The Order of the Stick: Utterly Dwarfed
The Order of the Stick: Utterly Dwarfed - Coming in December and available for pre-order now
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 192
  1. - Top - End - #31
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    In eternity.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    I agree with this interpretation and have allowed it in-game as GM:

    They stack by RAW. Domain Wizards can't be specialists Wizard, meaning they aren't. Elven Generalist Wizards can't be specialist Wizards, meaning they aren't.

    Whether going generalist compared to, say, Abrupt Jaunt Conjurer is better is contextual. Return to thread's main point now.
    Quote Originally Posted by GPuzzle View Post
    And I do agree that the right answer to the magic/mundane problem is to make everyone badass.
    Quote Originally Posted by Flickerdart View Post
    If you're of a philosophical bent, the powergamer is a great example of Heidegger's modern technological man, who treats a game's mechanics as a standing reserve of undifferentiated resources that are to be used for his goals.
    My Complete Tome of Battle Maneuver/Stance/Class Overhaul

    Arseplomancy = Fanatic Tarrasque!

  2. - Top - End - #32
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Malphegor's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2018

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Quote Originally Posted by Vizzerdrix View Post
    Why would anyone ever want to play an elf, when they could go changeling and have ALL of the familiars, or be a dwarf and not be an elf?
    Probably because changeling wizards have more prohibitited spell schools.

    I would be curious if the morphic familiar also included improved familiar though while we're talking about that.

    You thought you were facing a imp! BUT IT WAS I, A HIPPOGRIFF!
    It is somewhat depressing that the last published player race as far as I can tell for 3.5e was the Vril. You know, the screaming purple and orange howler-bat-goblins. All that work, and that's the final one, the end of it all? Really?

  3. - Top - End - #33
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Vizzerdrix's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Quote Originally Posted by Malphegor View Post
    Probably because changeling wizards have more prohibitited spell schools.

    I would be curious if the morphic familiar also included improved familiar though while we're talking about that.

    You thought you were facing a imp! BUT IT WAS I, A HIPPOGRIFF!
    The real question is: how does it react to taking extra familiar, or the PRC that turns them into those spell ooze things.

    Also it says you have the option to specialize so you can still be a generalist.


    Are we naming this hypothetical hippogriff Deo?
    Last edited by Vizzerdrix; 2019-09-10 at 08:02 AM.
    ,,,,^..^,,,,


    Quote Originally Posted by Haldir View Post
    Edit- I understand it now, Fighters are like a status symbol. If you're well off enough to own a living Fighter, you must be pretty well off!

  4. - Top - End - #34
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Doctor Awkward's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Collegeville, PA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Quote Originally Posted by Sword Magess View Post
    I am not sure what the problem is. The domain wizard text is quite clear about this:


    It says quite clearly that domain wizards are not specialist wizards.
    Agreed. This is reinforced further down in the variant description under "No Prohibited Schools", where it reads, "Unlike a specialist wizard, a domain wizard need not select any prohibited schools or domains. All wizard spells are available to her to learn."

    A domain wizard is entirely different from a normal PHB specialist wizard, and most certainly mutually exclusive when considering the rest of the text.
    Resident Mad Scientist...

    "It's so cool!"

    Spoiler: Contests
    Show
    VC I: Lord Commander Conrad Vayne, 1st place
    VC II: Lorna, the Mother's Wrath, 5th place
    VC XV: Tosk, Kursak the Marauder, Vierna Zalyl; 1st place, 6th/7th place
    Kitchen Crashers Protocol for Peace

    Quote Originally Posted by Troacctid View Post
    But that's one of the things about interpreting RAW—when you pick a reading that goes against RAI, it often has a ripple effect that results in dysfunctions in other places.

  5. - Top - End - #35
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    RedMage125's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    I'm on a boat!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Wow, I feel kind of like a celebrity on this thread, given that it was my thread from 2016 that was linked. *Blush*

    Frankly, like I stated in my OP from 2016, whether or not EGW and Domain Wizard can be combined at all is utterly tangential to why Leapfrog Wizard does not work by RAW. Even if you allow the combo, it still doesn't. More on that below, because there's one thing I need to address on this matter:
    Spoiler
    Show

    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Awkward View Post
    I'm... fairly flabbergasted at how anyone thinks RAW is so thoroughly settled in favor of this combination.

    Domain Wizard and Elf Wizard are clearly two variants of the same base class that are both attempting to modify the same class feature. They are quite incompatible with one another on the same character.

    Domain Wizard explicitly does trade away your ability to specialize. It says so right in the variant description: "A domain wizard cannot also be a specialist wizard; in exchange for the versatility given up by specializing in a domain instead of an entire school, the domain wizard casts her chosen spells with increased power."

    Generalist wizardry explicitly replaces your ability to specialize in a school of magic. You either no longer have that ability to trade away to become a domain wizard, or generalist wizardry counts as specializing for all other rules purposes, in which case you must then give that up to become a domain wizard.
    Quote Originally Posted by Silvercrys View Post
    Technically, none of that bit is rules text, it's just fluff. Like the bit of the Great Cleave feat where it says "You can wield a melee weapon with such power that you can strike multiple times when you fell your foes." That isn't rules text, it's a description.

    The rules text is the bit where it says "A Domain Wizard has all the standard Wizard class features except as noted below, and then it never actually says you trade specialization for the domain or that the domain is a form of specialization or anything like that. What it does say is that being a Domain Wizard does not require you to prohibit schools, and technically as long as you aren't a specialist wizard you aren't in violation of the fluff, either. Since EGW isn't a specialist wizard, it probably works RAW.

    RAI? Yeah, you're probably right, but this was early days, relatively, in the Alternate Class Features game and editing and rules around them were less strict than they are in, say, Pathfinder.
    Silvercrys, you have no authority to dismiss the sentence he bolded and underlined as "not rules text". Simple as that. OTOH I can prove that it is rules text. Because it's part of the same sentence as "A domain wizard cannot be a specialist wizard". That's Rules Text, isn't it? Of course it is. Now, these two statements are part of the same sentence, and are separated by a semicolon. Now, this book is originally written in English, yes? What does it mean, in the parlance of the English Language, when 2 otherwise complete sentences are combined and separated by a semicolon?

    Answer:
    A semicolon is most commonly used to link (in a single sentence) two independent clauses that are closely related in thought.When a semicolon is used to join two or more ideas (parts) in a sentence, those ideas are then given equal position or rank.
    Source: Well, really I just remembered this because gramnmar, punctuation and syntax are something I am a stickler for, but I also was able to find it here.

    So when 2 clauses are separated by a semicolon, it means they are both equally important. Ergo, if "A domain wizard cannot be a specialist wizard" is Rules Text, then so is "in exchange for the versatility given up by specializing in a domain instead of an entire school, the domain wizard casts her chosen spells with increased power."

    Which emans that all of you defending this combination need to justify how "in exchange for the versatility given up by specializing in a domain instead of an entire school", being rules text, does not forbid this combo. Which no one in the 2016 thread was able to do.

    *drops microphone*


    Now that THAT is out of the way, the point is that allowing the DW+EGW combo still does not allow for the "Leapfrog Wizard".

