. And other such variables that determines whether you add caster levles in a prestige for spells known or not.
Count Arioch the 28th 10-10-04, 06:20 PM	Note that that specifically states that the two new spells are only gained on the advancement of wizard level. Good job! Stick it to the man! Go with your gut reaction, even though the description of the PrCs say it adds spells known! Hehe, this looks like it's gonna be a fun debate! <pops popcorn>
TheGreenGriffon 10-10-04, 06:29 PM	Good job! Stick it to the man! Go with your gut reaction, even though the description of the PrCs say it adds spells known! Ok Ive already said this a few posts ago but ill say it again. "Spells Known" do you see that table anywhere on the Wizard class description? No it isnt there because "Spells Known" refers to the table on the Sorcerer and Bard descriptions. Wizards have no spells known as they have no limit to the number of spells they can learn, they can go onto any scroll or spellbook and learn new spells at any time. "Spells Known" refers ONLY to Sorcerers and Bards.
Archtyrant Terevoth 10-10-04, 06:51 PM	The DM is free to ban PrCs, and should in the cases of extreme ones. Warshaper is broken IMO. Gaining that crazy +4/+4 ability at 2nd level makes it over the top just right there. The war hulk takes 2 levels just to get +4 to strength and he gets no BaB. I haven't had enough experience with bear warrior to really make a judgment about that. Now I can't speak for that hallowed mage class, but I can say the mystic theurge is perfectly balance, and no more powerful than any core class. Without it a cleric/mage multiclass becomes impossible. I haven't seen any favoritism here. All PrCs are not created equal. Allowing one doesn't mean you have to open the door to all of them. The easiest thing is to ask your DM what PrCs in the book he's going to allow and then see what you can make with those. If you really like a concept of a PrC see if you can get the DM to nerf it into playability for you. See what classes he thinks are ok and then go with them. Thus far getting rid of bear warrior and warshaper don't really strike me as being over the top as far as house rules go. I've already seen one warshaper in play, he was insanely powerful.
Dartanel 10-10-04, 08:45 PM	The warshaper looks bad on the surface until you note one little sentence: All the abilities of the warshaper class only work when transformed.
Cold Napalm 10-10-04, 08:46 PM	Note hallowed mage isn't even an offical WotC PrC. It's 3rd party. It adds you divine and arcane CL and apply's it to both...i.e. broke beyond belief. If I recall it's even a 3.0 PrC to boot...to try to make a mage/cleric PrC. Okay if you do not ignore the spell known...which is you did the sorcerer would NEVER get any higher level spells with a PrC, the 2 free spells is SPELL KNOWN! Bloody hell, how thick head are you guys?!? If you gonna argue by following the "letter" of the rules and yet ignore that simple fact, you are NOT followibng the letter of the rules, you making **** up.
Kessalin Talira 10-11-04, 12:04 AM	Good job! Stick it to the man! Go with your gut reaction, even though the description of the PrCs say it adds spells known! Hehe, this looks like it's gonna be a fun debate! <pops popcorn> Yeah, it would be a great debate, if the wizard class said ANYTHING AT ALL about "knowing" spells. The only caster classes that refer to spells known in any way, shape, or form are the spontaneous casters. Therefore, the only reason any caster PrC mentions spells known is so that Sorcerers don't get completely screwed when they take the class. Wizards don't have the same problem, all they need is a scroll to copy into their spellbook, and they still get new spells. You're absolutely right, though, the PrC's do say it adds to spells known. Too bad wizards don't know any spells, they have to prepare them from a book every day. Since they don't know any, it's hard for the caster level increase to give them more, isn't it? Adding nothing to nothing is still nothing, last time I checked. :D Btw, Cold Napalm, those who are stating that you don't get two free spells are not "making **** up", as you so delicately put it. Look for yourself in the sorcerer class features and the wizard class features in the PHB. Which one says ANYTHING about "known" spells? Here's a hint, it's not the wizard. They don't know their spells, so they don't get more from PrC levels. So, the only "simple fact" I'm ignoring is the personal interpretation that you have of the rules, stating that spells known are the same as, or even related to, the spells in a wizard's spellbook. Do I like it? No. Is that what the rules say? Yes. If I decide to allow it regardless of what the books say, it's a house rule. Incidentally, calling people thick-headED is no way to win an argument. If you're going to throw a fit and call people names, just take your ball and go home. I've quoted books, shown exactly how known spells are different from spellbook spells, and haven't seen anything concrete to say that I'm wrong. So the burden of proof is on you, and the rest of the people that think I'm wrong. Page numbers, direct quotes FROM BOOKS; not from the Sage, not from 3.0 FAQ's... 3.5 errata, SRD, or book quotes only. If someone does that, I'll happily change my stance, because if the DM doesn't throw plenty of scrolls into the game, or other spellbooks, then wizards can be crippled in their spell selection by taking a PrC.
Cold Napalm 10-11-04, 02:34 AM	So basically your arguement is that 2 spells per level that a wizard gets is NOT spells known because it is in a book?!? Umm okay... Okay so the wizards basically has the entry of when you gain a new level of wizard you gain 2 spells known added to you spell book. Okay reworded, but it is spells known right? Unless you want to argue adding spells to your spellbook does not increase your spells known in which case I have nothing further to say to you and you massive reasoning power at any attempt to reduce wizard's powers. SO a PrC add spells known just as if you gianed a level of wizard...i.e. 2 spell per level. Get it now? Anyone who refuses to acknoweldge that adding a spell in a spellbook is adding spells known I will proudly call thick headed. Also using that vast logic of spell in spellbook being a wizard class feature, you now neref ALL druid and cleric PrC as their acces to spells is also class based and hence don't get new spell levels as it does not SPECIFICALLY say SPELLS KNOWN?!? Bloody idiotic logic is that?
darczero 10-11-04, 08:04 AM	Yeah, your DM is playing favorites. I don't know what to tell you except that you may want to find a new gaming group if this is a regular occurance. And as for the Wizard spells known thing, yes, you do learn 2 new spells every time your overall wizard Caster level increases permanently. Even at Epic levels. (you can't learn free epic spells like this however.)
TheGreenGriffon 10-11-04, 09:17 AM	Okay so the wizards basically has the entry of when you gain a new level of wizard you gain 2 spells known added to you spell book. Okay reworded, but it is spells known right? Unless you want to argue adding spells to your spellbook does not increase your spells known in which case I have nothing further to say to you and you massive reasoning power at any attempt to reduce wizard's powers. SO a PrC add spells known just as if you gianed a level of wizard...i.e. 2 spell per level. Get it now? Anyone who refuses to acknoweldge that adding a spell in a spellbook is adding spells known I will proudly call thick headed. Also using that vast logic of spell in spellbook being a wizard class feature, you now neref ALL druid and cleric PrC as their acces to spells is also class based and hence don't get new spell levels as it does not SPECIFICALLY say SPELLS KNOWN?!? Bloody idiotic logic is that? blast it! why cant nobody get this simple concept?! SPELLS KNOWN does not refer to wizards in any way shape or form. It does NOT refer to adding spells to your spell book. It is a GAME TERM. It refers to a specific game rule in the book that applies to Sorcerers and Bards because the way they gain their spells is different from sorcerers in that they have no limits. Your caster level has nothing to do with how many spells you know, it only tells you what level you can cast. 3.5 is a well oiled machine, if it means to say something it will say it specifically that "Wizards gain 2 spells per level as normal" but in the case of most PrC's it does not. Read my post above. it qoutes a page from the 3.5 PHB: At each new wizard level, she gains two spells that she can cast (based on her new wizard level) for her spellbook. Ok do we get this now? Do we understand that SPELLS KNOWN is a game mechanic term for the table that is in the Bard and Sorcerer description and has NOTHING to do with Wizards. Wizards DO NOT have spells known. They have a SPELLBOOK which they copy spells into. Just because you would dont want something to be true doesnt mean it isnt. A Game isnt a living person, it doesnt have common sense, its print on a page, it says exactly what it means to. This isnt philosophy. Sheesh. Oh and by the way it doesnt mention anything about Druids and Cerlics spells known because gt what, they dont have spells known. They have access to all spells on their list that they are high enough in level to cast. Geez this is stuff a rookie gamer should know after his first day.
