Multiclassing and Wizard Spellbooks and Gunslinger Pistol


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 63 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

4 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

Okay, This is only about in Multiclassing aspects.

If there is /NO/ mention, No events that have anything to do with these items... none at all, would I get the spellbook or pistol without any explanation? would I just /have/ one because I took the level

I start at level one, as a fighter, and fight nothing but animals, wolves and boars. I never return to town in between level one and level two, then I multiclass into wizard or gunslinger, would I receive the spellbook or gun?

The Wizard Class rules state that

Quote:
"Starting Spells (See Spellbooks below): A wizard begins play with a spellbook containing all 0-level wizard spells (except those from his opposed schools, if any; see Arcane Schools) plus three 1st-level spells of his choice. The wizard also selects a number of additional 1st-level spells equal to his Intelligence modifier to add to the spellbook."

So would this count as 'beginning play' or should I have to find someone to give me a spellbook (buying it or whatever)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The GM is entitled to modify the rules when the situation makes implementing them straight RAW, nonsense as in your question above.

At my table, you would have the option of delaying your levelup until you could be at a location where you could acquire the class instruction and gear, (and getting no experience until you do level up) or taking a class level which would make sense, such as continuing in fighter or taking a level in a closely related class such as ranger, given your propensity to avoid towns.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

RAW is clear. They get them for free when they level. And as per the multiclassing rules you should assume the character has been training with it all along.


Anzyr wrote:
RAW is clear. They get them for free when they level. And as per the multiclassing rules you should assume the character has been training with it all along.

Can you quote/link the bit in the rules that says you should assume that?

I actually thought it was there, but can't find it now.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Player, GM.... this message board is not the venue to wash your dirty laundry at.

Players need to remember that RAW is not a stick to beat your GM with. GMs need to remember that the rules serve YOU, not the other way around.


And character creation serves the Player, not the GM.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Anzyr wrote:
RAW is clear. They get them for free when they level. And as per the multiclassing rules you should assume the character has been training with it all along.

Raw can kiss my posterior.

When the player makes it plain and simple that they haven't been doing any preparation for taking on a new class, that takes your assumption outside, and shoots it.


I am not his GM, I am just another person on the forums. I'm just trying to ask a question, Which he told me to ask, and then he tries to come in to answer the question which he wants me ask. I asked him to leave.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Anzyr wrote:
And character creation serves the Player, not the GM.

Character creation serves the campaign. If the player doesn't want to play nice with the campaign, he's become an obstruction.


LazarX wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
And character creation serves the Player, not the GM.
Character creation serves the campaign. If the player doesn't want to play nice with the campaign, he's become an obstruction.

I'm going to call this GM Entitlement. Because it is. If the GM needs to have every aspect of the campaign serve their campaign, they should go write the novel they want to write.


thejeff wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
RAW is clear. They get them for free when they level. And as per the multiclassing rules you should assume the character has been training with it all along.

Can you quote/link the bit in the rules that says you should assume that?

I actually thought it was there, but can't find it now.

I can't find it via some searching and am away from book at the moment, but this should cover the RAW of multiclassing, that a Fighter gains all the Wizards abilities anyway.

CRB wrote:


For example, let's say a 5th-level fighter decides to dabble in the arcane arts, and adds one level of wizard when he advances to 6th level. Such a character would have the powers and abilities of both a 5th-level fighter and a 1st-level wizard, but would still be considered a 6th-level character. (His class levels would be 5th and 1st, but his total character level is 6th.) He keeps all of his bonus feats gained from 5 levels of fighter, but can now also cast 1st-level spells and picks an arcane school. He adds all of the hit points, base attack bonuses, and saving throw bonuses from a 1st-level wizard on top of those gained from being a 5th-level fighter.

If the Fighter decides to dabble in the arcane arts, all they need to do is add a level of Wizard when they advance. I'm sure someone will find the language in the meantime, because I am also sure I've read that.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Anzyr wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
And character creation serves the Player, not the GM.
Character creation serves the campaign. If the player doesn't want to play nice with the campaign, he's become an obstruction.
I'm going to call this GM Entitlement. Because it is. If the GM needs to have every aspect of the campaign serve their campaign, they should go write the novel they want to write.

