They are: Sublime Chord (Complete Arcane) & Knight of the Weave (Champions of Valor)
The build would be X9/Knight1/Sublime1 (Not too hard to qualify)
Sublime chord would see your Knight caster level, and then your sublime chord & all other caster levels would be (Knight+1).
Knight determines its caster level in a special manner, which since it is more specific overrides the level Sublime Chord set it at. It sees your sublime chord level is (Knight+1), and makes it (Knight+1)+1.
Sublime chord would see your Knight caster level, and then your sublime chord & all other caster levels would be ((Knight+1)+1)+1.
Knight determines its caster level in a special manner, which since it is more specific overrides the level Sublime Chord set it at. It sees your sublime chord level is ((Knight+1)+1)+1, and makes it (((Knight+1)+1)+1)+1.
Lather, rinse, repeat. This is not something your character is doing, merely the determination of your character level as per the rules, and as such it is equal to infinity, not near infinite or any such thing.
Of course, any sane DM would not allow Knight of the Weave to alter the caster level after sublime chord (sane DMs having a natural aversion to infinity symbols written on PC char sheets...), but by RAW I figure it has to work that way.
Sublime Chord sets the level for all other classes.
Knight of the Weave sets its own.
Knight of the Weave's effect is more specific, so it trumps the more general effect.
Infinite caster level.
So, you guys have anythoughts on this, or am I just rehashing yesterday's news?
*Goes to look up spells whose effect scales with level and are unbounded*
Sublime Chord caster level is based on the class level of a single previous arcane spellcasting class, not its caster level.
Good call, but I disagree, since its use of "level" is ambiguous and doesn't refer to "class level" or "caster level" specifically, I opt to carry over the reference to caster level from earlier in the sentence and apply it.
I've seen this use of the sublime chord caster level mechanic elsewhere on these boards, so if people are willing to accept it there, then they must accept it here as well.
The fact that it leads to potential infinite caster level if one heck of a reason to disagree with it though ;p
gains from other arcane spellcasting classes is determined by adding her sublime chord level to her level in another arcane spellcasting class."
looks pretty clear cut to me...
Then I think you must be just about the only person in the world who thinks SCs spellcaster level wording is clear. Personally, I don't see any connection at all between the "class" and "level" you bolded at all, and for clarity my reading is:
"A sublime chord’s caster level for both her sublime chord spells and the spells she gains from other arcane spellcasting classes is determined by adding her sublime chord (caster) level to her (caster) level in another arcane spellcasting class."
Empasis & parenthesized additions mine.
I fully acknowledge the ambiguity of SC this trick relies upon, and don't see the need to discuss whether it should be one way or another here. You believe your way, myself and various builds I've seen around believe the other (With a great natural bias towards believing what is most beneficial).
To altperson:
Then I think you must be just about the only person in the world who thinks SCs spellcaster level wording is clear.
momma always said i was special...
There's also the question of whether your caster level is calculated once, or recalculated constantly. You're assuming the latter.
That's hardly an assumption. If you tried to argue against it I would make the analogy of a bard/sublime chord who takes an extra level in bard. Of course you recalculate the caster level and add one to it. In this case it is simply unusual because rather than having to adjust once (IE at a new level), you have to do it infinite times....
I'm surprised with all the discussion, I was expecting just to get a link to an old thread and a reprimand to use search functions ;p
So, to use your example, you have a level 9 Bard. You take a level of Knight of the Weave and then recalculate your caster level (KotW level + Bard level + 1). Then you take a level of Sublime Chord and recalculate your caster level (Sublime Chord level + KotW level + Bard level + 1).
There's a difference between gaining a level and... just sitting around.
So, to use your example, you have a level 9 Bard. You take a level of Knight of the Weave and then recalculate your caster level (KotW level + Bard level + 1). Then you take a level of Sublime Chord and recalculate your caster level (Sublime Chord level + KotW level + Bard level + 1).
