I selected Cleric and Sorcerer so that I have to UMD the fewest items possible, such as wands, not to mention the bonus feats you can get with cleric (Time and Planning domains grant Improved Initiative and Extend Spell, respectively).
1 - Cleric 1 - Nymph's Kiss (BoED), Practiced Spellcaster (Cleric)
2 - Artificer 1 - Scribe Scroll (bonus feat)
3 - Sorcerer 1 - Theurgic Creationist (DR325 p62)
4 - Artificer 2 - Brew Potion (bonus feat)
5 - Artificer 3 - Craft Wondrous Item (bonus feat)
6 - Artificer 4 - Practiced Spellcaster (Sorcerer)
7 - Artificer 5 - Craft Magic Arms and Armor (bonus feat)
Dragon Magazine 325, page 62 wrote:
Sloppy, sloppy WotC.
From the SRD:
The creator must have prepared the spell to be scribed (or must know the spell, in the case of a sorcerer or bard) and must provide any material component or focus the spell requires. If casting the spell would reduce the caster’s XP total, she pays the cost upon beginning the scroll in addition to the XP cost for making the scroll itself. Likewise, a material component is consumed when she begins writing, but a focus is not. (A focus used in scribing a scroll can be reused.) The act of writing triggers the prepared spell, making it unavailable for casting until the character has rested and regained spells. (That is, that spell slot is expended from her currently prepared spells, just as if it had been cast.)
There is similar language for other items that contain or use spells. Having a high caster level, by itself, doesn't allow one to access the slots required to complete the construction.
No, this doesn't work. Increasing caster level will only help achieve that part of the prereqs that reference caster level as a requirement. It doesn't allow one to, for example, scribe a scroll of a 9th level spell.
From the SRD:
The creator must have prepared the spell to be scribed [etc.]
The artificer class has rules for item creation that override the SRD.
It's mildly interesting, but it's not "9th level spells", it's "scrolls of 9th level spells" which are far less interesting (i.e. you could just go out and buy one if you had enough money).
Artificer 7 = 5 + 2 (class feature)
Bard 5 = 1 + 4 (Practiced Spellcaster)
Beguiler 5 = 1 + 4 (Practiced Spellcaster)
"the caster levels of all your spellcasting classes to determine your caster level"
That uses problematic text. Does it mean levels in casting classes ("caster levels") or does it mean raw caster level added together?
If it means levels in caster classes, then the Artificer wouldn't apply, and the total would be 2.
For levels in class the levels in class, it should have been written:
"add levels in spellcasting classes together to obtain caster level."
For casting level, it should have been written as one of these two:
"add all of your spellcasting classes caster level together"
"add your effective caster level for each class with a caster level together"
Also, your DM may balk at the Artificer's "I can can do anything you can do with a low level UMD check" abilities. I personally wouldn't allow this even if it was clearly intended to work this way.
I don't think this trick was intended to work this way.
No, this doesn't work. Increasing caster level will only help achieve that part of the prereqs that reference caster level as a requirement. It doesn't allow one to, for example, scribe a scroll of a 9th level spell.
From the SRD:
The creator must have prepared the spell to be scribed [etc.]
The artificer class has rules for item creation that override the SRD.
It's mildly interesting, but it's not "9th level spells", it's "scrolls of 9th level spells" which are far less interesting (i.e. you could just go out and buy one if you had enough money).
Exactly, hogarth.
Item Creation (Ex): An artificer can create a magic item even if he does not have access to the spells that are prerequisites for the item. The artificer must make a successful Use Magic Device check (DC 20 + caster level) to emulate each spell normally required to create the item.
But still, able to craft any and every spell up to 9th level on a scroll and cast it without even needing to make a roll, since it's autosuccess even on a 1, is pretty powerful for a 7th level character.
But scrolls aren't the only option. You can craft almost any magical item with a caster level requirement up to CL 17. You can't do wands, rods, staffs, or rings yet, because you don't have the feats, but with 1 more level, you can do wands and have CL 18.