Kessalin Talira 10-11-04, 09:20 AM	So basically your arguement is that 2 spells per level that a wizard gets is NOT spells known because it is in a book?!? Umm okay... LMFAO!! Yes, that's exactly what my argument is, when those books happen to contain the rules that are the foundation of the game. It's right there, in black and white. Spellbook spells are not known spells. If they were, the wizard wouldn't need their spellbook, now would they? Okay so the wizards basically has the entry of when you gain a new level of wizard you gain 2 spells known added to you spell book. Okay reworded, but it is spells known right? No. When a new level of wizard is gained, 2 spells are added to the wizards spellbook. Nowhere does it state that these are spells known. Basically, the wizard has discovered more formulas that, when studied, allow them to cast a different spell. Where you mention that it's been reworded, that's where the designers of 3.5 thought clarification was needed. Obviously, they were right. Unless you want to argue adding spells to your spellbook does not increase our spells known in which case I have nothing further to say to you and you massive reasoning power at any attempt to reduce wizard's powers. Here we go with the sarcasm again. I'd almost take this as a personal attack, but I won't since everyone knows that's against the CoC. Right? Anyway, you're exactly right in seeing the basis of my argument. Adding spells to your spellbook does not increase known spells. Wizards don't "know" spells. Knowing something implies retaining it in your memory for further reference, doesn't it? know ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n) v. knew, (n, ny) known, (nn) know·ing, knows v. tr. 4. To have fixed in the mind: knows her Latin verbs. The only time a wizard's spells are fixed in her mind is when she's prepared spells for the day. When cast, all memory of how to cast the spell for its desired effect is lost until the wizard prepares it again from her spellbook, correct? It's like selective amnesia, really. Once a wizard spell has been cast, the memory of how to cast it disappears from the mind of the caster. Therefore, it's not fixed in the mind anymore, now is it? Which, by definition means that wizard spells are not known spells. SO a PrC add spells known just as if you gianed a level of wizard...i.e. 2 spell per level. Get it now? Anyone who refuses to acknoweldge that adding a spell in a spellbook is adding spells known I will proudly call thick headed. No, it doesn't add any spells to the spellbook. You inserted the word "known" into what is plainly stated in the PHB. Quoted directly from the book: At each new wizard level, she gains two new spells of any spell level or levels that she can cast (based on her new wizard level) for her spellbook. Nowhere in that sentence does it state or even imply that wizards "know" the spells that are in their spellbooks. So obviously, I'm not the one that needs to "get" anything, now. Also using that vast logic of spell in spellbook being a wizard class feature, you now neref ALL druid and cleric PrC as their acces to spells is also class based and hence don't get new spell levels as it does not SPECIFICALLY say SPELLS KNOWN?!? Bloody idiotic logic is that? No, cleric and druid PrC's don't change in the least. They get spells per day, just like a wizard does. No, they don't know their spells either. If they did, they wouldn't need to pray for them. All a divine caster does when casting a spell is pray to their particular flavor of higher power for assistance, and mention the type of assistance they'd like to get. The vast majority of the time, this assistance is granted in just the manner expected and desired. Why, if a cleric knows all her spells, would she need to pray? Why would a cleric be worried about her standing with her deity? If a cleric does something contrary to the ethos of her chosen power, why does she lose access to spells? Because she doesn't "know" those spells at all. They are not fixed in her mind. Non-spontaneous divine casters have spells per day, just like a wizard. That's the part of a PrC description that applies to them, just like a wizard. They do not "know" spells, they prepare them from a list of choices available to them, just like a wizard. When reading prestige caster class descriptions, "spells per day" applies to non-spontaneous casters, and "spells known (if applicable)" applies to spontaneous casters. Easy enough to understand, I thought. Considering the complete LACK (so far) of concrete, verifiable quotes to the contrary, I retain my stance on spells per day vs. spells known. I'm not the one being thick-headed, or using "Bloody idiotic logic", here. I'm the one quoting on multiple occasions EXACTLY what the rules of the game say. Whether they get changed in someone else's game is completely up to them, and I can completely agree with why they change it. The fact remains that the rules as written explicitly state exactly what I've been saying, and you've done nothing to prove me wrong, Cold Napalm. The name-calling added a little spice, though. :D EDIT: Unfortunately, this has taken this thread WAY off topic. I'll start a new thread in D&D General entitled "Spellbook spells vs. Spells known". Anyone is welcome to come over there and continue this discussion. Sorry for the derailing. :embarrass
TheGreenGriffon 10-11-04, 09:31 AM	Exactly Kessalin Talira. Believe me I am in agreement with you here. 3.0 and 3.5 are a lot better in being clear than 2ed ever was. I remember how one half of the rules in 2ed contradicted the other half and they never went into any detail at all allowing all kinds of abusing the rules. WoTC this time around tried to make D&D more user friendly by saying exactly what they meant as specific as they could. I think a lot of players are still just coming to their own conclusions of what a rule means without reading it entirely. or they havent read the other material on the issue. If its a house rule, thats fine, im not saying it breaks the bank on power giving the PrC those 2 spells per level for their book but I hate it when people tru and convince me thats what the rule means when it clearly states the obvious. Spellbook is even written as a seperate ability and still people dont get it.
Ongorth 10-11-04, 09:41 AM	Remember everyone, people love there PrCs and won't listen to ANY arguement that makes there PrC less than completely better than a core class in every way! Even if it is a minor class feature that can easily be compensated for with an almost marginal amount of gold, they won't give it up, no matter how outdated there referances are or how wrong contrary to the rules they are. Well, it is ok when a PrC is blatantly better than fighter, but thats because EVERYTHING is better than fighter. But this is wizard here. WIZARD! Not really a class needing a bump.
Kessalin Talira 10-11-04, 09:48 AM	The debating's fun, but it's really off topic here. I started this thread (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=320895) to continue the debate, if anyone cares to. Be warned, however, that if it doesn't, I might succumb to arrogance and assume an admission of defeat by the naysayers. :D
Naeron 10-11-04, 12:22 PM	So basically your arguement is that 2 spells per level that a wizard gets is NOT spells known because it is in a book?!? Umm okay... That is the argument being made here, and it is supported by chapter 3 of the PHB which does not mention Spells Known at all for Wizards. It is also supported by the PrC descriptions which specifically state what they do give and what they don't when a PrC has "+1 level of existing class". However it is not supported by the Glossary entry for Known Spell "A spell that an arcane spellcaster has learned and can prepare. For wizards, knowing a spell means having it in their spellbooks. For sorcerers and bards, knowing a spell means having selected it when acquiring new spells as a benefit of level advancement." Also using that vast logic of spell in spellbook being a wizard class feature, you now neref ALL druid and cleric PrC as their acces to spells is also class based and hence don't get new spell levels as it does not SPECIFICALLY say SPELLS KNOWN?!? Bloody idiotic logic is that? Clerics and Druids also do not have "Spells Known", even by including the Glossary, but this is not a nerf because according to the SRD: "Divine spellcasters do not require spellbooks. However, such a character’s spell selection is limited to the spells on the list for his or her class". Their spells per day are increased by PrC entries of "+1 level of existing class" because the PrC descriptions do state this which allows then to prepare any spell of the appropriate level from their class list. No nerfing takes place and this part of your argument is invalid.
Cold Napalm 10-11-04, 02:18 PM	Bwahaha 2ed less clear then 3.x...Bwahaha. the only thing that made 2ed contridict itself was OPTIONAL rules. If you take all the 3.x optional stuff out there and tried to use em all, then it would be 100x worse then 2ed. Getr eal comparing ALL 2ed to 3.x is silly. Core wise 2ed did not contridict itself at all. But that is getting off topic...a lot.