    As was pointed out, the most simple factor is the minimum required caster level for a given spell. Which, in case you are confused, is based on which class is casting it. Take a level 3 spell, for example. For a Wizard, minimum CL is 5, for a Sorcerer, it is 6, and for an Ur-Priest, it is 3. It's very simple, the argument that that section of the PHB "only applies to Fireball" is an asinine claim, because that entire paragraph says "for example", thus clearly indicating that fireball is being used as an example spell, and the rule applies more broadly.

    Next up is the fact that EVEN IF you have Alarcitous Cogitation and Versatile Spellcaster (which does, in fact, allow a wizard to leave 2 spell slots "unprepared" and combine them in order to cast a spell of one level higher), your bonus spells from DW and EGW do not "float", and the ones from High INT certainly do not (that's actuallt SPECIFICALLY mentioned in the PHB general rule on minimum caster level).

    Why? I'm glad you asked, my children.

    Quite simply, it is because when the wizard finishes resting and preparing spells, she only has level 1 spell slots, and thus only those spell slots are refreshed. Said wizard does not have the "ability to cast 2nd level spells" until the EXACT MOMENT when 2 "unfilled" 1st level slots are spent. And, as per the general rule mentioned above, this does not allow her to cast a 2nd level spell, because her caster level is not high enough. Precocious Apprentice is a specific exception to this rule. Also, after that exact moment of spending 2 level 1 slots passes, the wizard no longer has the ability to cast 2nd level spells.

    But most importantly, the EGW "bonus slot" cannot "float". Namely because it is not (as so many people often use in shorthand) "an extra slot of the highest level spell you can cast". EGW, more correctly, says that you may prepare one extra spell per day of the highest level you can cast. And the spell slots used for AC+VS must be left "unfilled" in order for that combo to work. And so the EGW extra spell can not "float". Nothing in the RAW says it does.

    Remember everyone, claiming that "there's no rule saying I can't, therefore RAW says I can" is Munchkin Fallacy. It's flat-out untrue.
    Red Mage avatar by Aedilred.

    Where do you fit in? (link fixed)

    RedMage Prestige Class!

    Best advice I've ever heard one DM give another:
    "Remember that it is both a game and a story. If the two conflict, err on the side of cool, your players will thank you for it."

    Second Eternal Foe of the Draconic Lord, battling him across the multiverse in whatever shapes and forms he may take.

  6. - Top - End - #36
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    In eternity.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    RedMage125: I think you just solved the thread. Thankee!
    Quote Originally Posted by GPuzzle View Post
    And I do agree that the right answer to the magic/mundane problem is to make everyone badass.
    Quote Originally Posted by Flickerdart View Post
    If you're of a philosophical bent, the powergamer is a great example of Heidegger's modern technological man, who treats a game's mechanics as a standing reserve of undifferentiated resources that are to be used for his goals.
    My Complete Tome of Battle Maneuver/Stance/Class Overhaul

    Arseplomancy = Fanatic Tarrasque!

  7. - Top - End - #37
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Elves's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2019

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Quote Originally Posted by RedMage125 View Post
    Silvercrys, you have no authority to dismiss the sentence he bolded and underlined as "not rules text". Simple as that. OTOH I can prove that it is rules text. Because it's part of the same sentence as "A domain wizard cannot be a specialist wizard". That's Rules Text, isn't it? Of course it is. Now, these two statements are part of the same sentence, and are separated by a semicolon. Now, this book is originally written in English, yes? What does it mean, in the parlance of the English Language, when 2 otherwise complete sentences are combined and separated by a semicolon?[snip]
    This doesn't reduce the ambiguity. If you want to look at the two sides of that semicolon clearly, they're actually contradictory, since the first clause says DW can't be a specialist and the second seems to posit DW as an alternate form of specialist.

    Now that THAT is out of the way, the point is that allowing the DW+EGW combo still does not allow for the "Leapfrog Wizard".

    As was pointed out, the most simple factor is the minimum required caster level for a given spell.
    Yes, this was the consensus.

    Versatile Spellcaster (which does, in fact, allow a wizard to leave 2 spell slots "unprepared" and combine them in order to cast a spell of one level higher)
    My emphasis. You were repeating this error in the original thread as well. The wizard does not have to leave the slots unprepared. A prepared spell is also a spell slot, it's simply a spell slot with a spell prepared in it.

    After that exact moment of spending 2 level 1 slots passes, the wizard no longer has the ability to cast 2nd level spells.
    Untrue, or the same would apply after normal spell slots get used.

    And the spell slots used for AC+VS must be left "unfilled" in order for that combo to work.
    No, as mentioned above they don't.

    I agree that the combo as a whole doesn't work.
    Last edited by Elves; 2019-09-29 at 01:08 PM.
    The Age of Warriors (revived 2019) - Huge fanmade TOB sequel. Content needs PEACH and input.

  8. - Top - End - #38
    Orc in the Playground
     
    RedKnightGirl

    Join Date
    Jul 2015

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Think I agree with Elves, the prepared spell must be in a spell slot, and Versatile Spellcaster doesn't specify an empty slot.

    The "slot" does float, then, but only when you prepare spells rather than instantly. You have to take the time required to prepare the new spell, at which time the Domain Wizard slot would float up to the next level too.

    Or it would if the trick worked, anyway, because it doesn't unless you allow VS to exceed the caster level limit.

  9. - Top - End - #39
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    RedMage125's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    I'm on a boat!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Quote Originally Posted by Endarire View Post
    RedMage125: I think you just solved the thread. Thankee!
    Won the last one in 2016, too. But Thank you.
    Quote Originally Posted by Elves View Post
    This doesn't reduce the ambiguity. If you want to look at the two sides of that semicolon clearly, they're actually contradictory, since the first clause says DW can't be a specialist and the second seems to posit DW as an alternate form of specialist.
    It's a clarification that you cannot be a [Domain] Conjurer/Evoker/etc. Because DW is an alternate form of specialist, that's the whole point. So you cannot be an alternate specialist and regular specialist at the same time. That's the only reading that takes both clauses into account as rules text that is at all coherent. And like I said, no one has the authority to dismiss it as "not rules text", especially because such an unathorized dismissal is required to allow this combo.

    Quote Originally Posted by Elves View Post
    Yes, this was the consensus.
    Well, that alone makes the "Leapfrog Wizard" not work.

    Quote Originally Posted by Elves View Post
    My emphasis. You were repeating this error in the original thread as well. The wizard does not have to leave the slots unprepared. A prepared spell is also a spell slot, it's simply a spell slot with a spell prepared in it.
    But AC requires the spell slot to be left "unfilled" in order to cast spontaneously, and VS requires spontaneous casting slots to work.

    So...yes, it does require them left unfilled.


    Quote Originally Posted by Elves View Post
    Untrue, or the same would apply after normal spell slots get used.
    Except that a 1st level wizard, by definition, does not have, as a class feature, "the ability to cast level 2 spells". The AC+VS combo allows a level 2 spell slot to be cast at the moment when 2 L1 slots are expended. That's what I meant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Elves View Post
    No, as mentioned above they don't.
    Then you need to re-familiarize yourself with how Alarcitous Cogitation works, as well as Versatile Spellcaster.
    Quote Originally Posted by Elves View Post
    I agree that the combo as a whole doesn't work.
    Then why argue?
    Quote Originally Posted by Silvercrys View Post
    Think I agree with Elves, the prepared spell must be in a spell slot, and Versatile Spellcaster doesn't specify an empty slot.