The GM serves the campaign too. A campaign doesn't work out without the mutual implied agreement that the GM and Players agree to make it work.

The players get served when the campaign works out. but they have to do their part in not breaking it in the first place.


After your first level. Period. you are no longer beginning play. you are continuing play with a new level. This is why I want an FAQ.

And again, I would like you to leave this thread


Death_Keeper wrote:

After your first level. Period. you are no longer beginning play. you are continuing play with a new level. This is why I want an FAQ.

And again, I would like you to leave this thread

You are continuing play as Class X/Wizard 1 yes. But you are beginning play as a Wizard. It's kind of a messageboard and my comments are just as valid as the next persons, so asking me to leave a thread is kind of rude. Please remember the Community Guidelines.


Myself, I don't want them taking time out to give you that answer when they could be fixing parts of the game (ACG) that actually don't work. This is a simple NEED for you to match a working rule with YOUR verisimilitude. Why should they have to come in and tell you that you can add your own houserules? Why does YOUR vision of the game need an FAQ? What about the people that are ok or LIKE that they don't have to go out of their way to explain those things.

I don't think there is anything you could say to make me think this is worth the time for them to even think about an FAQ. If there was a -FAQ button, I'd hit it. :P

PS: PLEASE STOP TELLING PEOPLE TO LEAVE THE THREAD. Feel free to flag people if you think they are doing something against the rules. You don't get to pick who posts in a thread, the staff does.


Death_Keeper wrote:

After your first level. Period. you are no longer beginning play. you are continuing play with a new level. This is why I want an FAQ.

And again, I would like you to leave this thread

First of all, you don't get a FAQ just because you want one.

Second, you don't get to control who posts on a thread.

Third, it's extremely poor form to deprive a character of his class abilities.

Fourth, you are being a Richard. You might want to see to that.

Fifth, Paizo makes a policy of not responding to FAQ requests where the requester demands a FAQ and not simple logic.


EDIT. Deleted and I will try to frame an apt response

Silver Crusade Contributor

graystone wrote:

Myself, I don't want they taking time out to give you that answer when they could be fixing parts of the game (ACG) that actually don't work. This is a simple NEED for you to match a working rule with YOUR verisimilitude. Why should they have to come in and tell you that you can add your own houserules? Why does YOUR vision of the game need an FAQ? What about the people that are ok or LIKE that they don't have to go out of their way to explain those things.

I don't think there is anything you could say to make me think this is worth the time for them to even think about an FAQ. If there was a -FAQ button, I'd hit it. :P

PS: PLEASE STOP TELLING PEOPLE TO LEAVE THE THREAD. Feel free to flag people if you think they are doing something against the rules. You don't get to pick who posts in a thread, the staff does.

Why are you so sure "OUR vision" of the game doesn't match the developers' intent? Thus far, your and Anzyr's proof of RAW is trying to shout other people down. Additionally, Anzyr has had a very aggressive and insulting tone throughout this. I can respect Death_Keeper's desire to not be chased and shouted at. And if your best defense for your behavior is "nobody said I couldn't harass you!"... I hope you'll realize what you're doing, and how your treatment of others affects them. Please be nice. :)


Aggressive and insulting? I have been no such thing. Stating clearly, "this is what the rules say" when someone asks a rules question is not shouting other people down. Disagreeing with people certainly, but you'll find very few capital letters in my posts. Could it be that maybe you are projecting my avatar onto my posts? Its the red eyes and fangs isn't it?


Anzyr wrote:
Death_Keeper wrote:

After your first level. Period. you are no longer beginning play. you are continuing play with a new level. This is why I want an FAQ.

And again, I would like you to leave this thread

You are continuing play as Class X/Wizard 1 yes. But you are beginning play as a Wizard. It's kind of a messageboard and my comments are just as valid as the next persons, so asking me to leave a thread is kind of rude. Please remember the Community Guidelines.