TheGreenGriffon 10-11-04, 07:15 PM	Bwahaha 2ed less clear then 3.x...Bwahaha. the only thing that made 2ed contridict itself was OPTIONAL rules. If you take all the 3.x optional stuff out there and tried to use em all, then it would be 100x worse then 2ed. Getr eal comparing ALL 2ed to 3.x is silly. Core wise 2ed did not contridict itself at all. But that is getting off topic...a lot. Your right if you tried to use all 3ed books together they wouldnt mesh together 100% but it would be pretty close. The reason is that not all books out there are in 3.5. However 3.5 is so close to 3.o the conversion is minimal. But saying that the books dont work together is nonsense. 3ed was made so that all the rules mesh together well and that all the similiar abilities and rules work pretty much exactly the same. 2ed was a slapped together peice of garbage where every single roll was a different ordeal. High rolls for attacks, low ones for saves. 2ed allowed for so much abuse it wasnt even funny. 2ed source books are what killed that game for me, every different table I went to didnt use this and used that, you couldnt get use to anything because everywhere you went somebody wasnt allowing something you were use to using and were bringing in something you didnt agree with. 3ed source books arent the same as optional rules. They ARE NOT new break away rules that are completely different of how you play the game, they all work in harmony with the system, thats how the 3ed system is designed so that everything fits together snug if not perfect. They even managed to fit Psionics into 3ed very well so that it fits so DM's arent afraid to use the over powered system 2ed had for them. I personally dont enjoy psinoics in this edition because its too much like sorcerer but thats opinion, not based on anything wrong with the class itself. I wish people would know what they are talking about before they start up. You dont even sound like you play 3ed or else youd know what you were spouting wasnt remotely true. Everything in 3ed fits together well. I mean really there is a reason more people are playing D&D than ever before and thats the introduction of the new edition. I lost so many players to 2ed simply because people hated the rules and found the game confusing, nobody wants to play a game where they dont know what to do. That included core rules because the only books I used besides that were The Humanoids book, spells and magic, and Tome of Magic.
Ongorth 10-11-04, 11:13 PM	What is this? A 2nd versus 3rd edition arguement? In the middle of a thread about an unfair DM? Are we on the internet or something? Seriously, the high horse compatibility arguements are dead. The adaptability arguements are dead. They are all dead. Some people like 2nd edition better and there are very good reasons, some people like 3rd edition better and there are very good reasons. Just because you don't like, accept or validate tham means nothing. I like 2nd edition products 100 times better, because the writing style and description are far superior. I don't care that the rules don't fit together because rules aren't that important to me. No one cares that I think this, though, and similiarly, no one cares why you hated 2nd edition. Lets all get over it.
rautapaavi 10-12-04, 04:35 AM	Could someone explain to me precisely how this prestige class works? Does it combine all caster levels for a particular aspect of casting a la the old true necromancer and death spells, or does it really affect all casting? Does the brokenness follow from adding Mystic Theurge levels to the combination or is the Hallowed Mage PrC broken in itself?
Kessalin Talira 10-12-04, 06:56 AM	I've never seen the prestige class before, but from what I gathered from a previous post on the subject, it sounds like a Wizard 4/Cleric 4/Hallowed Mage 2 would be considered at least an 8th level caster in both cleric and wizard. That's assuming the Hallowed Mage levels don't stack in there too... If they do, then a Wizard 3/Cleric 3/Hallowed Mage 2/Mystic Theurge 10 would be an 18th level character with 18 wizard caster levels, and 18 cleric caster levels. Shattered, not just broken, in my opinion. Now that I think about it, the Mystic Theurge isn't even needed, if the Hallowed Mage works like I think it does. Wizard 5/Cleric 5/Hallowed Mage 10 would be a 20th level caster in both arcane and divine spells.
Willybot 10-12-04, 08:57 PM	At first I thought that GreenGriffon was off his rocker too; then I took a closer look. Looking at the Mystic Theurge entry (DMG pg.192), it states: Spells per Day: When a new mystic theurge level is gained, the character gains new spells per day as if he also gained a level in any one arcane spellcasting class....He does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained (bonus metamagic or item creation feats, bard or assassin abilities, and so on). This essentially means that he adds the level of mystic theurge to the level of whatever other arcane spellcasting..., then determines spells per day and caster level accordingly. I, like many other players, immediatly assumed that this also included spells known; though it wasn't explicatly stated, it was assumed. However, a page before it (DMG pg. 191) in the entry of the Lore Master: Spells per Day/Spells Known: A loremaster continues training in magic as well as her field of research. Thus, when a new loremaster level is gained, the character gains new spells per day (and spells known if applicable) as if she also gained a level in a spellcasting class she belonged to before she aded the prestige class...This essentially means that she adds the level of loremaster to the level of some other spellcasting class the character has, then determines spells per day, spells known, and caster level accordingly. Not only it is specifically mentioned in the Loremaster entry, it's mentioned twice! This leads to the conclusion that unless otherwise stated, the Theurge does not include spells known for any class, including sorceror. The Loremaster, on the otherhand does since it's specified in the entry. I'll say one thing, this will change a character or two in my own RP group when we next play.
TheGreenGriffon 10-12-04, 10:11 PM	Thanks WillyBot! I knew that example was somewhere but I didnt wanna mention it without knowing where. Someone is borrowing my DMG and MM right now so looking stuff isnt an option. But I kinew it had an example of this on something, thanks for pointing it out. By the way, sometimes I am indeed a little of my rocker but usually its "in game" :D
Rogue Spear 10-13-04, 02:26 AM	Not only it is specifically mentioned in the Loremaster entry, it's mentioned twice! This leads to the conclusion that unless otherwise stated, the Theurge does not include spells known for any class, including sorceror. The Loremaster, on the otherhand does since it's specified in the entry. I'll say one thing, this will change a character or two in my own RP group when we next play. I'm not positive, but I'm almost certain that section of text in the Loremaster is reprinted word for word from 3rd edition. Now, far be it from me to complain about the "well-oiled machine," but there are plenty of errors caused by cutting and pasting in 3.5, so you can't really assume too much from it. Furthermore if you go to the other thread, there are several examples of wizards "knowing" and the designers using the word "know" wrt to wizards and their spellbooks. Its pretty clear that a wizard/mystic theurge gets his 2 spells per level.
Willybot 10-13-04, 03:53 AM	I'm not positive, but I'm almost certain that section of text in the Loremaster is reprinted word for word from 3rd edition. Now, far be it from me to complain about the "well-oiled machine," but there are plenty of errors caused by cutting and pasting in 3.5, so you can't really assume too much from it. Furthermore if you go to the other thread, there are several examples of wizards "knowing" and the designers using the word "know" wrt to wizards and their spellbooks. Its pretty clear that a wizard/mystic theurge gets his 2 spells per level. But check the Spells/Day entry for Archmage; you'll find the same specification on spells-per-day vs spells-per-day&spells-known. Looking at more recent material, specifically the Complete Divine and the new Libris Mortis, they make certain to specify that classes increase their SPD as well as SK. This includes classes that are brand new, such as the Entropomancer. Now, what is strange is that I haven't seen many new spellcaster prestege classes where only the SPD increase, but not the SK (outside of the DMG, that is). Mabye the ommission was a typo, but otherwise the class is stuck. Looking at some of the 3.0 classes, they didn't specify either. In the case of the Red Wizard of Thay, the SPD entry is pretty much the same; stating that they gain SPD, but not hinting toward SK. The class says the same in the 3.5 DMG. So what I wonder is: if (I don't have a 3.0 DMG handy so I can't check that version of the Loremaster) the 3.0 Loremaster specified SK, why didn't the 3.0 Red Wizard, since both of their SPD entries were carried over pretty much identical?