    The "slot" does float, then, but only when you prepare spells rather than instantly. You have to take the time required to prepare the new spell, at which time the Domain Wizard slot would float up to the next level too.
    You're missing the point of how how VS works. Using 2 L1 slots does not give you a L2 slot that you can then "prepare a spell in". That is an act of casting. You spend 2 L1 slots to cast a L2 spell. It's essentially an alternate spell slot cost, not a means of gaining higher-level "slots". So no, the slot still does not "float".

    Failing to understand that is a big part of why people thought this "Leapfrog Wizard" worked for years.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silvercrys View Post
    Or it would if the trick worked, anyway, because it doesn't unless you allow VS to exceed the caster level limit.
    Which means that the only thing one CAN do with this (and doesn't even require DW), is spend 2 L1 slots, to cast a Heightened L1 spell, which bumps the save DC up by one.
    Red Mage avatar by Aedilred.

    Where do you fit in? (link fixed)

    RedMage Prestige Class!

    Best advice I've ever heard one DM give another:
    "Remember that it is both a game and a story. If the two conflict, err on the side of cool, your players will thank you for it."

    Second Eternal Foe of the Draconic Lord, battling him across the multiverse in whatever shapes and forms he may take.

  10. - Top - End - #40
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Elves's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2019

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    and VS requires spontaneous casting slots to work.
    It doesn't, which was the point of my post.
    The Age of Warriors (revived 2019) - Huge fanmade TOB sequel. Content needs PEACH and input.

  11. - Top - End - #41
    Orc in the Playground
     
    RedKnightGirl

    Join Date
    Jul 2015

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    It depends on your reading of "spell level".

    The exact text is "The elf wizard may also prepare one additional spell of her highest spell level each day." for EGW and "a domain wizard gains one bonus spell per spell level, which must be filled with the spell from that level of the domain spell list" for Domain Wizard.

    If "spell level" means "spell level they can cast" in either case, then it works if Versatile Spellcaster also allows you to cast above your normally allowed level. You can cast second level spells when you prepare spells with two 1st level spells unexpended, so the EGW bonus spell and Domain spell both lock into 2nd level spell slots. As long as you don't cast them before you prepare spells again, you can cast a Heightened Domain Spell as a 3rd level spell, and so on and so forth.

    If it means "the highest level spell they can prepare" then the slot doesn't float regardless of your reading of Versatile Spellcaster.

    I understand you're taking the second reading but I don't think it's all that unambiguous.

  12. - Top - End - #42
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Doctor Awkward's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Collegeville, PA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Quote Originally Posted by Elves View Post
    It doesn't, which was the point of my post.
    It kind of does.

    Versatile Spellcasters requires you to use two slots of the same level to "cast a spell you know that is one level higher."

    Wizards do not have spells that they know, because they are not spontaneous spellcasters.

    The rules draw a very specific distinction between prepared and spontaneous casters in this way. You can note that the wizard class table lacks the spells known section as is found in sorcerer and bard and all other spontaneous casting classes.

    You can also see this distinction in other places, such as prestige classes that advance spellcasting:

    Quote Originally Posted by Dungeon Master's Guide, pg 178, "Archmage"
    Spells per Day/Spells Known: When a new archmage level is gained, 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.
    Additionally, a cleric and druid's ability to give up a prepared spell in place of a cure or summon nature's ally is also not spontaneous casting. It's spontaneous conversion. The same applies to a wizard who takes the Spontaneous Divination alternate class feature.
    Resident Mad Scientist...

    "It's so cool!"

    Spoiler: Contests
    Show
    VC I: Lord Commander Conrad Vayne, 1st place
    VC II: Lorna, the Mother's Wrath, 5th place
    VC XV: Tosk, Kursak the Marauder, Vierna Zalyl; 1st place, 6th/7th place
    Kitchen Crashers Protocol for Peace

    Quote Originally Posted by Troacctid View Post
    But that's one of the things about interpreting RAW—when you pick a reading that goes against RAI, it often has a ripple effect that results in dysfunctions in other places.

  13. - Top - End - #43
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Elves's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2019

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    "Unlike a bard or sorcerer, a wizard may know any number of spells." - SRD
    The Age of Warriors (revived 2019) - Huge fanmade TOB sequel. Content needs PEACH and input.

  14. - Top - End - #44
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Doctor Awkward's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Collegeville, PA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Quote Originally Posted by Elves View Post
    "Unlike a bard or sorcerer, a wizard may know any number of spells." - SRD
    How many spells does a 1st-level wizard without a spellbook know?
    Resident Mad Scientist...

    "It's so cool!"

    Spoiler: Contests
    Show
    VC I: Lord Commander Conrad Vayne, 1st place
    VC II: Lorna, the Mother's Wrath, 5th place
    VC XV: Tosk, Kursak the Marauder, Vierna Zalyl; 1st place, 6th/7th place
    Kitchen Crashers Protocol for Peace

    Quote Originally Posted by Troacctid View Post
    But that's one of the things about interpreting RAW—when you pick a reading that goes against RAI, it often has a ripple effect that results in dysfunctions in other places.

  15. - Top - End - #45
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Elves's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2019

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    The quote clearly says that wizards "know" spells. A wizard needs their spellbook to prepare their spells.
    The Age of Warriors (revived 2019) - Huge fanmade TOB sequel. Content needs PEACH and input.

  16. - Top - End - #46
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Doctor Awkward's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Collegeville, PA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Quote Originally Posted by Elves View Post
    The quote clearly says that wizards "know" spells. A wizard needs their spellbook to prepare their spells.
    The correct answer is one: read magic.

    Regardless, wizards do not qualify for Versatile Spellcaster in the first place as they do not possess the ability to spontaneously cast spells.

    "Some characters can cast spells, but they don’t need spellbooks, nor do they prepare their spells. They can cast any spell they know using a daily allotment of spell slots. These characters are called spontaneous spellcasters." - Rules Compendium, pg. 139

    If your character has only has levels in a class that prepares spells, they are automatically disqualified from being a spontaneous spellcaster.
    Resident Mad Scientist...

    "It's so cool!"

    Spoiler: Contests
    Show
    VC I: Lord Commander Conrad Vayne, 1st place
    VC II: Lorna, the Mother's Wrath, 5th place
    VC XV: Tosk, Kursak the Marauder, Vierna Zalyl; 1st place, 6th/7th place
    Kitchen Crashers Protocol for Peace

    Quote Originally Posted by Troacctid View Post
    But that's one of the things about interpreting RAW—when you pick a reading that goes against RAI, it often has a ripple effect that results in dysfunctions in other places.

  17. - Top - End - #47
    Titan in the Playground
     
    AvatarVecna's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2014

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Quote Originally Posted by Elves View Post
    The quote clearly says that wizards "know" spells. A wizard needs their spellbook to prepare their spells.
    That quote is fluff text, not mechanical. If the wizard loses their spellbook and gets a new blank spellbook, AFAICT the RAW of the situation is that they have to gain access to the spells for scribing purposes even if the spells they're trying to scribe were the "free" ones they get as part of leveling up as a wizard. In a certain sense then, wizards "knowing" how to cast their spells is less an inherent understanding of the magical forces involved, the way someone might understand scientific principles, and more the ability to follow instructions and (in-between levels) suss out enough laws of magic to write a new set of instructions that should work. It's more akin to cooking than to scientific experiments, and the recipes are too long and specific for anybody to really know them forwards and backwards unless they've put a lot of time into doing specifically that (via Spell Mastery, which lets you prepare a select number of spells you particularly like from memory without need for a spellbook).