That's just silly, nowhere does it say that the effect only comes about when you gain a level, it is simply continuous. After the process you described, knight of the weaves ability further changes things. To bring up a (sort of) similar situation:
A character with 5 levels of abjurant champion has caster level = base attack bonus. Say they are a fighter4/sorc2/abjch5/eldritchknight9, bab19 cl 15. Abjurant champion's ability makes their cl 19.
Now, said character then proceeds to cast tenser's transformation, boosting their bab to 20, among other things. Now...just because they didnt gain a level...you don't think their caster level should boost to 20 as well?
Or will you now fall back on the argument that gaining a level or casting a spell is grounds for change? How different is that from gaining a level or casting a spell or (in the case of the KotW/SC) using a class feature?
That's just silly
The interpretation that gives you a natural number only one higher than your character level as your caster level is silly, but the interpretation that gives you an infinite caster level at character level 11 for no effort is sensible?
That's horrible for Bard/Lyric Thaumaturges.
Lyric Thaumaturges are horrible, period, because of lousy wording on how they stack with bards.
A bard 7/X3/Fonchulan Lyricist5 has all the bardic music uses and abilities of a bard 12.
A bard7/Virtuoso5 inspires courage as a bard12, has 12 bardic music uses, and has non-IC bardic music abilities of a bard 7 (Inspire Competence, suggestion), while also having new virtuoso abilities.
A bard 7/Lyric Thaumaturge5 has 12 bardic music uses, but only has the abilities of a Bard 7, and gains no new abilities from Lyric Thau, except Sonic Might, which is pretty useless.
Look, I'm not trying to make anyone feel bad about themselves, but honestly, people need to stop trying to find holes in the rules to do stuff like this. Anybody can pull this on you, and it just makes DMing a hassle. Think about it like this, you know how much fun you are having playing that char? Well realize that the DM doesn't play a char, they're there to set things up to give you the most fun possible. You lose a char and feel bad? DMs lose almost every monster they put you up against. So hopefully everyone will read this and just learn to chill and enjoy the game, cuz whats the fun in playing it as an all mighty and powerful char? great...well..nothing left to do here, may as well make new chars and start a new adventure, right?
I hope everyone takes this to heart. It is still cool looking at people's builds and seeing cool ideas they have (I've been checking out War Weavers recently) but lets just try and keep it inside the rules eh? If you've got a problem with anything I've said just drop me a message or e-mail and I'll be sure to rip on you till the cows come home--I mean, I appreciate your criticism, but if it takes me a while to get back to you, its cuz I rarely check my e-mail (arogenith@gmail.com)
Look, I'm not trying to make anyone feel bad about themselves, but honestly, people need to stop trying to find holes in the rules to do stuff like this. Anybody can pull this on you, and it just makes DMing a hassle. Think about it like this, you know how much fun you are having playing that char? Well realize that the DM doesn't play a char, they're there to set things up to give you the most fun possible. You lose a char and feel bad? DMs lose almost every monster they put you up against. So hopefully everyone will read this and just learn to chill and enjoy the game, cuz whats the fun in playing it as an all mighty and powerful char? great...well..nothing left to do here, may as well make new chars and start a new adventure, right?
I hope everyone takes this to heart. It is still cool looking at people's builds and seeing cool ideas they have (I've been checking out War Weavers recently) but lets just try and keep it inside the rules eh? If you've got a problem with anything I've said just drop me a message or e-mail and I'll be sure to rip on you till the cows come home--I mean, I appreciate your criticism, but if it takes me a while to get back to you, its cuz I rarely check my e-mail (arogenith@gmail.com)
Did you just say that the Character Optimization board shouldn't go about the whole point of its existence? =/
Level=class level, caster level=caster level.
Only relevant point of that whole post. But, yes, he's right. This trick doesn't work.
And, doesn't stuff like this belong on the Theoretical Optimization board?
Ok, Batman references aside, TO is now part of CO because Gamer_Zer0 decided that TO wasn't getting enough hits.
wow, epic fail dude....I literally made an account on this site just so I could tell you what a dumb s**t you are for bringing this up.