Rogue Spear 10-13-04, 05:15 AM	But check the Spells/Day entry for Archmage; you'll find the same specification on spells-per-day vs spells-per-day&spells-known. Looking at more recent material, specifically the Complete Divine and the new Libris Mortis, they make certain to specify that classes increase their SPD as well as SK. That assumes that material is new. Complete Divine is almost completely reprinted, and has many flagrant errors (the first that comes to mind is the requirements for the black flame zealot) that are obviously caused by cutting and pasting without editing. This includes classes that are brand new, such as the Entropomancer. The entropomancer is not new, it was first printed in Lords of Darkness. As I've said before, reprinted material is highly suspect, particularly when its in the complete divine. Now, what is strange is that I haven't seen many new spellcaster prestege classes where only the SPD increase, but not the SK (outside of the DMG, that is). Mabye the ommission was a typo, but otherwise the class is stuck. Looking at some of the 3.0 classes, they didn't specify either. In the case of the Red Wizard of Thay, the SPD entry is pretty much the same; stating that they gain SPD, but not hinting toward SK. The class says the same in the 3.5 DMG. So what I wonder is: if (I don't have a 3.0 DMG handy so I can't check that version of the Loremaster) the 3.0 Loremaster specified SK, why didn't the 3.0 Red Wizard, since both of their SPD entries were carried over pretty much identical? I always assumed the phrasing is different because the text in question was written by different people. People, I might add, with imperfect editing skills. The simplest answer is that the classes where SK was not specified were written quickly, and the writer truncated the text in question without realizing it, or the writer assumed everyone would know what he meant, both of which I've seen in these rules.
pres_man 10-13-04, 10:10 AM	I agree that it is probably an editing problem with different people writing the descriptions. Spells per day: ..., an 8th level wizard gains a level in loremaster, she gains new spells as if she had risen to 9th level in wizard, ... The text prior to the example is identical to the text for mystic theurge with respect to gaining spells per day and caster levels.
Willybot 10-13-04, 11:55 AM	The problem is, with the exception of the 3.0 FAQ there is no addressing the issue. That assumes that material is new. Complete Divine is almost completely reprinted, and has many flagrant errors (the first that comes to mind is the requirements for the black flame zealot) that are obviously caused by cutting and pasting without editing. Ok then, from the Libris Mortis, how about the True Necromancer? The class was originally from Tome and Blood sure, but you simply cannot say that it was a direct reprinted copy. Anyway, I personally hope it is as we've always assumed, because otherwise the classes become alot less attractive to take. Considering that all the new material states that the classes gain both Spells Known and Spells per Day, it makes the assumption that all such classes (unless otherwise stated, ala the Heirophant) include both. But with no other official text supporting this...
TheGreenGriffon 10-13-04, 06:09 PM	The text prior to the example is identical to the text for mystic theurge with respect to gaining spells per day and caster levels. Actually I was just recently rolling up a Mystic Theuge for an NPC and it says no where in that class that Mystic Theuge gain 2 spells per level for their spellbooks. You cannot assume because Loremaster gets this ability that Mystic Theuge's do to. Besides the example you just listed sounds an awfully like the description for spells per day, Ill have to read up on that, I sense some editing. and remember people their is a difference between the writers using the word "Know" and the "SPELLS KNOWN" game mechanic term, they have no relation Ok then, from the Libris Mortis, how about the True Necromancer? The class was originally from Tome and Blood sure, but you simply cannot say that it was a direct reprinted copy. Anyway, I personally hope it is as we've always assumed, because otherwise the classes become alot less attractive to take. Considering that all the new material states that the classes gain both Spells Known and Spells per Day, it makes the assumption that all such classes (unless otherwise stated, ala the Heirophant) include both. But with no other official text supporting this... Ok Ive repeated this about 3 times now not including now. When the text refers to both Spells Known and Spells per Day it is referring to Sorcerers, Bards, or anyone else with a SPELLS KNOWN table in their class description. Wizards have no such table, they are not limited in the amount of spells they can know since they can get them from other sources besides leveling but Sorcerers, Etc.. have no such luxury. The Wizards SPELLBOOK is actually a SEPERATE ability in the Wizard description that has nothing to do with caster level, he gets 2 new spells from any that he can cast to copy into his spellbook for every WIZARD level he gains. Class levels are rudimentary stuff yet some still are having an awful problem figuring this out when they Take a PrC.
Cold Napalm 10-13-04, 07:39 PM	So no cleric and druid right green griffon since they do not have a spells known chart or specifically say spells known anywhere in their spells text block? Bah don't be daft. Also until 3.5 faq comes out with a clarification of spell per day of PrC the 3.0 faq is still in effect and is the "offical" ruling...so Bah. It's done, you lose...I win WOOT. Oh yeah BTW this is what I mean by complicated 3.x. BTW look at paralyzing in shining south vs say BoED. No confilicting rules my ass. This is addition to say what a 3rd party books says about PrC or feats or various other things. Course I'll understand if you wanna only use offical WotC stuff...but then it still has problems. Even core rules have problems of claifications that core 2ed did not have...like the whole 2 spells per day arguement we are having now. Wizards editing and R&D people seemed to not have graduated high school at this point. I swear I had a 10 year old point out errors to me at the book store for complete divine. That is just SAD. If you wanna argue using typoes...fine but be prepared for a slew of brokeness to come forth from that. I should know I have made several builds based JUST from a typo.
TheGreenGriffon 10-13-04, 07:56 PM	So no cleric and druid right green griffon since they do not have a spells known chart or specifically say spells known anywhere in their spells text block? Bah don't be daft. Also until 3.5 faq comes out with a clarification of spell per day of PrC the 3.0 faq is still in effect and is the "offical" ruling...so Bah. It's done, you lose...I win WOOT. Actually you loose since druids and clerics have no need of a spells known since they have access to ALL spells on their list that they are sufficient enough level to cast. Clerics and Druids DO NOT learn spels, they are granted spells by their deity. The +1 caster level that the PrC offers gives them access to the lists as they go along, thats never been in dispute about spell level, were talking about spells known which applies to Bards and Sorcerers. I mean if you dont get something as simple as the aspect of Divine spellcasters and how they are gifted with their spells then please dont talk cuz its obvious you have to clue what your talking about. If they adapt the rules later then thats fine and please dont go dictating policy for WoTC or how they work their FAQ. You ARE NOT WoTC and 3.0 is a different edition of the rules and is not relevent to 3.5 since all the 3.0 FAQ changes were included in the new edition so obvously there was never anything in it about this. Thanks for coming out.
pres_man 10-13-04, 08:32 PM	From SRD: WIZARD Spells: A wizard casts arcane spells which are drawn from the sorcerer/ wizard spell list. A wizard must choose and prepare her spells ahead of time (see below). To learn, prepare, or cast a spell, the wizard must have an Intelligence score equal to at least 10 + the spell level. The Difficulty Class for a saving throw against a wizard’s spell is 10 + the spell level + the wizard’s Intelligence modifier. Like other spellcasters, a wizard can cast only a certain number of spells of each spell level per day. Her base daily spell allotment is given on Table: The Wizard. In addition, she receives bonus spells per day if she has a high Intelligence score. Unlike a bard or sorcerer, a wizard may know any number of spells. She must choose and prepare her spells ahead of time by getting a good night’s sleep and spending 1 hour studying her spellbook. While studying, the wizard decides which spells to prepare. Bards and sorcerers are strictly limited on how many spells they can know at any given point, that is why they have a table that describes it. That is the only reason. There is nothing special about bards and sorcerers knowing spells and wizards knowing spells. Adding Spells to a Sorcerer’s or Bard’s Repertoire: A sorcerer or bard gains spells each time he attains a new level in his class and never gains spells any other way. When your sorcerer or bard gains a new level, consult Table: Bard Spells Known or Table: Sorcerer Spells Known to learn how many spells from the appropriate spell list he now knows. With permission, sorcerers and bards can also select the spells they gain from new and unusual spells that they have gained some understanding of. Pretty obvious that's the sole reason for the table. Wizard Spells and Borrowed Spellbooks A wizard can use a borrowed spellbook to prepare a spell she already knows and has recorded in her own spellbook, but preparation success is not assured. And finally from the Glossary of the PHB (don't know where, lol know, it is on the SRD if at all): known spell: ...For wizards, knowing a spell means having it in their spellbooks. For sorceres and bards, knowing a spell means having selected it when acquiring new spells as a benefit of level advancement. You can stick your fingers in your ears and try to pretend that wizards don't know spells, but your just fooling yourself. Now if you want to get really strict (and silly) then read this: Spellbooks: A wizard must study her spellbook each day to prepare her spells. She cannot prepare any spell not recorded in her spellbook, except for read magic, which all wizards can prepare from memory. Being a wizard means you can't prepare any spell that is not in your spellbook. So why would anyone want to go wizard/cleric or wizard/druid? Since you can't prepare your cleric or druid spells since they are divine and can't be written in a spellbook.