I do not believe these are how the rules are intended to be which is why I am attempting to get this question answered.

graystone wrote:

Myself, I don't want them taking time out to give you that answer when they could be fixing parts of the game (ACG) that actually don't work. This is a simple NEED for you to match a working rule with YOUR verisimilitude. Why should they have to come in and tell you that you can add your own houserules? Why does YOUR vision of the game need an FAQ? What about the people that are ok or LIKE that they don't have to go out of their way to explain those things.

I don't think there is anything you could say to make me think this is worth the time for them to even think about an FAQ. If there was a -FAQ button, I'd hit it. :P

PS: PLEASE STOP TELLING PEOPLE TO LEAVE THE THREAD. Feel free to flag people if you think they are doing something against the rules. You don't get to pick who posts in a thread, the staff does.

That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. I am trying to get a question answered by a person that cannot be dismissed. An FAQ will end this argument, which is what I am trying to do.

Orfamay Quest wrote:


First of all, you don't get a FAQ just because you want one.

Second, you don't get to control who posts on a thread.

Third, it's extremely poor form to deprive a character of his class abilities.

Fourth, you are being a Richard. You might want to see to that.

Fifth, Paizo makes a policy of not responding to FAQ requests where the requester demands a FAQ and not simple logic.

Everyone who wants an FAQ must first ask for one. I am being stalked and asking this player to cease doing so and leave me alone. I am not trying to deprive a player of his class abilities, I am trying to get the player to not 'game the system' so to speak. (I don't know why an undead warlock matters in this context.) and again I would like to point out that Yes, I want an FAQ ruling, but I am far from breaking down their front door and demanding... I want a question answered and posting that I want a question answered does not fit into what I deem as 'demanding'


Posting in a topic in the general discussion thread is stalking? Particularly one that involves a discussion I'm already a part of? "I want to prove what you are saying is so wrong, so leave the thread I made to specifically about that topic that was being discussed." is basically what you are saying you know that right? And again... this is really in the wrong forum, you would have better luck in rules questions.


Kalindlara wrote:
graystone wrote:

Myself, I don't want they taking time out to give you that answer when they could be fixing parts of the game (ACG) that actually don't work. This is a simple NEED for you to match a working rule with YOUR verisimilitude. Why should they have to come in and tell you that you can add your own houserules? Why does YOUR vision of the game need an FAQ? What about the people that are ok or LIKE that they don't have to go out of their way to explain those things.

I don't think there is anything you could say to make me think this is worth the time for them to even think about an FAQ. If there was a -FAQ button, I'd hit it. :P

PS: PLEASE STOP TELLING PEOPLE TO LEAVE THE THREAD. Feel free to flag people if you think they are doing something against the rules. You don't get to pick who posts in a thread, the staff does.

Why are you so sure "OUR vision" of the game doesn't match the developers' intent? Thus far, your and Anzyr's proof of RAW is trying to shout other people down. Additionally, Anzyr has had a very aggressive and insulting tone throughout this. I can respect Death_Keeper's desire to not be chased and shouted at. And if your best defense for your behavior is "nobody said I couldn't harass you!"... I hope you'll realize what you're doing, and how your treatment of others affects them. Please be nice. :)

#1 If he feels that way, the correct thing to do is flag his posts. Telling people where they can post isn't.

#2 One makes your class abilities not work. That doesn't seem like any "developers' intent". Spellbook is a class feature you gain. You gain spells in said book. You abilities are centered around It makes little sense that said book starts out someplace away from you. And how did you LEARN to cast spells if you don't have the book? From a game and logic basis, it makes 0% sense to not have the book.

#3 as to Death_Keeper's "'game the system'" comment, to me it seems more that it's HIM trying to game the system to get one over on those sneaky players that actually want their class abilities to work... Darn them for thinking taking a level in a class gets you something... :P

Silver Crusade Contributor

Anzyr wrote:
Posting in a topic in the general discussion thread is stalking? Particularly one that involves a discussion I'm already a part of? "I want to prove what you are saying is so wrong, so leave the thread I made to specifically about that topic that was being discussed." is basically what you are saying you know that right? And again... this is really in the wrong forum, you would have better luck in rules questions.