Well first off, thank you very much for releasing your pent-up agression against a random person on the internet.
This was originally posted over on theoretical optimization, and as such the majority of your rant concerning munchkins ruining games is 100% irrelevant to this thread.
Furthermore, based on your proposed solution to munchkinery, I extrapolate that your ability to generate strong encounters is quite poor, and that perhaps YOU should go DM some 4.0, for the very reasons you suggested I should play it. Not that I think those reasons are true (Not enough 4.0 experience yet).
I cede the point that SC looks at caster levels, although again it is important to note that several people do not. There are builds which revolve around misusing it to have high (but not infinite) caster levels of 30 or more. I suggested that this interpretation should be wrong in the 3rd post of this thread., but acknowledge that it must be correct for this trick to work.
The recursion mechanism (Assuming that SC does in fact work on caster level) is entirely valid, even though some people disagree. Bejik thinks caster level should only be checked every time it changes, but in his example he fails to do so. After CL changes after the first KotW boost, SC needs to kick in again. My analogy with an AC casting Tenser's is quite convincing in my opinion. The recursion mechanic is worth arguing, because it may be used with other classes (Not SC, since it does not work) to acheive the infinite caster level. Some other possibilities were discussed in the linked thread.
I, too, think I might have to slaughter your character out of spite if you tried this in my game.
I'm going to have to agree with the poster above that mentioned the absolute absurdity of this idea.
I, too, think I might have to slaughter your character out of spite if you tried this in my game.
This was originally posted over on theoretical optimization, and as such the majority of your rant concerning munchkins ruining games is 100% irrelevant to this thread.
Seriously though, back off.
And FYI, from the linked thread, the class combination that DOES work is Knight of the Weave + Apostle of Peace.
Did you just say that the Character Optimization board shouldn't go about the whole point of its existence? =/
no, you can optimize a character and share it, but that only counts if it stays inside of the rules. Whats the point of showing off my lvl 20 wizard that casts level 9 divine spells for absolutely no reason? This is the equivalent. Its like saying though it states "wizards cast arcane spells instead of divine spells" that when it says 'spells per day' I'm to assume it means 'divine spells per day' because it was the last one stated (and yes, thats exactly your defence previously stated)
Well first off, thank you very much for releasing your pent-up agression against a random person on the internet.
This was originally posted over on theoretical optimization, and as such the majority of your rant concerning munchkins ruining games is 100% irrelevant to this thread.
1-munchkins? I said something about munchkins?
2-I personally think you deserve it for blatantly not following the rules of the game, and in case you didn't notice, I was intending for more then just you to read it Keithio, hence the, you know, part about 'not just talking to you'...
no, you can optimize a character and share it, but that only counts if it stays inside of the rules. Whats the point of showing off my lvl 20 wizard that casts level 9 divine spells for absolutely no reason? This is the equivalent. Its like saying though it states "wizards cast arcane spells instead of divine spells" that when it says 'spells per day' I'm to assume it means 'divine spells per day' because it was the last one stated (and yes, thats exactly your defence previously stated)
You're new here, aren't you bucky?
The endgame of any Character Optimization is to find and abuse as many loopholes in the rules to meet the goal of the thread in the most efficient manner.
The members of this board generally don't break the RAW, so the rules you think we "break" are only the ones in your head aka RAI.
Now getting any of the stuff found here past a DM is another story.
If a DM is stupid enough or lazy enough to let any CO in their campaign and then complain afterwards that they can't make appropriate challenges without leaving the rest of the group in the dark, that's no skin off our noses.
That doesn't mean they break any rules.
Look, I'm not trying to make anyone feel bad about themselves, but honestly, people need to stop trying to find holes in the rules to do stuff like this.
I think you may have missed the point of these boards. Feel free to leave and never look back.
The members of this board generally don't break the RAW, so the rules you think we "break" are only the ones in your head aka RAI.
Have you read the entire thread yet? The build breaks the rules, straight out. Perhaps the second build that was stated works, but I haven't read up on it yet, people are still defending SC, and no one has quoted the bit about the caster's class level.