Rogue Spear 10-14-04, 02:37 AM	Ok Ive repeated this about 3 times now not including now. When the text refers to both Spells Known and Spells per Day it is referring to Sorcerers, Bards, or anyone else with a SPELLS KNOWN table in their class description. Wizards have no such table, they are not limited in the amount of spells they can know since they can get them from other sources besides leveling but Sorcerers, Etc.. have no such luxury. The Wizards SPELLBOOK is actually a SEPERATE ability in the Wizard description that has nothing to do with caster level, he gets 2 new spells from any that he can cast to copy into his spellbook for every WIZARD level he gains. Class levels are rudimentary stuff yet some still are having an awful problem figuring this out when they Take a PrC. Repetition doesn't improve the veracity of your arguement. No matter how many times you repeat it your interpretation is wrong. Its quite clear from the glossary definition and the rules for spellcasting (props to pres_man for digging out the quotes) that the wizard's spellbook is the mechanic that controls the number of spells known for a wizard, making a table unnecessary. The fact is that you're wrong, and no matter how many times you repeat yourself you're still wrong.
Rogue Spear 10-14-04, 02:43 AM	The problem is, with the exception of the 3.0 FAQ there is no addressing the issue. Ok then, from the Libris Mortis, how about the True Necromancer? The class was originally from Tome and Blood sure, but you simply cannot say that it was a direct reprinted copy. Anyway, I personally hope it is as we've always assumed, because otherwise the classes become alot less attractive to take. Considering that all the new material states that the classes gain both Spells Known and Spells per Day, it makes the assumption that all such classes (unless otherwise stated, ala the Heirophant) include both. But with no other official text supporting this... *shrugs* I don't have Libris Mortis, so I couldn't say, but I've seen enough truncation errors in both 3.0 and 3.5 that I feel its safe to assume that it was just truncated out.
rautapaavi 10-14-04, 03:03 AM	Thanks KT. Anyone else have any relevant information regarding the Hallowed Mage?
Cold Napalm 10-14-04, 03:04 AM	HAHAHA 3.0 faq was put in 3.5 HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA That was funny since some errors that 3.5 faq covers is OBVIOUSLY not in the 3.5 book. As an example this whole PrC arguement we are having now. So Anything NOT covered in 3.5 but covered in 3.0 faq means that the 3.0 one is STILL valid. You arguement is that the wizards spells section SPECIFICALLY nowhere says spells known and that the 2 spells per day is a WIZARD class feature. NOWHERE in the cleric/druid section is spells known mentioned so hence their access to cast higher level spells is a CLERIC/DRUID CLASS feature...just like the 2 spells per day right? Did I not tell you I can break things?
Naeron 10-14-04, 08:49 AM	Actually I was just recently rolling up a Mystic Theuge for an NPC and it says no where in that class that Mystic Theuge gain 2 spells per level for their spellbooks. You cannot assume because Loremaster gets this ability that Mystic Theuge's do to. Besides the example you just listed sounds an awfully like the description for spells per day, Ill have to read up on that, I sense some editing. and remember people their is a difference between the writers using the word "Know" and the "SPELLS KNOWN" game mechanic term, they have no relation. And it has been pointed out to you that the defintion of the game mechanic term "spells known" states that this includes the spells a wizard has in his spellbook as well as the spells that a sorceror or bard picks when they level up. The relationship is there in black and white in the definition of the game term. Ok Ive repeated this about 3 times now not including now. When the text refers to both Spells Known and Spells per Day it is referring to Sorcerers, Bards, or anyone else with a SPELLS KNOWN table in their class description. Wizards have no such table, they are not limited in the amount of spells they can know since they can get them from other sources besides leveling but Sorcerers, Etc.. have no such luxury. The Wizards SPELLBOOK is actually a SEPERATE ability in the Wizard description that has nothing to do with caster level, he gets 2 new spells from any that he can cast to copy into his spellbook for every WIZARD level he gains. Class levels are rudimentary stuff yet some still are having an awful problem figuring this out when they Take a PrC. Its irrelevant that a wizards spellbook is a separate class ability, the definition of spells known states that it includes the spells a wizard has put into their spellbook. All Arcane casters have known spells. The point that the phrase "At each new wizard level, she gains two new spells of any spell level or levels that she can cast (based on her new wizard level) for her spellbook." indicates that gaining a PrC level cannot grant this because it is only for wizard levels (even though these are, by definition, known spells) can be matched by the statement "At each new sorcerer level, he gains one or more new spells, as indicated on Table: Sorcerer Spells Known" which only talks about gaining Sorceror levels. So either the PrC note about increasing spells known (if applicable) applies to "spells known" in which case it overrides all class specific entries that control the gaining of known spells. Lastly, nowhere does it say that Wizards do not have spells known, they don't have a spells know table - instead the class specifically says "Unlike a bard or sorcerer, a wizard may know any number of spells.". Wizards do know spells, they just don't have a fixed limit per level.