I've already flagged it for wrong forum. Since you feel as deeply concerned as I do, I assume you've already done the same. The website crew will take care of the rest.


I believe a gunslinger's firearm is explicitly listed in their starting equipment section, and a wizard's spellbook is not. I'm pretty sure when you multiclass you specifically do not gain anything listed under starting equipment in your new class. This gets a bit confusing since the gunslinger's firearm is also listed under a class feature, which means a gunslinger would start with a battered firearm even if they are multiclassed.


Rastrum wrote:
I believe a gunslinger's firearm is explicitly listed in their starting equipment section, and a wizard's spellbook is not. I'm pretty sure when you multiclass you specifically do not gain anything listed under starting equipment in your new class. This gets a bit confusing since the gunslinger's firearm is also listed under a class feature, which means a gunslinger would start with a battered firearm even if they are multiclassed.

This is the reason I have asked for an FAQ, it does not make sense *To Me*

I am looking at it as, "if there is no way for you to have it, you do not have it, despite it being a 'starting equipment/class ability' thing

They see it from the other side. I am not saying which is right and which is wrong. I am saying it is odd and I would like a ruling, but they are now accusing me of trying to cheat people out of their gear, rather than withholding it until it makes sense... such as buying a junk gun off a peddler or merchant, or seeking training or whatever.


graystone wrote:
#2 One makes your class abilities not work. That doesn't seem like any "developers' intent". Spellbook is a class feature you gain. You gain spells in said book. You abilities are centered around It makes little sense that said book starts out someplace away from you. And how did you LEARN to cast spells if you don't have the book? From a game and logic basis, it makes 0% sense to not have the book.

So just for the record, you do think the book just mysteriously appears when you take the class?

"If there is /NO/ mention, No events that have anything to do with these items... none at all, would I get the spellbook or pistol without any explanation? would I just /have/ one because I took the level

I start at level one, as a fighter, and fight nothing but animals, wolves and boars. I never return to town in between level one and level two, then I multiclass into wizard or gunslinger, would I receive the spellbook or gun?"

If you want add in a event that stripped them of all their starting gear, but the GM made sure they found useful stuff to cover their known needs, but not an random extra spellbook or gun that no one needed.

This is admittedly an extreme situation. Not likely to happen.
But in that case, does the new wizard get a spellbook when he takes his first level? Does it just pop out of thin air? Does a gun do the same for the gunslinger?
Because the rules say they get one and it's a game, so there's no need for any further explanation.

Again, if I was running and aware that they were going to do this, I'd arrange for it to work out. Or for them to start with one that they can't yet use, so they can do a little bit of rp to set the stage for the class change. But I've been told again and again that it isn't necessary. Because it's a game, no matter what you get the spellbook along with that 1st wizard level.

Silver Crusade Contributor

graystone wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
graystone wrote:

Myself, I don't want they taking time out to give you that answer when they could be fixing parts of the game (ACG) that actually don't work. This is a simple NEED for you to match a working rule with YOUR verisimilitude. Why should they have to come in and tell you that you can add your own houserules? Why does YOUR vision of the game need an FAQ? What about the people that are ok or LIKE that they don't have to go out of their way to explain those things.

I don't think there is anything you could say to make me think this is worth the time for them to even think about an FAQ. If there was a -FAQ button, I'd hit it. :P

PS: PLEASE STOP TELLING PEOPLE TO LEAVE THE THREAD. Feel free to flag people if you think they are doing something against the rules. You don't get to pick who posts in a thread, the staff does.

Why are you so sure "OUR vision" of the game doesn't match the developers' intent? Thus far, your and Anzyr's proof of RAW is trying to shout other people down. Additionally, Anzyr has had a very aggressive and insulting tone throughout this. I can respect Death_Keeper's desire to not be chased and shouted at. And if your best defense for your behavior is "nobody said I couldn't harass you!"... I hope you'll realize what you're doing, and how your treatment of others affects them. Please be nice. :)

#1 If he feels that way, the correct thing to do is flag his posts. Telling people where they can post isn't.

