My argument for this is that the wording specifically states, "Levels in all classes that allow you to cast arcane spells stack".
As for the racial classes thing, I'm not so sure - however I would say no, because I don't feel that they are the same classes(racial classes and regular classes are two different things to me. And wizards definitely needs a thesarus.)
Or is there a way that familiars can gain feats (aside from Familiar Spell)?
At worst, it gives Familiars access to Epic Feats pre-Epic. I don't really think that's nearly as bad as it sounds though, considering how underwhelming any Epic Feat that isn't magic-related is.
Note that Familiars do not gain feats.
The only option is to change existing feats, which may involve some cheese.
While I understand that racial classes and regular classes are indeed different, I wonder if it is enough benefit for a character to treat their familiar at a level equal to their ECL that it should be denied... I mean, all it does is increase familiar intelligence and natural armor. It does not grant your character any other benefit besides that. Is that really powerful enough to say no to allowing racial levels to stack?
Personally, in my own games, and in the games amongst my group, we've house-ruled that all familiars are based on caster level and not Sor/Wiz level. We've yet to have a problem with this rule. But most of the people in my group rarely remember that they even have a familiar, beyond the +2 to saves and the +2 to spot/listen.
If someone were using their familiar to the limits of what you can do with it, ECL based familiars could be a problem, but I don't see any reason not to run it that way and see what actually happens in the group first. Especially if someone spent a FEAT on even gaining their familiar in the first place. A Feat can grant you an 18th level Wizard/Cleric/or Druid that in practice generally does whatever the heck you want him/her to do. So Obtain Familiar based on ECL isn't overpowered when compared, at least, not to me.
Note that Familiars do not gain feats.
The only option is to change existing feats, which may involve some cheese.
This is why I like the Skeletal Minion variant -> after awakening, you get feats on your skelly.
The wording on the feat implies that any class that increases your caster level, even if its not every level in that class, should grant you familiar abilities. Thus a Wizard 3/Beguiler 1/Ultimate Magus 10 should have the familar of a level 14 wizard.
My argument for this is that the wording specifically states, "Levels in all classes that allow you to cast arcane spells stack".
I would argue that, strictly speaking, the Ultimate Magus class (like many other prestige classes) does not allow you to cast arcane spells. It only improves your existing ability to cast arcane spells. However, a prestige class like Suel Arcanamach does allow you to cast arcane spells.
But that's splitting hairs a little bit.
This is why I like the Skeletal Minion variant -> after awakening, you get feats on your skelly.
Interesting.
Would it have to be awakened? One could argue that simply by gaining HD it should already get feats.
Interesting.
Would it have to be awakened? One could argue that simply by gaining HD it should already get feats.
Mindless creatures do not gain feats.
SRD[/url]"]Intelligence
Any creature that can think, learn, or remember has at least 1 point of Intelligence. A creature with no Intelligence score is mindless, an automaton operating on simple instincts or programmed instructions. It has immunity to mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects) and automatically fails Intelligence checks.
Mindless creatures do not gain feats or skills, although they may have bonus feats or racial skill bonuses.
Emphasis mine
So it gets Imp Initiative, which is good, and you should get Power Attack on it, too. I also like IUS / Imp Grapple on the thing as well. After a while, it doesn't become as useful to use the skeleton as anything other than a wall, but Grappling always has utility. It might be possible to get TWF / iTWF on it, too. Too bad you can't do much about the Cha, though, otherwise UMD would be a nice way to spend skills... Maybe use PAO on it to change it into a Vampire later, or somesuch nonsense?
Note that Familiars do not gain feats.
The only option is to change existing feats, which may involve some cheese.
Epic familiars do.
Epic familiars do.
Since those are set feats, my point about the cheese required to change them to what you actually want is still valid.
Well, a wizard who gives up his familiar for a variant class feature would have no capability of gaining a familiar, and thus by your own example would qualify as a candidate for an arcane caster capable of gaining a familiar with Obtain Familiar.
thats a nix on that , the official verdict is also that if you use a class variant(such as hexblade getting shadow companion, which is not a familiar), you can not use the feat to get around that, so taking a variant wizard that states it gives up familiar, taking obtain familiar would not work , or at the very least loose you the benefits of not having said familiar, this is just another feat that sadly to many people try to abuse by taking the wording out of context
thats a nix on that , the official verdict is also that if you use a class variant(such as hexblade getting shadow companion, which is not a familiar), you can not use the feat to get around that, so taking a variant wizard that states it gives up familiar, taking obtain familiar would not work , or at the very least loose you the benefits of not having said familiar, this is just another feat that sadly to many people try to abuse by taking the wording out of context
You know, I don't understand the reasoning behind that, and don't even see how this constitutes "abuse". You spent a feat on it. The ability to have a familiar is precisely worth a feat.
And where exactly was this clarified "officially"?
I don't see anything in the text of the feat that would prevent you from taking it after giving up a familiar for an ACF. I also don't see anything in the ACF's that generally take away your familiar that would prevent you from using the feat to gain it back. At least, not any more than specialization prevents you from casting spells from prohibited schools would prevent you from taking feats that specifically grant those spells back.
You know, I don't understand the reasoning behind that, and don't even see how this constitutes "abuse". You spent a feat on it. The ability to have a familiar is precisely worth a feat.
And where exactly was this clarified "officially"?
i'm sorry i made the mistake of trying to clarify a rule in forums that cater to powergaming and 9/10 people who post here think that rpg means really powerful gamer, it's abuse b/c you get an ability that looses you a familiar adn then taking a feat to get it back and by official i mean wotc sanctioned events and the rpga ruling on the feat, but like i said trying to explain how a rule works to min/maxers is like trying to show an orc how to use a fork.