"the caster levels of all your spellcasting classes to determine your caster level"
That uses problematic text. Does it mean levels in casting classes ("caster levels") or does it mean raw caster level added together?
If it means levels in caster classes, then the Artificer wouldn't apply, and the total would be 2. (snip)
That's the issue I was seeing and why I asked. If Artificer doesn't apply, then the total CL is still 10. If you dropped Artificer and used another spellcaster for that base, such as Wizard, you could still accomplish the CL 17, but then you'd need to have access to the 9th level spells in your spellbook or a borrowed spellbook, which severely limits the abuse of this.
Still, a hypothetical Wizard 3 / Cleric 3 / Mystic Theurge 3 with Theurgic Creationist would be level 9 with a CL of 12 for crafting, throw Practiced Spellcaster on both Wizard and Cleric, and it brings it up to CL 18.
If Artificer doesn't apply, then the total CL is still 10.
No, it would be 2.
If your DM interprets to mean levels in a class, then level 1 Bard and level 1
Beguiler is a total of level 2, so CL2.
It all comes down to how your DM interprets the rules. Expect the DM to interpret it as CL2 if you try this build in his game
add together the caster levels of all your spellcasting classes
Your caster level for beguiler spells is 5. Your caster level for bard spells is also 5. This applies to all level-dependent variables thanks to Practiced Spellcaster. It is well-established that "levels in a spell-casting class" != "caster level". Just look at the orange ioun stone for example.
No, it would still be 10.
Sigh
Did you read any of this thread, or is my point that difficult to gain?
What would it be?
It would be 2, if you interpret it to be "levels in the class" and Artificer doesn't count. There are only two class levels, and they have a habit of confusing "caster levels" between "levels in classes" and "spell casting levels in class."
It would be 10, if you interpret it to be "spell caster levels" and Artificer doesn't count.
It would be 17, if you interpret it to be "spell caster levels" and Artificer counts.
In short, quoting me "Caster Levels" doesn't prove a thing other than you ignore all my previous posts in this thread.
Even then, an orange ion stone raising a theurge's caster level by 2 probably wasn't intended.
Risner, it's cut and dry.
No it isn't cut and dry in my mind.
They use "caster levels" everywhere, sometimes when they intended to levels in a caster classes.
Knight of the Weave is another one that is worded similarly that I believe the intent was for "levels in a class."
I just don't believe it is intended to work the way you suggest. On the other hand, Ultimate Magus seems to be intended to work that way.
What CL do you need to craft a Sword of Kas again? Or a Staff of the Magi?
Yeah, I see no ambiguity either. The feat is crappy, is all. They really should've done better, since Mystic Theurge has been around at least since T&B (and it's in the SRD now). On the other hand, if the feats predate the class, then it's understandable.
Even then, an orange ion stone raising a theurge's caster level by 2 probably wasn't intended.
It's dragon. What do you expect? They were under tremendous time pressure, and never had a tremendously large grasp of optimization anyway. I think it's probably okay, but since it's DM approval material, and effectively third party, there's not a lot of call to get so worked up about this whole whoo-ba-lee-do.
Mystic Theurge was first printed in DMG 3.5.
On the other hand, if the feats predate the class, then it's understandable.
It's in Dragon Mag 325, which was November 2004, well after DMG 3.5's release.
If you want to combat WBL this looks good, but otherwise I don't think the OP has it together...
Build needs more Master Spellthief. Setting all of your CLs to maximum, essentially means you have a CL of X * Y where X is the number of arcane spellcasting classes you have, and Y is your total number of spellcasting classes.
What CL do you need to craft a Sword of Kas again? Or a Staff of the Magi?
Still no Master Spellthief...why be addative when you can be multaplicative?