TheGreenGriffon 10-14-04, 09:54 AM	HAHAHA 3.0 faq was put in 3.5 HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA That was funny since some errors that 3.5 faq covers is OBVIOUSLY not in the 3.5 book. As an example this whole PrC arguement we are having now. So Anything NOT covered in 3.5 but covered in 3.0 faq means that the 3.0 one is STILL valid. You arguement is that the wizards spells section SPECIFICALLY nowhere says spells known and that the 2 spells per day is a WIZARD class feature. NOWHERE in the cleric/druid section is spells known mentioned so hence their access to cast higher level spells is a CLERIC/DRUID CLASS feature...just like the 2 spells per day right? Did I not tell you I can break things? You havent broken anything because you have no clue what your talking about and I dont think anyone else does either. Clerics and Druids dont have spells known. They gain access to every druid or cleric spell they are sufficient enough level to cast, do you know what that means? As long as the Druid and Clerics caster level goes up, every 2nd level they gain access to a new spell level and all the spells on the list like every caster does, it has nothing to do with spells known, they are divine casters and thus this statement has no place in this discussion because the PrC gives them +1 effective caster level. Why are we having a discussion about a spellcasting class that doesnt even work the same way and haas no relevance to arcane casters, even if a wizard or sorcerer never gained any new spells they would still obtain the abilkity to cast higher spell levels, this has nothing to do with spells known. The point that the phrase "At each new wizard level, she gains two new spells of any spell level or levels that she can cast (based on her new wizard level) for her spellbook." indicates that gaining a PrC level cannot grant this because it is only for wizard levels (even though these are, by definition, known spells) can be matched by the statement "At each new sorcerer level, he gains one or more new spells, as indicated on Table: Sorcerer Spells Known" which only talks about gaining Sorceror levels. So either the PrC note about increasing spells known (if applicable) applies to "spells known" in which case it overrides all class specific entries that control the gaining of known spells. Yes but for the Sorcerer example theres actually a clear rule that backs it up. However in the case of the wizard its different because th spells known section was placed in there because Sorcerers can only gain spells one way while a wizard can gain them anytime from nearly any source. By the way there is no definition rules, they are like you said black and white, not shades of grey that canaltered to fit what the individual player wants. And it has been pointed out to you that the defintion of the game mechanic term "spells known" states that this includes the spells a wizard has in his spellbook as well as the spells that a sorceror or bard picks when they level up. The relationship is there in black and white in the definition of the game term. Your right this has been pointed out to me, too bad its only opinion and not actually printed. Tell me why does Loremaster in the same book as DMG actually bother to point out in a seperate area that a loremaster gains 2 bonus spells per level for his spellbook while Mystic Theuge and the other PrC's do not? Huh? Its because when they mean to say something they say it, and when there is an error is usually says nothing at all on the subject. Its irrelevant that a wizards spellbook is a separate class ability, the definition of spells known states that it includes the spells a wizard has put into their spellbook. All Arcane casters have known spells. And again your trying to convince me by trying to make Spells Known a subjective term that has many meanings when it doesnt, It means exactly what it says and nothing more. The nature of PrC's states that unless it specifically says the character gains improvement in a former ability he doesnt gain it and since spellbook is a seperate ability than +1 effective caster level than this means you do not get it. Either way Its not a ground breaking rule, Im gonna email sage advice and ask for an official calling on it, whichever way anyone wants to use it isnt breaking the system or over powering the game
pres_man 10-14-04, 10:30 AM	Your right this has been pointed out to me, too bad its only opinion and not actually printed. :OMG! And finally from the Glossary of the PHB (don't know where, lol know, it is on the SRD if at all): Quote: known spell: ...For wizards, knowing a spell means having it in their spellbooks. For sorceres and bards, knowing a spell means having selected it when acquiring new spells as a benefit of level advancement. Just kept trying to not admit your wrong. :looloo:
allenchan 10-14-04, 02:26 PM	Back to the thread's topic, I ahve to agree this is completely unfair and you're getting royally shafted. If you have the choice I would simply not play with the group, or bring it to everyone's attention. As a DM I personally dont allow 3.0 material or 3rd party stuff, and this is exactly why. Next you'll say your DM thinks wizards and clerics are underpowered and a pure 20 fighter is so cheap... :nonono: I feel your pain.
TheGreenGriffon 10-14-04, 06:28 PM	Just kept trying to not admit your wrong. Umm no, afraid not, I hold strong with my original position until an official calling has been given, thats when Ill admit im wrong if I am, unlike some Im not so afraid to be wrong. By the way your handy definition is for a "Known spell" not for "Spells Known". Spells Known as ive said refers to a table on the Bard and Sorcerer description. Your definition from the PHB which I looked up is the actual definition while Spells Known is a game mechanic term.
pres_man 10-14-04, 10:25 PM	By the way your handy definition is for a "Known spell" not for "Spells Known". Spells Known as ive said refers to a table on the Bard and Sorcerer description. Your definition from the PHB which I looked up is the actual definition while Spells Known is a game mechanic term. Ahhhh, I think I'm beginning to understand the confusion between what your claiming and what everybody else is talking about. You seem to be claiming that the phrase spells known is not the same as known spells. Fighter: So do you know mage armor? Wizard: Yes, but it's not a spell known to me. Fighter: But I thought you said you know the spell. Wizard: Exactly, I know the spell, but it is not a spell known to me. Sorcerer: Yeah, it's a spell known to me and its a known spell to me. Favored Soul: Hey do I have any known spells? Wizard&Sorcerer: How can you dumbie you cast divine magic? Favored Soul: Oh, ... well do I have spells known to me? Sorcerer: Of course you do, just like me but a divine caster. Fighter: :headexplo Wizard/Favored Soul: Hey, I have known spells and I have spells known and none of them are known spells that are spells known.
Cold Napalm 10-14-04, 10:44 PM	And he is still ignoring that if it MUST say spells known then cleric and druid don't get their spells since their access to higher level spells does not say spells known so it is a class based feature don'tcha know and does not say spells known.
Rogue Spear 10-14-04, 11:01 PM	By the way your handy definition is for a "Known spell" not for "Spells Known". Spells Known as ive said refers to a table on the Bard and Sorcerer description. Your definition from the PHB which I looked up is the actual definition while Spells Known is a game mechanic term. Actually, as we've already pointed out, the definition of spells known (defined as spells in a wizard's spellbook) is a game mechanic as well. For example, a wizard can memorize a spell he knows (a spell that is written in his spellbook) from a different spellbook, while he cannot memorize a spell he does not know (a spell not written in his spellbook) from a spellbook not his own. BUt thank you for playing.
TheGreenGriffon 10-15-04, 09:56 AM	And he is still ignoring that if it MUST say spells known then cleric and druid don't get their spells since their access to higher level spells does not say spells known so it is a class based feature don'tcha know and does not say spells known. No it doesnt need to because it says +1 effective caster level. Going up in caster level allows you access to a higher level spell slot regardless if you know any spells of that level or not. In the case of Druids and Clerics they gain a new list whenver they get to the right level to access it: For example: A 16th level Cleric who can cast a maximum of 8th level spells gains anothe rlevel and takes Divine Hierophant. He gains a +1 effective caster level making him a 17th level caster and granting him access to the 9th level spell list. Druids and Clerics have little to do with this topic, they arent Arcane casters and they dont learn new spells, their deity grants them all the spells on a list they have a high enough caster level to reach. It works the same for Wizards too, even if a Wizard had no spells for a certain level, he can still cast that level spell, the option is available he just cannot utilize it if he doesnt have a spell in his book for that level. Actually, as we've already pointed out, the definition of spells known (defined as spells in a wizard's spellbook) is a game mechanic as well. For example, a wizard can memorize a spell he knows (a spell that is written in his spellbook) from a different spellbook, while he cannot memorize a spell he does not know (a spell not written in his spellbook) from a spellbook not his own. Not denying that wizards dont "know" spells, im just saying in the case of the PrC, thats not what they are referring to and I believe they are referring to the table. Loremaster says specifically that wizards gain more spells for their book while the other PrC's do not so until WoTC come sout and says that they missed every PrC except Loremaster on this regard. Theres two sides to this coin and flipping the coin isnt really changing anything at this point, everything thats been said has been said over and over again and nothing has been accomplished so until an official calling is made theres not much point going on with this.
TheGreenGriffon 10-15-04, 09:59 AM	You seem to be claiming that the phrase spells known is not the same as known spells. Fighter: So do you know mage armor? Wizard: Yes, but it's not a spell known to me. Fighter: But I thought you said you know the spell. Wizard: Exactly, I know the spell, but it is not a spell known to me. Sorcerer: Yeah, it's a spell known to me and its a known spell to me. Favored Soul: Hey do I have any known spells? Wizard/Sorcerer: How can you dumbie you cast divine magic? Favored Soul: Oh, ... well do I have spells known to me? Sorcerer: Of course you do, just like me but a divine caster. Im actually not sure if this is what I mean or not but it is entertaining to read, thanks for posting it! :D
pres_man 10-15-04, 10:16 AM	Not denying that wizards dont "know" spells, im just saying in the case of the PrC, thats not what they are referring to and I believe they are referring to the table. Loremaster says specifically that wizards gain more spells for their book while the other PrC's do not so until WoTC comes out and says that they missed every PrC except Loremaster on this regard. Actually the 3.5 Loremaster doesn't say anything about wizards gaining more spells for their book. The 3rd edition had flavor text that seemed to make this clear but then it didn't mention known spells specifically. And Archmage also has a section with spells per day/spells known. My guess is 1 person did the 3.5 archmage and lore master and at least 1 other person did arcan trickster, eldritch knight, mystic theurge, red wizard, and thaumaturgist. Also I might mention that if you believe a wizard shouldn't get his 2 free spells per level for cases where the sorcerer gets his new known spells then what happens if the wizard has a "low" spellcraft? The wizard has to make a DC 15 + spell level check to learn a spell. Basically it seems to me that your saying a player can choose to spend their skill points anyway they want as long as they max out spellcraft. I'm not saying a wizard shouldn't max out spellcraft, but to have to, that's crazy.