#2 One makes your class abilities not work. That doesn't seem like any "developers' intent". Spellbook is a class feature you gain. You gain spells in said book. You abilities are centered around It makes little sense that said book starts out someplace away from you. And how did you LEARN to cast spells if you don't have the book? From a game and logic basis, it makes 0% sense to not have the book.

#3 as to Death_Keeper's "'game the system'" comment, to me it seems more that it's HIM trying to game the system to get one over on...

I'm sure posts have been flagged, and the moderators will judge their content. But the moderators are busy, and until they address the situation, the tone is becoming hostile. I hope everyone will try to be nice rather than requiring the moderators to clean up after them. As I said, if someone needs a moderator to tell them to stop and can't be polite on their own, I hope they'll consider how others receive their words.

A lot of things don't seem like developers intended them. Entering Eldritch Knight at 3rd level directly contradicts the Prestige Class section in the Advanced Class Guide. But for a while, we had an FAQ saying that doing so was legal.

And to you, Death_Keeper, Anzyr, myself, and everyone else... please be nice. :)


Depends on how you do leveling and downtime. If you let people level up between fighting the dragon's minions and the dragon itself in the adjacent room, then of course you don't spontaneously acquire a spellbook or gun (unless you had an appropriate form of backstory reasoning, like "I use my newfound magic powers to make a spellbook as my first act of arcane might!" or "I cobbled together this gun in five minutes from stuff those kobolds dropped."). If you only level up during downtime, then of course the player acquires a spellbook or homemade gun as part of their exploration of this new avenue of knowledge.

Silver Crusade Contributor

2 people marked this as a favorite.

If someone is playing Skull & Shackles, where the game starts with everyone getting press-ganged and losing their equipment, does the wizard lose his spellbook? The adventure believes so.

If such a character reached level 2 and multiclassed into wizard, would he receive a spellbook?

Would he also receive a spell component pouch?

Silver Crusade Contributor

Rastrum wrote:
Depends on how you do leveling and downtime. If you let people level up between fighting the dragon's minions and the dragon itself in the adjacent room, then of course you don't spontaneously acquire a spellbook or gun (unless you had an appropriate form of backstory reasoning, like "I use my newfound magic powers to make a spellbook as my first act of arcane might!" or "I cobbled together this gun in five minutes from stuff those kobolds dropped."). If you only level up during downtime, then of course the player acquires a spellbook or homemade gun as part of their exploration of this new avenue of knowledge.

Others categorically disagree, which is why this thread exists. Welcome! :)


From my point of view, if you allow them to level up in that class then they should be able to use the abilities of those levels. How else do
they get the abilities? If you don't feel that they have the tools to learn the class then why advance them?

Of course when you go down that road, you end up having to justify EVERY option taken. Where did that new spell come from? How did you learn that feat/ability/ ect without that item. Weapon focus bow? did you buy and spend a 100 arrow to practice?

thejeff, I don't think they just show up. If the GM allows the multiclass it's usually assumed that you've been training in the background. You've been out of scene and it'a only now that everyone else see it. An off camera montage, if you will. So it may SEEM to pop out of nowhere, but it's been there the whole time.

Doing it the way Death_Keeper, almost noone should level up outside of town where you can train and have the right materials at hand or you're trying to 'game the system'.


Rastrum wrote:
Depends on how you do leveling and downtime. If you let people level up between fighting the dragon's minions and the dragon itself in the adjacent room, then of course you don't spontaneously acquire a spellbook or gun (unless you had an appropriate form of backstory reasoning, like "I use my newfound magic powers to make a spellbook as my first act of arcane might!" or "I cobbled together this gun in five minutes from stuff those kobolds dropped."). If you only level up during downtime, then of course the player acquires a spellbook or homemade gun as part of their exploration of this new avenue of knowledge.

Well, downtime might still be "we go back to our camp in the woods". Or "We spend a week continuing to trek across the tundra, mile after mile" <sorry, got carried away>

Mind you, I'd still have no problem with "I'm carrying my dad's old musket, hoping I can finally fix it one day" or "I never finished my wizard training, but I've still got my old notes."