    (From that perspective, the memorization side of wizardry could be well-represented in an IRL game: a wizard player can only prepare spells that they can recite from memory, although they get a certain number of cheat-cards with the spell written on it based on their wizard level and in-game money spent acquiring more cheat-cards for the purposes of reciting spells in the morning. And then Spell Mastery represents having memorized certain spells so thoroughly that you don't even need the cheat cards. #WorstHouseruleEver )
    Current Avatar (Sunny and Violet) was created by the incredibly talented AsteriskAmp.
    Many thanks!

  18. - Top - End - #48
    Orc in the Playground
     
    RedKnightGirl

    Join Date
    Jul 2015

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Except Spell Mastery explicitly refers to memorizing spells you already know and not needing a spell book to prepare them anymore. That isn't fluff, it's part of the feat's benefit. You have to already know the spell to memorize it with Spell Mastery. Can you only use Spell Mastery on spells you know as a Sorcerer or Bard so you can prepare them in your Wizard slots or something? (No, that would be silly.)

    The RAW seems to be that Wizards know all the spells in their spellbook plus Read Magic. If they lose their spell book, they no longer know those spells, but that's hardly the weirdest rules interaction in DnD. Saying that a Wizard knows the spells in their spell book but doesn't know them if the book is lost because spells are too complex to memorize without one isn't that much of a stretch.

  19. - Top - End - #49
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Elves's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2019

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Awkward View Post
    Regardless, wizards do not qualify for Versatile Spellcaster in the first place as they do not possess the ability to spontaneously cast spells.

    "Some characters can cast spells, but they don’t need spellbooks, nor do they prepare their spells. They can cast any spell they know using a daily allotment of spell slots. These characters are called spontaneous spellcasters." - Rules Compendium, pg. 139
    If we're being pedantic enough to interpret this passage to mean a multiclass wizard/sorcerer doesn't count as a spontaneous spellcaster, then by that same pedanticism both AC and the multiclass wizard/sorcerer do qualify for VS, because VS only requires the "ability to spontaneously cast spells", not that you be a spontaneous spellcaster. And if using a more natural reading, so that a wizard/sorcerer would qualify as a spontaneous spellcaster even though some of their spells are prepared, so would a wizard with AC.

    Quote Originally Posted by AvatarVecna View Post
    That quote is fluff text, not mechanical.
    It's in a mechanical section, not a fluff section, so I don't see why you'd think so.

    The most reasonable real-game implementation is probably what Silvercrys suggests, that they only know their spells so long as they have their spellbooks at hand.
    Last edited by Elves; 2019-10-01 at 03:33 AM.
    The Age of Warriors (revived 2019) - Huge fanmade TOB sequel. Content needs PEACH and input.

  20. - Top - End - #50
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Quote Originally Posted by Silvercrys View Post
    Except Spell Mastery explicitly refers to memorizing spells you already know and not needing a spell book to prepare them anymore. That isn't fluff, it's part of the feat's benefit. You have to already know the spell to memorize it with Spell Mastery. Can you only use Spell Mastery on spells you know as a Sorcerer or Bard so you can prepare them in your Wizard slots or something? (No, that would be silly.)

    The RAW seems to be that Wizards know all the spells in their spellbook plus Read Magic. If they lose their spell book, they no longer know those spells, but that's hardly the weirdest rules interaction in DnD. Saying that a Wizard knows the spells in their spell book but doesn't know them if the book is lost because spells are too complex to memorize without one isn't that much of a stretch.
    Wizards know all the spells they've learned. It sounds redundant but the procedure for learning a spell is written down: decipher the writing with read magic, then spend a day studying the spell and make a spellcraft check (DC 15 + spell level, get a +2 bonus for a specialized school, auto fail for an opposition school). If you make the check, you learned the spell and can copy it to your spellbook. The process is automatic for the free spells at level up. Once you've copied it into your spellbook using notation you understand, you know the spell. If you master someone else's spellbook using the process in Complete Arcane, you (arguably, depending on the DM) know all those too because you treat the spellbook as your own and can automatically prepare spells from it, no spellcraft check required.

    So even after losing a spellbook, if a wizard has written out a spell in a spellbook at some point, they know it. Spell mastery says they know it well enough to not need a book anymore to prepare it.
    It doesn't matter how many classes you mash together, it's still "just" gestalt. Not tri-, not quad-, not penta-; gestalt.

  21. - Top - End - #51
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    RedMage125's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    I'm on a boat!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Elves, looking at the feat again (and at the last bit of the 2016 thread, which I apparently never read the last few posts in), you appear to be correct, that VS does not require the slots to be "unfilled". It's against RAI, certainly, but RAW does not seem to prohibit it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Awkward View Post
    It kind of does.

    Versatile Spellcasters requires you to use two slots of the same level to "cast a spell you know that is one level higher."

    Wizards do not have spells that they know, because they are not spontaneous spellcasters.

    The rules draw a very specific distinction between prepared and spontaneous casters in this way. You can note that the wizard class table lacks the spells known section as is found in sorcerer and bard and all other spontaneous casting classes.
    Doctor Awkward, I appreciate that you are on my side in this matter, but in this instance, you are incorrect. A Wizard's "spells known" refers to the spells in their spellbook. Alacritous Cogitation can only be taken by wizards, and in that context, a "spell known" can only be a spell in their spellbook.

    Also, Elves is right that a wizard with AC counts as "able to spontaneously cast spells". I've never disputed that, myself. The feat even says "You can leave a prepared spell slot open to spontaneously cast a spell". Hell, it even specifies that it only takes a full-round action to cast (and the spell must initially have a casting time of 1 round or less), which means you can use it to cast a Summon Monster spell (only thing I can think of with a 1 Round casting time) faster than if you had prepared it normally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silvercrys View Post
    The RAW seems to be that Wizards know all the spells in their spellbook plus Read Magic.
    Correct.

    Quote Originally Posted by Elves View Post
    It's in a mechanical section, not a fluff section, so I don't see why you'd think so.
    I'm glad we can agree that people don't have the authority to dismiss rules text as "fluff"
    Quote Originally Posted by Elves View Post
    The most reasonable real-game implementation is probably what Silvercrys suggests, that they only know their spells so long as they have their spellbooks at hand.
    That seems reasonable.

    HOWEVER, if we're having an anal-retentive myopicly-detailed RAW discussion of what the rules say, then a wizard "knows" all the spells in her spellbook, regardless of where the spellbook is. She may not be able to prepare them if her spellbook is not at hand, but she "knows" them.

    Which leads to some interesting things with regards to the wording of Domain Wizards. Because DW "know" their domain spell of each given level as soon as they gain the ability to cast it. Which indicates that it is added to their spellbook when they level, without counting against their 2 free spells known when they gain a level. The reason the "Leapfrog Wizard" reasoning is faulty is because the PHB explicitly tells us (page 171) that a wizard cannot cast L2 spells until she reaches 3rd level. So even if a DW has AC and VS, she does not "know" her L2 Domain spell, because she cannot cast L2 spells.