TheGreenGriffon 10-15-04, 10:28 AM	Actually the 3.5 Loremaster doesn't say anything about wizards gaining more spells for their book. The 3rd edition had flavor text that seemed to make this clear but then it didn't mention known spells specifically. And Archmage also has a section with spells per day/spells known. My guess is 1 person did the 3.5 archmage and lore master and at least 1 other person did arcan trickster, eldritch knight, mystic theurge, red wizard, and thaumaturgist. Also I might mention that if you believe a wizard shouldn't get his 2 free spells per level for cases where the sorcerer gets his new known spells then what happens if the wizard has a "low" spellcraft? The wizard has to make a DC 15 + spell level check to learn a spell. Basically it seems to me that your saying a player can choose to spend their skill points anyway they want as long as they max out spellcraft. I'm not saying a wizard shouldn't max out spellcraft, but to have to, that's crazy. Dont have my DMG, im having to go off memory, I really wish I had it but I dont. Maybe, I dont know, if WoTC comes and says that yes they do gain 2 new spells a level for wizard spellbooks if they take a PrC then ill say fine, thats ok. Im just saying the way I see it now. As for the Spellcraft, you should have a decent Int score and this check is just as difficult as Combat Casting so if you dont have a good spellcraft you are SOL. besides you only get 2 spells per level, if you have a low spellcraft where are all your other spells coming from? if your just living off those free spells that that is one useless wizard who should have been a Sorcerer. Heh. Your still gonna have to make the check sometimes. I remember back in 2ed when my wizard got 6th level spells I didnt have one 6th level spell for a while. It was just the way it went. No im not saying that im forcing my players to take spellcraft. They get their spells per level if they advance in Wizard but if you tale a PrC you are trading that ability for the abilities of the PrC, alot of people on here seem to want their cake and to eat it too. Where are you gonna find the time to learn new spells when your busy becomming an Archmage and dedictaing your studies to bending magic in ways never thought possible and learning some of the most guarded and difficult arcane training ever? On your coffee break? Its sad, people never think of this stuff, all players seem to think about these days is "How much can I get out of taking this?" If I am wrong about this I think I may keep it my way as a House rule. Because otherwise why continue in Wizard? for the feats? Pfft. Archamge gives better abilities than any feat can.
pres_man 10-15-04, 11:01 AM	As for clerics not being relevent. Well if a spellbook and bonus spells are a class feature of a wizard and not a feature of his spellcasting, then so are domain spells a class feature of a cleric and not his spellcasting. On a side note I figured out why a wizard would want to take a level of cleric. Remember I posted this sentence from the wizard entry. She cannot prepare any spell not recorded in her spellbook, except for read magic, which all wizards can prepare from memory. Which means that a wizard/cleric can not prepare cleric spells since they aren't written in the spellbook. Well here is why they might want to go cleric, at least for 1 level. The cleric can “lose” any prepared spell that is not a domain spell in order to cast any cure spell of the same spell level or lower (a cure spell is any spell with “cure” in its name). No where does it say the prepared spell must be a cleric spell. Therefore a wizard/cleric can spontaneously convert his wizard spells to healing spells. ;) Even better would be a wizard/cleric/druid. :D
Kiri Sittori 10-15-04, 12:18 PM	As for clerics not being relevent. Well if a spellbook and bonus spells are a class feature of a wizard and not a feature of his spellcasting, then so are domain spells a class feature of a cleric and not his spellcasting. On a side note I figured out why a wizard would want to take a level of cleric. Remember I posted this sentence from the wizard entry. Which means that a wizard/cleric can not prepare cleric spells since they aren't written in the spellbook. Well here is why they might want to go cleric, at least for 1 level. No where does it say the prepared spell must be a cleric spell. Therefore a wizard/cleric can spontaneously convert his wizard spells to healing spells. ;) Even better would be a wizard/cleric/druid. :D Two major errors here, illuminated by PHB3.5 p180. 1. Divine spellcasters do not require spellbooks. The divine caster's spell ability is, however, limited to his appropriate spell list. (See also p59, where "the character gains spells from all of his spellcasting classes.") Therefore, the wizard/cleric must prepare wizard spells from the book, and cleric spells the way clerics would (ie, through prayer or meditation.) 2. P180 also indicates that the *divine* energy of the spell being substituted is converted into the cure/inflict/summon. And, a note on the prestige-class argument: The sorcerer's "spells known" is a function of spellcasting (PHB 54) whereas a wizard's spellbook is a separate feature (PHB 57.) To put it another way. Sorcerer class features: Weapon proficiencies Spellcasting (includes spells known) Familiar Wizard class features: Weapon proficiencies Spellcasting Can learn Dragon as a bonus language Familiar Scribe Scroll Bonus Feats (meta/item/SM at 1/5) Spellbook (includes two spells at level up) That's right, the two spells a Wizard gets at level up are a function of the wizard's spellbook, not his spellcasting. Thus, he does NOT get them when PrC-ing.
TheGreenGriffon 10-15-04, 12:41 PM	Yeah I dont think you can use Arcane energy to cast a divine spell, since that power is given by your deity it can be converted into pure healing energy but a wizard spell is not given by that deity. then so are domain spells a class feature of a cleric and not his spellcasting. This is one of those yes and no answers. yes domain spells are a seperate feature to the cleric however they are improved by spellcasting level by unlocking them so this is a tough one. Im actually not sure on this one whether you would gain more domain spells as you progres in a PrC as a cleric. never really thought of that one before. Anyone have any ideas on this?
pres_man 10-15-04, 01:11 PM	1. Divine spellcasters do not require spellbooks. True The divine caster's spell ability is, however, limited to his appropriate spell list. (See also p59, where "the character gains spells from all of his spellcasting classes.") True Therefore, the wizard/cleric must prepare wizard spells from the book, and cleric spells the way clerics would (ie, through prayer or meditation.) Not by a strict reading of the rules. A wizard (and a multiclass PC with wizard as one of the classes is a wizard) must prepare their spells using a spellbook. It doesn't say that only the spells from the wizard class must be prepare with a spellbook, no, it says that for a wizard to prepare a spell it must be in his spellbook. So yes, a wizard/cleric gets the spells of both, but he can only prepare spells that are in his spellbook. 2. P180 also indicates that the *divine* energy of the spell being substituted is converted into the cure/inflict/summon. Yeah your right about that. Too bad, oh well now again no reason for wizard to multiclass to druid or cleric. :( And, a note on the prestige-class argument: The sorcerer's "spells known" is a function of spellcasting (PHB 54) whereas a wizard's spellbook is a separate feature (PHB 57.) To put it another way. Sorcerer class features: Weapon proficiencies Spellcasting (includes spells known) Familiar Wizard class features: Weapon proficiencies Spellcasting Can learn Dragon as a bonus language Familiar Scribe Scroll Bonus Feats (meta/item/SM at 1/5) Spellbook (includes two spells at level up) That's right, the two spells a Wizard gets at level up are a function of the wizard's spellbook, not his spellcasting. Thus, he does NOT get them when PrC-ing. Cleric class features: Weapon and Armor Proficiency Aura - Might be important to someone, maybe? Spells Deity, Domains, and Domain Spells No extra domain spells gained for most PrCs, and deity does not grant spells for new spells per day Spontaneous Casting Can't use extra spells per day to do any curing Chaotic, Evil, Good, and Lawful Spells Turn or Rebuke Undead Bonus Languages
pres_man 10-15-04, 01:17 PM	Spells: A wizard casts arcane spells which are drawn from the sorcerer/ wizard spell list. A wizard must choose and prepare her spells ahead of time (see below). The see below comment seems to be refering to the entry about spellbooks. Seems that the Spellbook entry is merely a continuation of the spells entry.