This is a break in the rules, things like the idea of using White raven tactics with 2 swordsages to get infinite turns is a loophole that could be used.
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
I've removed content from this thread because baiting and flaming are violations of the Code of Conduct, and to preserve continuity in the thread. You can review the Code of Conduct here: http://forums.gleemax.com/community_coc.php
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
I think you missed a few posts.
I've removed content from this thread because baiting and flaming are violations of the Code of Conduct, and to preserve continuity in the thread. You can review the Code of Conduct here: http://forums.gleemax.com/community_coc.php
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
awe, and I thought you'd actually read it before simply deleting it. The whole bit about 'this isn't a personal attack' was apparently skipped over. Nevertheless I think you guys should put an emphasis on either the fact that the builds can't break the rules, or clerify things like this so that people understand that they are in fact not following the rules with the interpretation some people appear to be taking. Its the people who pretend to know what they're doing then think they have an "infinite caster level" at level 11 that cause me to avoid D&D conventions
awe, and I thought you'd actually read it before simply deleting it. The whole bit about 'this isn't a personal attack' was apparently skipped over. Nevertheless I think you guys should put an emphasis on either the fact that the builds can't break the rules, or clerify things like this so that people understand that they are in fact not following the rules with the interpretation some people appear to be taking. Its the people who pretend to know what they're doing then think they have an "infinite caster level" at level 11 that cause me to avoid D&D conventions
The guy does have an infinite caster level though.
The class only mentions "caster level" and never "class level" so it's a very reasonable interpretation thank you.And just because it yields an infinite caster level does not make it an unreasonable interpretation. ;)
And just because it yields an infinite caster level does not make it an unreasonable interpretation. ;)
True, but the rules intent should be quite clear here, and it's a pointless way of reading it, since you're never ever going to get to play it like that.
Practical Optimization Failure.
True, but the rules intent should be quite clear here, and it's a pointless way of reading it, since you're never ever going to get to play it like that.
Practical Optimization Failure.
But we're not talking Practical Optimization here. The OP's talking about a neat trick he found, and not about how to get this past his DM. ;)
I said it from the start, I'm not trying to single anyone out, but look at this, its been imo a large waste of time and not worth the bytes that its clogging up on this server. Stop breaking the rules and just enjoy the game with a real char. And if you want advice on where to go, post it up, and the community will help you 'optimize your character'
THIS IS NOT CHARACTER OPTIMIZATION. This is theoretical opt.
This board is also the theoretical optimization board now. So this is in the right place.
THIS IS NOT CHARACTER OPTIMIZATION. This is theoretical opt. in the sense that the rules were modified,
Wrong. This was very clearly a simple mistake on the part of the OP. It happens all the time. That's why people post here, to get other opinions and clarification.
It's already been pointed out that another thread contains a build that will allow infinite caster levels within RAW. So what? Obviously, no one is going to try to play a character with infinite caster levels.
Attacking a poster for posting a build, any build, is completely out of line. He made a mistake, it was corrected. This is not an example of a personality defect for you to correct by berating him or any other poster. Leave it alone.
This board is also the theoretical optimization board now. So this is in the right place.
read the full sentence.
This is theoretical opt. in the sense that the rules were modified
TO doesn't include builds that break the rules
Wrong. This was very clearly a simple mistake on the part of the OP. It happens all the time. That's why people post here, to get other opinions and clarification.
and yet several people are still defending the SC build, and I'm sure this is going to be a thread that will come up again in the future
Attacking a poster for posting a build, any build, is completely out of line. He made a mistake, it was corrected. This is not an example of a personality defect for you to correct by berating him or any other poster. Leave it alone.
As I've said two or three times before, the posts were not an attack on anyone, and if you want to consider them one, then they'd be an attack on every person that posts on CO. I get the feeling that people read one sentence of every post and assume that thats all the person could possibly be saying in that entire reply. Hell, I'm getting a massive sense of déjà vu all of the sudden