Because Master Spellthief requires 2nd-level arcane spells in addition to the steal spell ability. This means that the build would need at least 3 levels (or 1 level and Precocious Apprentice depending on how you interpret that one) in an arcane class (infusions aren't arcane and don't count).
You'd then need something like Spellthief 1/Wizard 3/Artificer 4. This also then technically wouldn't allow for the Theurgic Creationist feat, as you can't actually cast spells from two different spell lists (infusions technically don't count as a spell list and you can't actually cast spells from your Spellthief list until you hit Spelltheif 4). This then changes the build to something like Spellthief 1/Wizard 3/Artificer 2/Cleric 1. This gives you only enough room for one Practiced Spellcaster feat as well.
So, assuming Practiced Spellcaster (spellthief), you'd have a CL of 18 for crafting scrolls at 7th level. You could also feasibly pull it off at level 6 with Spellthief 1/Wizard 3/Artificer 1/Cleric 1 for a CL of 17.
One drawback to this is the XP cost of crafting the 9th level spell scroll. A single scroll will cost you 153XP, since you won't have the feat to reduce XP cost. You also lose out on the 5th level class feature of the Artificer, which lets you drain XP from magic items to create other magic items.
You also miss out on the ability to craft your own UMD boosting items and wondrous magic items in general, potions, and magic arms and armor, all of which you'd get for free from your Artificer levels with Artificer 5.
Since you can't craft your stat boosting items, you're required to buy them, which costs more. You can't craft anything but scrolls, which can only be cast using UMD, so good luck selling them for the extra money you'll need.
The biggest drawback is UMD. Spellthief and Artificer are the only classes here with UMD as a class skill, so you'd need to take Spellthief at 1st level and Artificer at 6th, buying other necessary ranks cross class to be able to get UMD high enough. Still, you're looking at around a max UMD of mid 20s, since you're probably not going to talk your DM into giving you a UMD competence item. With a UMD of 25, you're going to need to be rolling 12+ to craft or even just to cast a 9th level spell.
I feel that the progression I've posted in the 1st post is a bit stronger, despite needing 1 more level to pull off the trick, because you actually have the UMD levels necessary to actually craft and cast 9th level scrolls reliably. If you don't mind failing to do anything on your turn 60% of the time, then Spellthief 1/(Arcane Caster) 3/(Other Caster) 1/Artificer 1 will work for you. Though the Master Spellthief feat does make your arcane spells for your other arcane caster class stronger, giving it a CL of 4 instead of 3, which isn't really spectacular. (Master Spellthief reads, "Your spellthief levels stack with levels of other arcane spellcaster classes (that is, levels of any class that grants arcane spellcasting other than the spellthief)" i.e., not caster levels).
Dragon's not that bad, but wasn't it pointed out that you can already buy custom ones....
If you want to combat WBL this looks good, but otherwise I don't think the OP has it together...
This is the CharOp board, right? What's not optimized about being able to cast any 9th level spell you can think of at character level 7? If an artificer can craft and cast a scroll of any spell up to 9th level and can do so at character level 7, I'd say that plenty powerful.
Not even using 9th level spells, you're a powerful gish. Cast Bite of the Weretiger (Druid 5), you get +12 Str, +4 Dex, +6 Con, +5 natural armor, 2 claw attacks at full BAB (1d8+str) and bite attack (2d6+1/2Str, -2 attack penalty as if using Multiattack feat), you gain Blind-Fight AND Power Attack feats when using your natural weapons. Then you drop a Divine power on top of that, and you've now got full BAB. Throw in the fact that you can drop a 1st level infusion on your own natural weapons to make them bane against anything you're facing at the moment. Or you could also cast Wraithstrike so all your attacks are touch attacks and then dump all your new found BAB into Power Attacking.
This is the CharOp board, right? What's not optimized about being able to cast any 9th level spell you can think of at character level 7? If an artificer can craft and cast a scroll of any spell up to 9th level and can do so at character level 7, I'd say that plenty powerful.