    Now arguably, if you also have Precocious Apprentice, then you also "know" your L2 Domain spell, but PA explicitly says that only the spell chosen as the L2 spell from PA can be cast with that "extra slot" until you hit level 3 of wizard. HOWEVER, as we pointed out in the last thread, a EGW with PA gets two L2 spell slots at level 1, and may prepare the PA spell twice. Which means that a level 1 EGW with PA, AC, VS, and who somehow also gets Heighten Spell can spend 2 L2 slots to heighten a spell to L3.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silvercrys View Post
    It depends on your reading of "spell level".

    The exact text is "The elf wizard may also prepare one additional spell of her highest spell level each day." for EGW and "a domain wizard gains one bonus spell per spell level, which must be filled with the spell from that level of the domain spell list" for Domain Wizard.

    If "spell level" means "spell level they can cast" in either case, then it works if Versatile Spellcaster also allows you to cast above your normally allowed level. You can cast second level spells when you prepare spells with two 1st level spells unexpended, so the EGW bonus spell and Domain spell both lock into 2nd level spell slots. As long as you don't cast them before you prepare spells again, you can cast a Heightened Domain Spell as a 3rd level spell, and so on and so forth.

    If it means "the highest level spell they can prepare" then the slot doesn't float regardless of your reading of Versatile Spellcaster.

    I understand you're taking the second reading but I don't think it's all that unambiguous.
    No. Just...all kinds of no.

    A Domain Wizard "prepares and casts spells like a normal wizard", so DWs must be able to prepare their Domain spell in order to cast it. The PHB, page 171, is not at all ambiguous, so the DW cannot cast L2 spells, ergo, she does not "know" her L2 Domain spell. And PHB 171 also means that L1 spells are "the highest spell level" that an EGW can cast*. So an EGW, even one with AC and VS does not have L2 spell slots, so there is no "ambiguity" at all with regards to the fact that the EGW bonus spell prepared can only be a L1 spell*.

    It's not about some kind of "alternate interpretation of 'spell level'". Because even under your "first interpretation", you fail to account for the fact that a given spell can only be cast with a minimum caster level equal to the level at which [given character's spellcasting class] first gains the ability to cast spells of that level. And both EGW and DW can only cast L1 spells at level 1*. So, to re-use the example I gave in the old thread, minimum caster level for a L3 spell for a Wizard, Cleric, or Druid is 5; minimum for a Sorcerer is 6; minimum for a Bard is 7; minimum for an Ur-Priest is 3. That last one seems odd, but it's the thing that helps explain this the best. Ur-Priest is, technically, a PrC with it's own distinct casting progression, it just happens to use the Cleric spell list. So a Fighter 17/Ur-Priest 3 has a maximum caster level of 3. But a Wizard 10/Ur-Priest 2/Mystic Theurge 8 has a maximum CL of 19 for her Ur-Priest spells (since 1/2 her CL from Wizard adds to Ur-priest levels for CL purposes), but such a character may still cast their L3 divine spells at CL 3, because 3 is the minimum CL that an Ur-Priest gets L3 spells. Make sense?

    *Unless she has Precocious Apprentice, see above.
    Red Mage avatar by Aedilred.

    Where do you fit in? (link fixed)

    RedMage Prestige Class!

    Best advice I've ever heard one DM give another:
    "Remember that it is both a game and a story. If the two conflict, err on the side of cool, your players will thank you for it."

    Second Eternal Foe of the Draconic Lord, battling him across the multiverse in whatever shapes and forms he may take.

  22. - Top - End - #52
    Orc in the Playground
     
    RedKnightGirl

    Join Date
    Jul 2015

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Quote Originally Posted by RedMage125 View Post
    Elves, looking at the feat again (and at the last bit of the 2016 thread, which I apparently never read the last few posts in), you appear to be correct, that VS does not require the slots to be "unfilled". It's against RAI, certainly, but RAW does not seem to prohibit it.

    Doctor Awkward, I appreciate that you are on my side in this matter, but in this instance, you are incorrect. A Wizard's "spells known" refers to the spells in their spellbook. Alacritous Cogitation can only be taken by wizards, and in that context, a "spell known" can only be a spell in their spellbook.

    Also, Elves is right that a wizard with AC counts as "able to spontaneously cast spells". I've never disputed that, myself. The feat even says "You can leave a prepared spell slot open to spontaneously cast a spell". Hell, it even specifies that it only takes a full-round action to cast (and the spell must initially have a casting time of 1 round or less), which means you can use it to cast a Summon Monster spell (only thing I can think of with a 1 Round casting time) faster than if you had prepared it normally.


    Correct.


    I'm glad we can agree that people don't have the authority to dismiss rules text as "fluff"

    That seems reasonable.

    HOWEVER, if we're having an anal-retentive myopicly-detailed RAW discussion of what the rules say, then a wizard "knows" all the spells in her spellbook, regardless of where the spellbook is. She may not be able to prepare them if her spellbook is not at hand, but she "knows" them.

    Which leads to some interesting things with regards to the wording of Domain Wizards. Because DW "know" their domain spell of each given level as soon as they gain the ability to cast it. Which indicates that it is added to their spellbook when they level, without counting against their 2 free spells known when they gain a level. The reason the "Leapfrog Wizard" reasoning is faulty is because the PHB explicitly tells us (page 171) that a wizard cannot cast L2 spells until she reaches 3rd level. So even if a DW has AC and VS, she does not "know" her L2 Domain spell, because she cannot cast L2 spells.

    Now arguably, if you also have Precocious Apprentice, then you also "know" your L2 Domain spell, but PA explicitly says that only the spell chosen as the L2 spell from PA can be cast with that "extra slot" until you hit level 3 of wizard. HOWEVER, as we pointed out in the last thread, a EGW with PA gets two L2 spell slots at level 1, and may prepare the PA spell twice. Which means that a level 1 EGW with PA, AC, VS, and who somehow also gets Heighten Spell can spend 2 L2 slots to heighten a spell to L3.


    No. Just...all kinds of no.

    A Domain Wizard "prepares and casts spells like a normal wizard", so DWs must be able to prepare their Domain spell in order to cast it. The PHB, page 171, is not at all ambiguous, so the DW cannot cast L2 spells, ergo, she does not "know" her L2 Domain spell. And PHB 171 also means that L1 spells are "the highest spell level" that an EGW can cast*. So an EGW, even one with AC and VS does not have L2 spell slots, so there is no "ambiguity" at all with regards to the fact that the EGW bonus spell prepared can only be a L1 spell*.

    It's not about some kind of "alternate interpretation of 'spell level'". Because even under your "first interpretation", you fail to account for the fact that a given spell can only be cast with a minimum caster level equal to the level at which [given character's spellcasting class] first gains the ability to cast spells of that level. And both EGW and DW can only cast L1 spells at level 1*. So, to re-use the example I gave in the old thread, minimum caster level for a L3 spell for a Wizard, Cleric, or Druid is 5; minimum for a Sorcerer is 6; minimum for a Bard is 7; minimum for an Ur-Priest is 3. That last one seems odd, but it's the thing that helps explain this the best. Ur-Priest is, technically, a PrC with it's own distinct casting progression, it just happens to use the Cleric spell list. So a Fighter 17/Ur-Priest 3 has a maximum caster level of 3. But a Wizard 10/Ur-Priest 2/Mystic Theurge 8 has a maximum CL of 19 for her Ur-Priest spells (since 1/2 her CL from Wizard adds to Ur-priest levels for CL purposes), but such a character may still cast their L3 divine spells at CL 3, because 3 is the minimum CL that an Ur-Priest gets L3 spells. Make sense?