Kalindlara wrote:

If someone is playing Skull & Shackles, where the game starts with everyone getting press-ganged and losing their equipment, does the wizard lose his spellbook? The adventure believes so.

If such a character reached level 2 and multiclassed into wizard, would he receive a spellbook?

Would he also receive a spell component pouch?

This is a great reason why someone couldn't multiclass into a wizard. Not a great reason for why someone you allowed to take a wizard level shouldn't have a book.


graystone wrote:

From my point of view, if you allow them to level up in that class then they should be able to use the abilities of those levels. How else do

they get the abilities? If you don't feel that they have the tools to learn the class then why advance them?

Of course when you go down that road, you end up having to justify EVERY option taken. Where did that new spell come from? How did you learn that feat/ability/ ect without that item. Weapon focus bow? did you buy and spend a 100 arrow to practice?

thejeff, I don't think they just show up. If the GM allows the multiclass it's usually assumed that you've been training in the background. You've been out of scene and it'a only now that everyone else see it. An off camera montage, if you will. So it may SEEM to pop out of nowhere, but it's been there the whole time.

Doing it the way Death_Keeper, almost noone should level up outside of town where you can train and have the right materials at hand or you're trying to 'game the system'.

I said none of that. I gave a very exacting, intensely precise way of phrasing the question and nothing else of the sort. I asked if a character who has no way of obtaining something, obtains it simply because he took the class. I think that you are trying to bait me, and detract from my question


Death_Keeper wrote:
graystone wrote:

From my point of view, if you allow them to level up in that class then they should be able to use the abilities of those levels. How else do

they get the abilities? If you don't feel that they have the tools to learn the class then why advance them?

Of course when you go down that road, you end up having to justify EVERY option taken. Where did that new spell come from? How did you learn that feat/ability/ ect without that item. Weapon focus bow? did you buy and spend a 100 arrow to practice?

thejeff, I don't think they just show up. If the GM allows the multiclass it's usually assumed that you've been training in the background. You've been out of scene and it'a only now that everyone else see it. An off camera montage, if you will. So it may SEEM to pop out of nowhere, but it's been there the whole time.

Doing it the way Death_Keeper, almost noone should level up outside of town where you can train and have the right materials at hand or you're trying to 'game the system'.

I said none of that. I gave a very exacting, intensely precise way of phrasing the question and nothing else of the sort. I asked if a character who has no way of obtaining something, obtains it simply because he took the class. I think that you are trying to bait me, and detract from my question

Not at all. Your question STARTS by the DM allowing the character to multiclass into wizard/gunslinger. Why would he allow it if there was TRUELY no way for them to learn it. THAT IS MY POINT.

You've gone one step too far in your question. By the time they take the class, there should be NO reason they shouldn't have a book/gun (as they NEED the book/gun to be able to learn the class). It's chicken and egg. Where did the spell casting knowlegde come from if NOT their spellbook? Or gunslinging without a gun?


The way I see it, you start one class with X starting gold. Just because you go wizard does not mean you get a spellbook. Starting items are not gained with levels.

If a high level wizard loses her spellbook, her new one will not have all the "free" spell she gained over many levels. Thus a multiclass wizard will not have spells already the new book she gets.

Now if the player told me ahead of time that their character was going multi-class wizard, then I will assume they had a starting spellbook that they were figuring out how to use. I would consider that a house-rule allowance.

Silver Crusade Contributor

graystone wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:

If someone is playing Skull & Shackles, where the game starts with everyone getting press-ganged and losing their equipment, does the wizard lose his spellbook? The adventure believes so.

If such a character reached level 2 and multiclassed into wizard, would he receive a spellbook?

Would he also receive a spell component pouch?

This is a great reason why someone couldn't multiclass into a wizard. Not a great reason for why someone you allowed to take a wizard level shouldn't have a book.

I didn't address that because the thread where this started was very clear. PCs can gain a level in anything, at anytime. The specific example was a magic-hating barbarian gaining a wizard level, and why that can't be forbidden. So I had gotten into the habit of excluding that possibility. Sorry. :)


graystone wrote:
Death_Keeper wrote:


I said none of that. I gave a very exacting, intensely precise way of phrasing the question and nothing else of the sort. I asked if a character who has no way of obtaining something, obtains it simply because he took the class. I think that you are trying to bait me, and detract from my question

Not at all. Your question STARTS by the DM allowing the character to multiclass into wizard/gunslinger. Why would he allow it if there was TRUELY no way for them to learn it. THAT IS MY POINT.