I agree it's plenty powerful, but so is just buying a 9th level spell scroll instead of crafting it. All you're really doing is saving money (which is nice) and ensuring that it will be available to you (which is also nice).
The fact that it's a poorly-worded feat from Dragon Magazine makes it less exciting, though.
Your caster level for crafting is 17.
+X ability tomes/manuals require CL17.
+8 enchancements on weapons/armor can be crafted at CL17
Not to mention all the high level wondrous items...
You can seriously equip yourself and your party way beyond what you should be able to do, and you're not reliant on some convoluted infinite loop pun-pun crap to boost your power.
also... i assume that it is so, since it was not covered in your build, but artificers do have caster levels then? or is that something they can emulate via umd? sorry for my laziness in not looking it up myself.
pun-pun has been overturned, it is not a valid rules use.
They've Errata'd Manipulate Form?
So the build is good because you don't have to rely on your GM allowing you to be overpowered?
You just need to rely on your GM to allow a Dragon feat and read it in a manner that allows you to be overpowered.
I can see how that's a big step forward.
For the purposes of crafting, they use their caster level +2.
What interpretation of the feat would give something else?
"you can add together the caster levels of all your spellcasting classes to determine your caster level" is pretty self explanatory and hard to read in any other way.
It's easy to read it another way:
Artificers don't cast spells. So you only have two 'spellcasting' classes.
"Infusions: Artificers don't cast spells. Instead, they wield infusions, which imbue magical power into items both mundane and magical. Though an infusion isn't a spell, it works just like a spell in game terms."
By that logic
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20060328a[/url] ] they don't have levels in a spellcasting class. I could be wrong here, as I don't own any books for that campaign setting, so can't actually read up the the class itself.
So when making your items you'd either use the feat for a CL of 5+5=10 OR you'd use the CL for the artificer (which was released after the Dragon issue and supersedes it?) of 5+2.
Basically, the reason why nobody is excited is:
You can replicate this with a pile of gold easily.
It's based on a badly worded Dragon feat, which isn't 'core' rules. It's a step up from third party, but not a huge one!
It's rather questionable.
Any right-minded GM would simply say 'no' due to the tenuous nature and Dragon origins, so it's more of a 'trinket' than a useful tool.
pun-pun has been overturned, it is not a valid rules use. ^^ but i digress.
Pretty sure Pun-pun has never been overturned. There was heated debate about whther the level 5 Divine Minion version was valid or not, but as the current build is level 1 and doesn't use the Divine Minion template, it's irrelevant.
The Pun Pun thread says "Pun-Pun, Divine Minion 1/Wizard 1/Master of Many Forms 3". Where is pun-pun level 1 (pre-ascension)?
Near the end of the thread. Khan bowed out long ago, and so the OP has never been updated with the newer methods.
Shortly after that, a Knowledge DC of 25 to say Pazuzu 3 times, with a commoner 1, triggers pun-pun.
Some time after that,
I started casting a very elaborate Epic spell ritual, entitled "Summon Tleilaxu_Ghola".
He shows up (eventually), and declares the level 1 build to be DM Fiat.
This whole thing really - and I mean really - riled up the true believers in Pazuzu.
Two years later, Tsuyoshikentsu seconded TG's neutering of the level 1 pun-pun.
Of course, he had figured out the Shaedling by then.
The "build" is listed in a number of Sigs, of people who social-posted in the pun-pun thread.
Strangely, the level 1 build works, if you use 3-Value Logic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trivalent_logic
and considering the necessity of using the Far-Realms (to keep up with Blingy),
the real answer is: Why Not.
It's not an absolute Yes, it's not an absolute No. :evillaugh
1: artificer does not have caster level. in other words effective caster level does not equal caster level.
2: artificer is not a spellcasting class, as per infusion class feature, which the feat requires to function.
even if point one is disagreed with, point two is pretty solid.