    *Unless she has Precocious Apprentice, see above.
    I don't think we actually disagree.

    The trick doesn't work because even with VS you can't prepare and cast a 2nd level spell without having a caster level that would allow you to do so as a member of your class (e.g. 3 for Wizard).

    I'm merely opining that if you allow Versatile Spellcaster to violate this (i.e. you basically ignore page 171) and read "spell level" as "spell level you can cast" then the trick would work, because being able to cast 2nd level spells via VS would grant you 2nd level spell slots per Domain Wizard and EGW.

    I don't think VS does allow you to "break" your caster level limit, though. It doesn't specifically allow you to cast spells with a lower caster level than normal, so I don't believe RAW you can even use it to cast a metamagicked 1st level spell unless you're otherwise capable of casting 2nd level spells (definitely not a Heightened one, possibly not one with +1 Metamagic because those are still spells of their original level for almost all purposes besides what level slot you need to cast it). Its main benefit is that once you have higher level spell slots you can burn lower level ones to cast more higher level spells than normal.

  23. - Top - End - #53
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    RedMage125's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    I'm on a boat!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Quote Originally Posted by Silvercrys View Post
    I don't think we actually disagree.

    The trick doesn't work because even with VS you can't prepare and cast a 2nd level spell without having a caster level that would allow you to do so as a member of your class (e.g. 3 for Wizard).

    I'm merely opining that if you allow Versatile Spellcaster to violate this (i.e. you basically ignore page 171) and read "spell level" as "spell level you can cast" then the trick would work, because being able to cast 2nd level spells via VS would grant you 2nd level spell slots per Domain Wizard and EGW.

    I don't think VS does allow you to "break" your caster level limit, though. It doesn't specifically allow you to cast spells with a lower caster level than normal, so I don't believe RAW you can even use it to cast a metamagicked 1st level spell unless you're otherwise capable of casting 2nd level spells (definitely not a Heightened one, possibly not one with +1 Metamagic because those are still spells of their original level for almost all purposes besides what level slot you need to cast it). Its main benefit is that once you have higher level spell slots you can burn lower level ones to cast more higher level spells than normal.
    You are correct as to what the "intended" benefit is in regards to VS. However, there's nothing preventing AC+VS being used for metamagic, because the spell itself is what has an actual level that determines whether or not it can be cast (according to PHB 171). Adding any metamagic just makes it take up a higher level slot. And I would think even heighten counts here, because it only raises the DC (based on the level of spell slot used), it does not make it a different spell.

    HOWEVER, what you have "opined" is, unfortunately, provably wrong. VS does not, by RAW, grant a "Specific > General" exception that allows one to break the General Rule on PHB 171. We know this because Precocious Apprentice does. I wish I could link the DnD Tools page to post the full text of the feat, but the relevant part is: "Your caster level with the chosen spell is your normal caster level, even if this level is insufficient to cast the spell under normal conditions." THAT is what it looks like when a Specific Rule trumps PHB 171. Versatile Spellcaster explicitly lacks this text, and therefore, the opinion that you posited is not in keeping with RAW.

    I understand you qualified it with "if you allow...", but that's entering DM fiat and house rule territory, which is not conducive to a RAW discussion. I'm not trying to be rude, I just wanted to be clear that this issue is not about what a DM may or may not "allow" via house rule or DM fiat, because that could be anything. Example: I know DMs that allow the L1 spell Grease to be flammable, but by RAW it is not. I do not insist that "straight RAW" is some kind of "true" or "best" way to actually play D&D (Lord knows I use a few house rules myself). But since house rules have so many possible permutations, for the purposes of discussing rules on the forums, only what is RAW is "True". That's not always a coherent way to play. For example, "drown healing" is technically a True Thing by RAW. It's absurd, but True. And the whole point of my original thread in 2016 was to point out that EVEN IF you allow EGW+DW (something I still disagree is RAW-permissable), the "Leapfrog Wizard" does not work by RAW. Bonus spells from high-INT are not granted, the EGW bonus spell is one "prepared" so it cannot "float", and most importantly, spells above L1 cannot be cast until the spellcaster in question is of sufficient caster level to do so.

    EDIT: Let me just add that I am pleased that this thread has stayed more on topic of "Leapfrog Wizard", rather than a multi-page discussion JUST about EGW+DW.
    Last edited by RedMage125; 2019-10-01 at 11:10 AM.
    Red Mage avatar by Aedilred.

    Where do you fit in? (link fixed)

    RedMage Prestige Class!

    Best advice I've ever heard one DM give another:
    "Remember that it is both a game and a story. If the two conflict, err on the side of cool, your players will thank you for it."

    Second Eternal Foe of the Draconic Lord, battling him across the multiverse in whatever shapes and forms he may take.

  24. - Top - End - #54
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Doctor Awkward's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Collegeville, PA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Quote Originally Posted by RedMage125 View Post
    Doctor Awkward, I appreciate that you are on my side in this matter, but in this instance, you are incorrect. A Wizard's "spells known" refers to the spells in their spellbook. Alacritous Cogitation can only be taken by wizards, and in that context, a "spell known" can only be a spell in their spellbook.

    Also, Elves is right that a wizard with AC counts as "able to spontaneously cast spells". I've never disputed that, myself. The feat even says "You can leave a prepared spell slot open to spontaneously cast a spell". Hell, it even specifies that it only takes a full-round action to cast (and the spell must initially have a casting time of 1 round or less), which means you can use it to cast a Summon Monster spell (only thing I can think of with a 1 Round casting time) faster than if you had prepared it normally.
    No, it doesn't.

    The feat, found no Complete Mage on page 37 states, quote, "Benefit: If you leave an arcane spell slot open when preparing spells, you can use that open slot to cast any arcane spell you know of the same level or lower."

    You added the word spontaneous yourself, as has anyone who has ever spoken of that feat to you as evidence of wizards having spontaneous spellcasting.

    As I have already shown with the quote from the Rules Compendium, the game draws a very clear distinction between spontaneous and prepared casters. If a class is one type then it cannot be the other type under any circumstances. Classes that have the ability to convert prepared spell slots on the fly to a different spell do not have spontaneous spellcasting. They have spontaneous conversion, which is a different ability entirely.
    Resident Mad Scientist...

    "It's so cool!"

    Spoiler: Contests
    Show
    VC I: Lord Commander Conrad Vayne, 1st place
    VC II: Lorna, the Mother's Wrath, 5th place
    VC XV: Tosk, Kursak the Marauder, Vierna Zalyl; 1st place, 6th/7th place
    Kitchen Crashers Protocol for Peace

    Quote Originally Posted by Troacctid View Post
    But that's one of the things about interpreting RAW—when you pick a reading that goes against RAI, it often has a ripple effect that results in dysfunctions in other places.