You've gone one step too far in your question. By the time they take the class, there should be NO reason they shouldn't have a book/gun (as they NEED the book/gun to be able to learn the class). It's chicken and egg. Where did the spell casting knowlegde come from if NOT their spellbook? Or gunslinging without a gun?

I allow the character to take levels in whatever they like. They gain the XP they can spend it wherever they want. I don't have a problem with the character taking levels in things. Maybe a player wants to become a wizard, and so takes the level so they can train /on screen/ (happened before) and so I allow all my players to take their levels in whatever they want. However I don't think they should get a spellbook/gun from hammerspace after they write down Level 1 wizard/gunslinger...


Kalindlara wrote:


I didn't address that because the thread where this started was very clear. PCs can gain a level in anything, at anytime. The specific example was a magic-hating barbarian gaining a wizard level, and why that can't be forbidden. So I had gotten into the habit of excluding that possibility. Sorry. :)

No problem. It's where the whole question from the OP breaks down for me. If you can take the wizard level how can you not already have the book that has the spells you JUST learned in that level? Allowing PCs can gain a level in anything, at anytime by it's nature makes spellbooks/guns always avalible anytime or else you wouldn't be able to level up wizard/gunslinger anytime you wanted.


Death_Keeper wrote:
graystone wrote:
Death_Keeper wrote:


I said none of that. I gave a very exacting, intensely precise way of phrasing the question and nothing else of the sort. I asked if a character who has no way of obtaining something, obtains it simply because he took the class. I think that you are trying to bait me, and detract from my question

Not at all. Your question STARTS by the DM allowing the character to multiclass into wizard/gunslinger. Why would he allow it if there was TRUELY no way for them to learn it. THAT IS MY POINT.

You've gone one step too far in your question. By the time they take the class, there should be NO reason they shouldn't have a book/gun (as they NEED the book/gun to be able to learn the class). It's chicken and egg. Where did the spell casting knowlegde come from if NOT their spellbook? Or gunslinging without a gun?

I allow the character to take levels in whatever they like. They gain the XP they can spend it wherever they want. I don't have a problem with the character taking levels in things. Maybe a player wants to become a wizard, and so takes the level so they can train /on screen/ (happened before) and so I allow all my players to take their levels in whatever they want. However I don't think they should get a spellbook/gun from hammerspace after they write down Level 1 wizard/gunslinger...

I'd call that a failing in your system, not the game at large. If you allow a wizard level at anytime, they needed that spellbook to level up. It makes LESS sense to say they learn spells but that THEY just came from hammerspace and NOT a spellbook. Really how do you justify wizards/gunslingers gaining thier first level without the items needed? THAT is where you should be looking for an answer.

Silver Crusade Contributor

graystone wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:


I didn't address that because the thread where this started was very clear. PCs can gain a level in anything, at anytime. The specific example was a magic-hating barbarian gaining a wizard level, and why that can't be forbidden. So I had gotten into the habit of excluding that possibility. Sorry. :)
No problem. It's where the whole question from the OP breaks down for me. If you can take the wizard level how can you not already have the book that has the spells you JUST learned in that level? Allowing PCs can gain a level in anything, at anytime by it's nature makes spellbooks/guns always avalible anytime or else you wouldn't be able to level up wizard/gunslinger anytime you wanted.

As I said, my points were influenced by the original thread. I really am closer to your position on this. If they insisted, I would let them deny advancement until they reached an appropriate point... I might even drop a convenient spellbook as loot in an upcoming encounter. We're coming together! :D

Let this be a lesson to everyone: common ground is easier to find than you think. Just politely ask questions, and be prepared to reexamine your position. And be nice. :)

1 to 50 of 63 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Multiclassing and Wizard Spellbooks and Gunslinger Pistol All Messageboards