The ACF's that cost you your class ability to gain a familiar have no bearing on the non-class ability that the feat Obtain Familiar grants. That's the text.
WoTC sanctions a lot of events. Many of them use rulesets that are incomplete or tailored to the particular event. The rulings made during those events apply only to the event in question. They are not a telling from the most high.
Personally, I understand your argument, since it doesn't seem quite right that a wizard can ditch their familiar for a cool wizard-only power like rapid summoning, then get the familiar back at 3rd level. But that's just how it works in standard D&D 3.5. The RPGA might have banned it in Living Greyhawk or whatever, but those rulings don't carry any official weight beyond decent suggestions for house rules, unlike official errata or even the Sage's rulings.
For what it's worth, I agree that the feat was intended for warmages and wu jen, not wizards with alternative class features or assassins, even though all 4 qualify for the feat.
On a sidenote, I don't like how the skeletal minion variant takes 24 hours to summon and 100 gold - considering that it's useful mostly as a walking meat shield with subpar hitpoints. tTking a whole day to replace it would really irritate me, especially if I left necromancer early for a prestige class or to multiclass.
The ACF's that cost you your class ability to gain a familiar have no bearing on the non-class ability that the feat Obtain Familiar grants. That's the text.
Absolutely.
Trading away a specialist wizard's familiar, for Abrupt Jaunt or a similar ability, then regaining it with Obtain Familiar is a perfectly good option. It also means that your familiar will scale with prestige classing, unlike a normal familiar.
abuse by taking the wording out of context
Absolutely not.
We're examining the wording of the feat within the context of the rules.
but like i said trying to explain how a rule works to min/maxers is like trying to show an orc how to use a fork.
(cut)
Min/Maxing…
1) …is always constrained by the rules at hand.
(cut)
1) The rules are vital to min/maxing. If you ignore the rules you are cheating, not min/maxing.
(cut)
Show
I had some stuff about punctuation, capitalization, and spelling here, but the board ate it. Suffice to say, your offhand dismissal of "powergamers" and "min/maxers" might be slightly more coherent if you took an extra 30 seconds to correct it. It would certainly help avoid the "13 year old on battle.net" vibe that currently plagues your posting.
It's not like this board moves quickly; there's no need to rush pressing the "submit" button. A half minute could greatly improve how well other people here understand your communication.
It's not like this board moves quickly; there's no need to rush pressing the "submit" button. A half minute could greatly improve how well other people here understand your communication.
i'm sorry i made the mistake of trying to clarify a rule in forums that cater to powergaming and 9/10 people who post here think that rpg means really powerful gamer, it's abuse b/c you get an ability that looses you a familiar adn then taking a feat to get it back and by official i mean wotc sanctioned events and the rpga ruling on the feat, but like i said trying to explain how a rule works to min/maxers is like trying to show an orc how to use a fork.
First, you are in the "optimization" boards. There are even people here who do not play any d&d. They just make builds that never see play.
It's not an abuse. You gain a familiar, so what? Sure, it can be optimized to the extreme, save you actions and do wonderful stuff, but it's not an abuse, like say, do 2k damage a round. Since you consider yourself closer to the role playing aspect of the game, can you imagine the roleplaying experiences when you have a familiar? It sure spices up the character. And even if you do, you are not supporting rpg. You are just rules lawyer-ing, which almost completely falls into the "optimization" part of the game.
Don't even mention wotc. That's because wizards have completely abandoned this game, there is no support. "Official verdict" == "This board's verdict".
Put another way:
i'm sorry i made the mistake of trying to clarify a rule in basic grammar to someone who spent more time learning how to act smart than actually being smart, when 9/10 people who act that way think that “apolo” means the Roman and/or Greek God of the Sun, it's ironic b/c you get an opportunity to look like you have something to say adn then misspell your own pseudonym based on the commonly accepted official spelling and by official i mean Webster’s sanctioned a proper spelling of the word, but like i said trying to explain how grammar works to internet trolls is like trying to show an orc how to use a fork.
i'm sorry i made the mistake of trying to clarify a rule in forums that cater to powergaming and 9/10 people who post here think that rpg means really powerful gamer, it's abuse b/c you get an ability that looses you a familiar adn then taking a feat to get it back and by official i mean wotc sanctioned events and the rpga ruling on the feat, but like i said trying to explain how a rule works to min/maxers is like trying to show an orc how to use a fork.
Bards suck. Play a Druid.
(Oh, how I miss these posts!)
So, was the general consensus that the wizard could give up his familiar twice to gain two ACFs?
Well... for example...
A conjurer using this variant permanently gives up the ability to obtain a familiar.
It doesn't say "gives up the class ability to obtain a familiar". Draw whichever conclusions from that you like.
I hate to point this out but… you misspelled "Apollo".
Put another way:
i'm sorry i made the mistake of trying to clarify a rule in basic grammar to someone who spent more time learning how to act smart than actually being smart, when 9/10 people who act that way think that “apolo” means the Roman and/or Greek God of the Sun, it's ironic b/c you get an opportunity to look like you have something to say adn then misspell your own pseudonym based on the commonly accepted official spelling and by official i mean Webster’s sanctioned a proper spelling of the word, but like i said trying to explain how grammar works to internet trolls is like trying to show an orc how to use a fork.
yea from the guy who assumes apolo was sposed to be apollo ****, the next time you decide to choke on your **** bath go **** yourself first