  25. - Top - End - #55
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    RedMage125's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    I'm on a boat!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Awkward View Post
    No, it doesn't.

    The feat, found no Complete Mage on page 37 states, quote, "Benefit: If you leave an arcane spell slot open when preparing spells, you can use that open slot to cast any arcane spell you know of the same level or lower."

    You added the word spontaneous yourself, as has anyone who has ever spoken of that feat to you as evidence of wizards having spontaneous spellcasting.

    As I have already shown with the quote from the Rules Compendium, the game draws a very clear distinction between spontaneous and prepared casters. If a class is one type then it cannot be the other type under any circumstances. Classes that have the ability to convert prepared spell slots on the fly to a different spell do not have spontaneous spellcasting. They have spontaneous conversion, which is a different ability entirely.
    So...I don't have my books in front of me, but the text of the feat on D&D Tools, which cites the Complete Mage, says: "You can leave a prepared spell slot open to spontaneously cast a spell". In those exact words. The whole reason we're not allowed to link D&D Tools is because the site doesn't actually have permission to cite material from the books as exactly as they do. The site's actually pretty good about incorporating errata into stuff, actually. So it's a pretty reliable resource. If you have access to the Complete Mage right now, you can look at the feat and tell me if those words are in it or not.

    You're citing the latter part of the feat description, so i'd appreciate it kindly if you didn't accuse me of "adding the word myself", as I perceive that as an accusation of me intentionally misrepresenting the text (i.e. lying). Look in the feat description, and you will see what I cited was word-for-word.

    As AC says "Prerequisite: Must prepare arcane spells", we know Wizards can take the feat. Hell, there's also "Special: A wizard can select this feat as a wizard bonus feat". So we are 100% sure that Wizards can take the feat, yes? That means that "...any arcane spell that you know" (words from AC) has a meaning for wizards, right? Which was the entire point of my post to you. You claimed that "Wizards do not have spells that they know, because they are not spontaneous spellcasters." That is a direct quote from you, and you are WRONG, sir.
    Last edited by RedMage125; 2019-10-01 at 11:27 AM.
    Red Mage avatar by Aedilred.

    Where do you fit in? (link fixed)

    RedMage Prestige Class!

    Best advice I've ever heard one DM give another:
    "Remember that it is both a game and a story. If the two conflict, err on the side of cool, your players will thank you for it."

    Second Eternal Foe of the Draconic Lord, battling him across the multiverse in whatever shapes and forms he may take.

  26. - Top - End - #56
    Orc in the Playground
     
    RedKnightGirl

    Join Date
    Jul 2015

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    I guess what I'm mostly trying to say is that I understand why people think it would work, because the rules on page 171 are a bit obscure/infrequently referenced and without them there is a reading that allows the trick to work. I suppose I should have made it clearer that allowing VS to work this way would be a houserule.

    I also think you're probably right that you can cast metamagicked spells with VS by RAW, though Heighten is a bit sketchy (it pretty clearly says "actually increases the effective level of the spell it modifies" and "the Heightened spell is as difficult to prepare and cast as a spell of its effective level", etc. where other Metamagic feats merely "use a slot" x levels higher).

  27. - Top - End - #57
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Doctor Awkward's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Collegeville, PA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Quote Originally Posted by RedMage125 View Post
    So...I don't have my books in front of me, but the text of the feat on D&D Tools, which cites the Complete Mage, says: "You can leave a prepared spell slot open to spontaneously cast a spell". In those exact words. The whole reason we're not allowed to link D&D Tools is because the site doesn't actually have permission to cite material from the books as exactly as they do. The site's actually pretty good about incorporating errata into stuff, actually. So it's a pretty reliable resource. If you have access to the Complete Mage right now, you can look at the feat and tell me if those words are in it or not.

    You're citing the latter part of the feat description, so i'd appreciate it kindly if you didn't accuse me of "adding the word myself", as I perceive that as an accusation of me intentionally misrepresenting the text (i.e. lying). Look in the feat description, and you will see what I cited was word-for-word.

    As AC says "Prerequisite: Must prepare arcane spells", we know Wizards can take the feat. Hell, there's also "Special: A wizard can select this feat as a wizard bonus feat". So we are 100% sure that Wizards can take the feat, yes? That means that "...any arcane spell that you know" (words from AC) has a meaning for wizards, right? Which was the entire point of my post to you. You claimed that "Wizards do not have spells that they know, because they are not spontaneous spellcasters." That is a direct quote from you, and you are WRONG, sir.
    It wasn't an accusation of lying. It was an accusation of misremembering the feat. Lying implies malicious intent, and I don't think any reasonable person would think you were maliciously stating something that would serve as evidence against the point you were arguing.

    In any case, that first sentence you cited comes from the short description of the feat which is a short overview of the intended function. It's purpose in the feat description, like the "Normal" entry, is to provide context for when the mechanical benefits are unclear. Much like how Acid Splatter directly above it says, "You can channel magical energy into orbs of acid.", or Captivating Melody from the same book says, "You can expend some of your musical abilities to increase the potency of your enchantment or illusion spells.", these are short descriptions of the in-game consequences of the mechanical effects of the spells and not part of how the feat interacts with the rest of the rules.

    Regardless, "spells known" does have meaning to wizards. It refers to read magic, which is (normally) the only spell that they can ever prepare from memory.

    It also has meaning if they have the Spell Mastery feat, which allows them to add a number of additional spells from their spellbook to that list that normally only includes read magic.

    This is still very distinct from spontaneous casters, who know all of their spells and use their daily allotment of slots to cast from their list of known spells at a whim. If you really want to get this pedantic over rules interpretations, then there is an arguable difference between having "Spells Known" and knowing spells.
    Resident Mad Scientist...

    "It's so cool!"

    Spoiler: Contests
    Show
    VC I: Lord Commander Conrad Vayne, 1st place
    VC II: Lorna, the Mother's Wrath, 5th place
    VC XV: Tosk, Kursak the Marauder, Vierna Zalyl; 1st place, 6th/7th place
    Kitchen Crashers Protocol for Peace

    Quote Originally Posted by Troacctid View Post
    But that's one of the things about interpreting RAW—when you pick a reading that goes against RAI, it often has a ripple effect that results in dysfunctions in other places.

  28. - Top - End - #58
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Elves's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2019

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Does text trumps table even apply if the table text doesn't contradict the body text? The table does say "spontaneously", and the text is behaviorally consistent with that.
    Last edited by Elves; 2019-10-01 at 01:26 PM.
    The Age of Warriors (revived 2019) - Huge fanmade TOB sequel. Content needs PEACH and input.

  29. - Top - End - #59
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    RedMage125's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    I'm on a boat!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    Quote Originally Posted by Silvercrys View Post
    I guess what I'm mostly trying to say is that I understand why people think it would work, because the rules on page 171 are a bit obscure/infrequently referenced and without them there is a reading that allows the trick to work. I suppose I should have made it clearer that allowing VS to work this way would be a houserule.

    I also think you're probably right that you can cast metamagicked spells with VS by RAW, though Heighten is a bit sketchy (it pretty clearly says "actually increases the effective level of the spell it modifies" and "the Heightened spell is as difficult to prepare and cast as a spell of its effective level", etc. where other Metamagic feats merely "use a slot" x levels higher).
    That's an interesting way to look at it. You MAY be correct about Heighten, but I'm not quite convinced.