Kiri Sittori 10-15-04, 02:09 PM	The see below comment seems to be refering to the entry about spellbooks. Seems that the Spellbook entry is merely a continuation of the spells entry. Actually, not exactly. The problem here is that both the sorcerer and bard have their "how do you *know* spells" answered in the spells entry. The equivalent text for the wizard is not only discrete, but widely separated from the spells entry (ie, by no fewer than four other entries that have nothing to do with spellcasting, per se.) Seems that the spellbook entry was intended to be completely separate from the spells entry. Moreover, the "see below" refers to the summary of the prepping rules, as presented atop p57; this, in turn, refers to p177, the section on Wizard Spell Preparation. As for clerics: -Domain spells: "A cleric also gets one domain spell of *each spell level he can cast,* starting at 1st level" (PHB p32.) Therefore, domain spells are keyed to spell levels, not cleric levels, and the PrC-ing cleric gets them as usual. (Now, most domain *abilities* don't accrue in this manner, since those tend to be keyed to the cleric's level or turning ability.) -Aura: Keep in mind that the (usually) non-stacking nature of the aura may be quite advantageous to the character. :P -Spontaneous Casting: Not keyed to level; and, as described on 32 and 180, works on any prepared [cleric/druid, as appropriate] spell.
pres_man 10-15-04, 04:53 PM	Spellbooks and their use is the most complicated thing directly related to spellcasting rules in the entire PHB. Look in the rules for magic, how much space is dedicated to the sole description of spellbooks, the writing of spells in them, the loaning of them, the copying of them, etc. The bard and sorcerer entries are about 1/4-1/3 the size. Of course it has its own seperate description, it is the one rule of a wizards ability to use magic that has nothing, nothing to do with any other class. The preparing of spells is similiar to clerics and druids, the arcane magic is similiar to bards and sorcerers, yet the use of a spellbook is unique to a wizard using magic. Take away an average wizard's spellbook and you have someone who can cast read magic 20 times and get killed really easily. A wizard's spellcasting an her spellbook are intimiately tied to one another. To say her spellcasting improves, but her spellbook doesn't is ignoring what it means to be a wizard. As for the number of things between the entries. Can learn Dragon as a bonus language - other classes give access to additional languages Familiar - sorcerers share the ability to call familiars Scribe Scroll - bonus feats are common with other classes Bonus Feats (meta/item/SM at 1/5) - ditto as above + this is similiar to a fighter's bonus feats So we see they covered everything that wizards had in common or related to all of the classes and then, lastly talked about what was different. Gee, that's a really weird way to do things.
Jeefit the meephit 10-15-04, 06:51 PM	No it doesnt need to because it says +1 effective caster level. Going up in caster level allows you access to a higher level spell slot regardless if you know any spells of that level or not. In the case of Druids and Clerics they gain a new list whenver they get to the right level to access it: For example: A 16th level Cleric who can cast a maximum of 8th level spells gains anothe rlevel and takes Divine Hierophant. He gains a +1 effective caster level making him a 17th level caster and granting him access to the 9th level spell list. . So a cleric wearing a Prayer bead of Karma (+4 to caster level) can now cast spells two levels higher for free? Their caster level went up didn't it? However it's obvious from the intent that a lot of caster level hikes like this are meant to be used to make dispelling easier and for spells where the caster level plays a pivotal or vital role in range or healing amount or dc to dispel. It's not intended to make people cast free spells, especially at such a low price. I would also argue that the inclusion of Clerics and Druids is necessary because we are arguing class skills versus spells known and they are another kind of spellcaster in fact I'd argue the inclusion of Psionics as well with power's known mechaninc if I felt that they're inclusion would help either arguement. When I look at spells known, for wizards, I agree that it is the spellbook, while they may add more spells they also have a major vunerability there, if they take away your spellbook the wizards is majorly nerfed, would it make sense even that the wizard gets even more nerfed by not getting more spells while a sorcerer does just fine? How is this balanced? Because a wizard can spend money to make up a deficit? Does that mean that a wizard should have a seperate funds chart for average party level because he has to compensate for an imbalancing effect when compared to his foil, the sorcerer? No. They need to stay balanced as foils, They both have pro's and cons and they mostly balance each other out. If one is allowed full caster progression in a prestige class that both can take it would make no sense to disadvantage the other when they both get the same benefit. Because it makes no sense in the first case I would like to try your sense of logic. why disadvantage one of the other aren't they equal? Logically if one advances both advance. Also I'd like to chime in on the issue of class abilities, It's a class ability of the druid and cleric that as they gain more CLERIC OR DRUID CASTER LEVELS (not gan more caster levels. or a cleric 1/ wizard 2 would be able to cast second level cleric spells) that they can cast heigher valences. If it adds a level as if they had gained a level in that class, then either the wizard is treatred as having gained a wizard caster level, and therefore two spells, or the cleric and druid having not gained druid specific caster levels may not cast higher level spells, though ranges, durations and other caster level modifiers have. Further more I'd like to thank you for bearing through this long post and I'd like to leave you with one final note. This is a game, your supposed to have fun. What is more fun to you? Wizards gaining with caster levels wizards not? If you like one and it doesn't spoil anyone elses fun then do it. As long as you and your group have fun it doesn't matter.
Count Arioch the 28th 10-15-04, 09:21 PM	Didn't the thread starter start a new thread for you guys to babble on about this dumb topic? Because I'd like it if you would go there so I can more easily ignore it.
Kessalin Talira 10-16-04, 12:37 PM	Didn't the thread starter start a new thread for you guys to babble on about this dumb topic? Because I'd like it if you would go there so I can more easily ignore it. :rofl: No, that was me... doesn't look like it worked too well, does it? Incidentally, that thread is located here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=320895).
rautapaavi 12-17-04, 02:41 AM	Hey all. Been away for awhile Any word on how this Hallowed Mage is supposed to work?
ManinDarkness 12-17-04, 03:44 AM	Oh yeah BTW this is what I mean by complicated 3.x. BTW look at paralyzing in shining south vs say BoED. No confilicting rules my ass. This is addition to say what a 3rd party books says about PrC or feats or various other things. Course I'll understand if you wanna only use offical WotC stuff...but then it still has problems. Even core rules have problems of claifications that core 2ed did not have...like the whole 2 spells per day arguement we are having now. Of course 2E had not that problems. It had many others. I spent like a week arguing with my DM about a rule. He said one thing, I said another. Both of us were right. His PHB said one thing and my PHB said another. 2E got many printings and every one of them changed something to the phrasing of some rules. It also had circular logic at character creation when reading by the letter, something along the lines of I choose a race, that race changes my abilities so I can not be that race, but with original abilities I can (there are more complicated instances but I don't remember them).
WizO_Catoblepas 12-20-04, 10:00 PM	Off topic.
GaffeR 12-21-04, 02:25 AM	this may have already been mentioned, but i wasn't really feeling up to reading three pages of debate over PrC's and spells known... With only a fighter/rogue/wizard, the DM may have allowed the wizard to become a MT because he could also handle the healing side. Now you have the classic fighter/cleric/wizard/rogue group. Never seen that other PrC tho.. :confused:
Afarian 12-22-04, 12:35 AM	this may have already been mentioned, but i wasn't really feeling up to reading three pages of debate over PrC's and spells known... With only a fighter/rogue/wizard, the DM may have allowed the wizard to become a MT because he could also handle the healing side. Now you have the classic fighter/cleric/wizard/rogue group. Never seen that other PrC tho.. :confused: Thank GOD!! Finally someone who posted a response related to the actual question of the poster--instead of some dorky version of a testorone driven argument about a remark made by the second or third reply!! Holy COW, LOL, I guess this is what they mean when they say "troll"! Anyhoots, I have a DM who has much more bizarre rulings which in my opinion are severely unfair! So I would love to be in your shoes right now. I won't get into my situation (You can read about it though in my other post) but if I were you, I would be happy with the fact that you can play a basic core class without having any house rules that will permanently screw your character! Basically, it could be worse.