    Here's why: From what I can tell, by the RAW, since the "minimum caster level" of a given spell is predicated on what level a given class would be able to cast that particular spell. The exact words used on pg 171 of the PHB are "the spell in question". Let's use Grease as our example L1 spell. A Heightened Grease spell would be considered a L2 spell. But Grease, itself, is a spell which can be cast at CL1. And said Heightened Grease is still being cast at CL 1. Because it's still the spell Grease, and it's not being cast below its minimum level. I think it's allowed by the same kind of RAW vis RAI disonance that actually allows "drown healing". PHB page 171 was probably intended to say "you can't cast any Level X spells (where X >1) until your level in your class gains access to them". But the way the text is actually worded says that each and every spell is considered on a case-by-case basis, which depends on when the caster's class gains access to that particular spell.

    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Awkward View Post
    It wasn't an accusation of lying. It was an accusation of misremembering the feat. Lying implies malicious intent, and I don't think any reasonable person would think you were maliciously stating something that would serve as evidence against the point you were arguing.

    In any case, that first sentence you cited comes from the short description of the feat which is a short overview of the intended function. It's purpose in the feat description, like the "Normal" entry, is to provide context for when the mechanical benefits are unclear. Much like how Acid Splatter directly above it says, "You can channel magical energy into orbs of acid.", or Captivating Melody from the same book says, "You can expend some of your musical abilities to increase the potency of your enchantment or illusion spells.", these are short descriptions of the in-game consequences of the mechanical effects of the spells and not part of how the feat interacts with the rest of the rules.
    Look, there's really 2 issues you're debating here:
    1) Whether "Spells Known" is something that has meaning for Wizards.
    2) Whether or not Alarcitous Cogitation makes a wizard able to "spontaneously cast" a spell.

    It is apprent that you are a firm 'No" on both. I brought up AC in regards to #1, as it is something for Wizards that also references "spells known". More on that below, I'm going to tackle #2 first.
    Wizards normally must prepare their spells ahead of time in order to cast them. However, AC does in fact, allow a Wizard to cast a spell that she did not previously have specifically prepared (thus an exception to the normal rules for prepared casters). This is a fact, and not up for debate. Complete Mage does refer to this as 'spontaneously cast[ing]" said spell. Also a fact and not up for debate. The text under "Benefit" details exactly how this is accomplished mechanically. That doesn't make the feat description not a true thing. To use your examples, can a Bard with captivating Melody "expend some of [his] musical abilities to increase the potency of [his] enchantment or illusion spells"? Yes or no? If yes, then it is clear that AC does, in fact, allow the Wizard with the spell to "spontaneously cast" one spell per day, which can be any one of a number of spells (plural) that the Wizard "knows".

    Versatile Spellcaster does not say, as a prerequisite "Must be of a class that spontaneously casts spells". If it did, even a single-classed Wizard with AC would be excluded. No, VS says "Ability to spontaneously cast spells". Ergo, AC allows a Wizard to meet the prerequisite for VS.

    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Awkward View Post
    Regardless, "spells known" does have meaning to wizards. It refers to read magic, which is (normally) the only spell that they can ever prepare from memory.

    It also has meaning if they have the Spell Mastery feat, which allows them to add a number of additional spells from their spellbook to that list that normally only includes read magic.

    This is still very distinct from spontaneous casters, who know all of their spells and use their daily allotment of slots to cast from their list of known spells at a whim. If you really want to get this pedantic over rules interpretations, then there is an arguable difference between having "Spells Known" and knowing spells.
    You're overlooking what has already been posted and cited to you from the PHB (and SRD) in regards to Wizards, which my mention of AC was only meant to supplement, not supplant. PHB: "unlike a bard or sorcerer, a wizard may know any number of spells", this is RAW. Period. Those are exact words in the text, and there is nothing in the text that supports your claim that "spells known" only means Read Magic (and spells taken with Spell Mastery). What is true about Read Magic (and spells taken with Spell Mastery) is that a Wizard may prepare them without her spellbook. But at no point are those spells referred to in the RAW as "spells known". I invite you to check the PHB yourself. Read Magic is specifically called out as being able to be prepared without a spellbook. The term "known" is never used. Let's get as pedantic as you want, it only undercuts your claim about "Spells Known" vis "knowing spells". In fact, the only other time the word "know" (in any context, including "knows" or "known") is used in context with Wizards is in the Magic section, under the heading "Wizard Spells and Borrowed Spellbooks". It says: "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".

    As I said to Elves, a wizard "knows" all the spells in her spellbook, regardless of where the spellbook is. She may not be able to prepare them if her spellbook is not at hand, but she "knows" them. Which may seem like a pedantic distinction, because if she doesn't have her spellbook, then "knowing" a spell doesn't do any good, does it? Which is true.

    So what does all this mean? Well, functionally, it means that, for a wizard, the term "spells known" is usually worthless drivvel. Because what spells are in the spellbook that she has on-hand are more important with regards to what spells she can prepare (and thus cast) for the day, as per the general rules regarding prepared casters under their "Spellcasting" class feature.

    HOWEVER, Alarcitous Cogitation creates a 1/day exception to those general rules, doesn't it? Ah, yes it does. Specific Overrides General, remember? NOW "spells known" is actually a term that the Wizard cares about. Because AC allows them "to cast any arcane spell you know of the same level or lower" with the spell slot they left unfilled.

    This means that, using the same kind of pedantic adherence to RAW that permits "drown healing", a wizard with AC whose spellbook has been taken from her may, once per day, use a full-round action to cast any arcane spell she knows, as long as the spell is of the same level or lower than said unfilled slot (which will likely be all of them, since she doesn't have her spellbook), and the casting time of the spell is 1 round or less.

    Doctor Awkward, I love debate and nitpicky details like this. I absolutely invite you to try and poke holes in this if you can, but if you are going to do so, please cite your sources (you've been pretty good about it so far). Or say so if this has convinced you, either way. Remember, this is from the perspective of what the RAW says in text, and is meant to be as pedantic and anal-retentive as it needs to be. Because one thing is certain: Spells that a wizard "knows" means something.
    Last edited by RedMage125; 2019-10-01 at 01:05 PM.
    Red Mage avatar by Aedilred.

    Where do you fit in? (link fixed)

    RedMage Prestige Class!

    Best advice I've ever heard one DM give another:
    "Remember that it is both a game and a story. If the two conflict, err on the side of cool, your players will thank you for it."

    Second Eternal Foe of the Draconic Lord, battling him across the multiverse in whatever shapes and forms he may take.

  30. - Top - End - #60
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Elves's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2019

    Default Re: Viability of Elf Generalist Wizard + Domain Wizard "Leapfrog" combo (cont. from 2

    This means that, using the same kind of pedantic adherence to RAW that permits "drown healing", a wizard with AC whose spellbook has been taken from her may, once per day, use a full-round action to cast any arcane spell she knows, as long as the spell is of the same level or lower than said unfilled slot
    This actually convinces me that the literal reading (a wizard knows all their spells and only needs a spellbook to prepare them) is smoother in practice than the compromise of saying they only know them while the book is at hand.
    The Age of Warriors (revived 2019) - Huge fanmade TOB sequel. Content needs PEACH and input.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •