| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
1). Arcane Caster Level is a specific combination of words that is literally used nowhere else in the rules. it is a copy-paste from the 3.5 version, which is itself a copy-paste of the 3.0 version. And in the 3.0 PHB, "Arcane Caster" was synonymous with "class that has a familiar"*.
*"But what about bards?". "Lol, f~@* Bards" was the stance of everyone writing magic rules for 3.0. Just look at metamagic feats for an example.
|
If you have a level in a class that either currently or eventually provides arcane spellcasting(this includes archetypes that change the spells cast to arcane) then that is an arcane spellcaster level.
Prestige classes do not extend the whole class so they do not stack in regards to arcane spellcaster level. They are a different class and have a different level pool. Yes, I know it sucks.
Now the argument goes that for as far as familiars are concerned every class that gets a familiar has a set of faux wizard levels and should provide the necessary arcane spellcaster levels.
But the counter argument is pretty compelling too since those faux levels only affect the familiar and thus would not fill the requirement for feat selection.
As it stands, with the most RAW stance, only those who gain arcane spellcasting and have levels in that class enough to select an improved familiar may take the feat.
As for who would benefit? Many classes and builds could. Improved familiars can be a valuable asset. Some even call them OP. That, I am afraid, is also why I do not think we will see any answers for this question.
#4: Anyone who has an [Arcane] [Caster Level] [of sufficient size]. I don't think it's correct, but it's a possibility.
Parsing "Arcane Spellcaster Level" as "levels in an arcane spellcasting class" is an assumptive interpretation, no more supported excplicitly by the text than any other interpretation.
Personally, I think that phrases like "effective Wizard level" should be interpreted broadly enough to also include Improved Familiar.
|
|
#4: Anyone who has an [Arcane] [Caster Level] [of sufficient size]. I don't think it's correct, but it's a possibility.
Parsing "Arcane Spellcaster Level" as "levels in an arcane spellcasting class" is an assumptive interpretation, no more supported excplicitly by the text than any other interpretation.
Personally, I think that phrases like "effective Wizard level" should be interpreted broadly enough to also include Improved Familiar.
James Jacobs on the subject of what Arcane Spellcaster level means.
Add to this, what happens if you have the Magical Knack.
Does a Skald 1 / Bloodrager 2 with Magical Knack (Bloodrager) and a bloodline familiar qualify for Improved Familiar? Does the answer change at all if we replace Skald with a different class?
Note that the abilities given to a familiar (such as Deliver Touch Spells and Natural Armor Adjustment) is based on class level, not caster level.
bloodrager 2 doesn't have a caster level yet, would need to get him 4 levels of bloodrager before magical knack would work.
Any class that matches all these requirements:
- Level(s) in an Arcane spell casting class with the required CL.
- The same class grants a familiar
- Your alignment matches the creature.
That last item has nothing to do with the class -- it is merely confusing to include it.
For the second item -- are you saying that a non-arcane spellcasting class that grants a familiar "as a wizard" gives you no effective levels for advancing the familiar?
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
For the second item -- are you saying that a non-arcane spellcasting class that grants a familiar "as a wizard" gives you no effective levels for advancing the familiar?
No, that has an effective arcane caster level of the effective level the class ability granting it.
Let me phrase this another way:
The same class giving you the familiar needs to be the same class giving you the required number of levels in the class to qualify.
bloodrager 2 doesn't have a caster level yet, would need to get him 4 levels of bloodrager before magical knack would work.
That would be true for Paladin and Ranger, but there is nothing indicating that a Bloodrager doesn't have a Caster Level at level 1.
However, rather than go off on that tangent (which got argued in a scroll use thread as well), I'll change the example.
Skald 1/Bloodrager 6 wants a Pseudodragon as a familiar. Do they qualify?
Same basic question, is it caster level or is it class level. Only the example changes.
class level of an arcane spellcasting class. Does not need to be the class that is granting you the familiar. Your example is a 6th level arcane spellcaster and a first level arcane spellcaster.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
IMO, any class that gains the sufficient "effective level" in an arcane class for familiar abilities and has a normal familiar.
Note that this could be a sea singer bard; a druid with the Eagle, Frog, Monkey, or Serpent domain; a magus that takes the Familiar magus arcana; a rogue that takes the Familiar advanced rogue talent; any character that takes the Eldritch Heritage feat in the Arcane bloodline; etc. If a druid with a familiar from a domain that takes the Improved Familiar feat, the new familiar must also meet the type restriction for the domain.
Depending on the exact character (multi-classing/prestige classes), they may have a caster level for spells that is sufficient, but their "effective level" for familiar abilities may not be high enough; for instance, a wizard 6/ranger 1/eldritch knight 2 with Magical Knack (Wizard) would cast spells at CL 9, but their familiar would only have the abilities of only the 6 wizard levels (so the character wouldn't qualify for any of the Improved Familiar choices that require 7 levels in my campaigns). Also note that some prestige classes and other character options may automatically grant a specific "improved" familiar, regardless of whether or not the character has a sufficient "effective level."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Skald 1/Bloodrager 6 wants a Pseudodragon as a familiar. Do they qualify?
1) Do they already have a normal familiar?
2) Do they have an "effective level" granting their familiar abilities as a 7th-level sorcerer or wizard?Unless both answers are "yes," they shouldn't qualify (IMO).
|
|
For the second item -- are you saying that a non-arcane spellcasting class that grants a familiar "as a wizard" gives you no effective levels for advancing the familiar?
No, that has an effective arcane caster level of the effective level the class ability granting it.
Let me phrase this another way:
The same class giving you the familiar needs to be the same class giving you the required number of levels in the class to qualify.
This is not technically correct as it does not say this anywhere.
Also, to unmix the facts here... improved famiilars do not care about caster level. They only care about "Arcane Spellcaster Levels" which is a separate thing. I think you know the difference but there are plenty who get confused by this which is why I bring it up.|
|
Prestige classes do not extend the whole class so they do not stack in regards to arcane spellcaster level. They are a different class and have a different level pool. Yes, I know it sucks.The others have been discussed at quite some length in other threads, but I find this one quite peculiar. You can have a prestige class which grants full arcane caster progression yet at the same time counts as 0 levels for the purposes of "Arcane Spellcaster Level".
------
When the Improved Familiar feat was originally written, only arcane casters had the ability to acquire familiars (correct me if I'm wrong). Now days, there are as many non-arcane classes which have the potential to acquire a familiar as those with arcane ability (or pretty close to). It feels like the limitation imposed on Improved Familiars is a pure artifact of an antiquated version of the rules and should be updated to reflect the true landscape of current potential familiar use.
Imho, anyway.
It doesn't count as 0. It counts as 1 in a new pool.
So, a wizard 6, fighter 1, eldritch knight 1 has a Arcane Spellcaster level of 6(wizard) and an arcane spellcaster level of 1(eldritch knight).As to your second point, that is my main argument which I have brought up several times on different threads of this nature.
|
|
Skald 1/Bloodrager 6 wants a Pseudodragon as a familiar. Do they qualify?1) Do they already have a normal familiar?
2) Do they have an "effective level" granting their familiar abilities as a 7th-level sorcerer or wizard?Unless both answers are "yes," they shouldn't qualify (IMO).
They still do not qualify even if both are a yes. Arcane Spellcaster levels do not stack, they are separate for each class you have. Yes, it sucks. Yes, it doesn't make sense. The rules for familiars are designed to benefit most single classed wizards(and by extension those classes which have arcane casting and have familiars).
|
|
Prestige classes do not extend the whole class so they do not stack in regards to arcane spellcaster level. They are a different class and have a different level pool. Yes, I know it sucks.The others have been discussed at quite some length in other threads, but I find this one quite peculiar. You can have a prestige class which grants full arcane caster progression yet at the same time counts as 0 levels for the purposes of "Arcane Spellcaster Level".
------
When the Improved Familiar feat was originally written, only arcane casters had the ability to acquire familiars (correct me if I'm wrong). Now days, there are as many non-arcane classes which have the potential to acquire a familiar as those with arcane ability (or pretty close to). It feels like the limitation imposed on Improved Familiars is a pure artifact of an antiquated version of the rules and should be updated to reflect the true landscape of current potential familiar use.
Imho, anyway.It doesn't count as 0. It counts as 1 in a new pool.
So, a wizard 6, fighter 1, eldritch knight 1 has a Arcane Spellcaster level of 6(wizard) and an arcane spellcaster level of 1(eldritch knight).As to your second point, that is my main argument which I have brought up several times on different threads of this nature.
I'm not so sure that having a prestige class ability which increases the spellcaster progression of a different class actually counts as an arcane spellcaster class itself.
Also consider Arcane Trickster, which doesn't specifically increase arcane caster progression. Or even more confusingly, the Evangelist prestige class.
Don't take my word for it. But every example I have seen written by a Paizo employee has worked in the fashion I describe.
But, in the example of an Eldritch Knight.... does it provide arcane spellcasting? Yes.
Thus it is a level with arcanes pellcasting.
In the case of Arcane Triskster... the Arcane Trickster class requires arcane casting to get in so it is assumed you will extend your arcane casting. But due to its phrasing... well, either way you should consider it arcane spellcasting levels if you chose to bind it to the arcane spellcasting you already have. This will be up to your GM to decide, though. But it is what makes the most sense.
In the case of evangelist... oddly enough due to how it words itself... it actually completely extends the class except for the few noted things. Those levels stack. So it should count for as one single level pool for arcane spellcasting.
They still do not qualify even if both are a yes. Arcane Spellcaster levels do not stack, they are separate for each class you have. Yes, it sucks. Yes, it doesn't make sense. The rules for familiars are designed to benefit most single classed wizards(and by extension those classes which have arcane casting and have familiars).Skald 1/Bloodrager 6 wants a Pseudodragon as a familiar. Do they qualify?1) Do they already have a normal familiar?
2) Do they have an "effective level" granting their familiar abilities as a 7th-level sorcerer or wizard?Unless both answers are "yes," they shouldn't qualify (IMO).
Sorcerer and wizard levels (assuming that the sorcerer classes are from the arcane bloodline) explicitly do stack -- but of course nobody in their right mind would combine those two classes in one character.
|
|
They still do not qualify even if both are a yes. Arcane Spellcaster levels do not stack, they are separate for each class you have. Yes, it sucks. Yes, it doesn't make sense. The rules for familiars are designed to benefit most single classed wizards(and by extension those classes which have arcane casting and have familiars).Skald 1/Bloodrager 6 wants a Pseudodragon as a familiar. Do they qualify?1) Do they already have a normal familiar?
2) Do they have an "effective level" granting their familiar abilities as a 7th-level sorcerer or wizard?Unless both answers are "yes," they shouldn't qualify (IMO).
Sorcerer and wizard levels (assuming that the sorcerer classes are from the arcane bloodline) explicitly do stack -- but of course nobody in their right mind would combine those two classes in one character.
You misunderstand. All levels which grant a familiar stack for what level your familiar is. But they do not stack in regards to Arcane Spellcaster Level which is what the feat needs. These are two separate things. It is entirely possible to have a 1st level familiar but 7 arcane spellcaster levels.(1 wizard/7 bloodrager)
Personally, I wish they would just base improved familiars off of familiar level. Then having an appropriately leveled familiar would be all you need to get an improved familiar(excluding alignment requirements).
As is it is entirely possible to have a 1st level familiar but change it into an improved familiar due to your arcane spellcaster levels.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
James Jacobs on the subject of what Arcane Spellcaster level means.
JJ view makes the whole things make far less sense. His rational is weirdly irrational.
Interesting James. Thanks for the answer.
So which of the following would be correct? (Note: the bard cannot normally have a familiar.)
NG Wizard1/Bard7 (using bard arcane spellcaster level) can get a Pseudodragon
OR
NG Wizard1/Bard6 (add the two Arcane Spellcaster levels together) can get a Pseudodragon- Gauss
Only the first one, since you don't add those levels together.
But the pseudodragon would only have 1 level of wizard to get its powers from.
This approach just doesn't make sense of any sort. And makes it clear that a FAQ is pretty much required, when someone on the team is interpreting the requirement very, very differently from how most of the player base seems to.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
James Jacobs on the subject of what Arcane Spellcaster level means.JJ view makes the whole things make far less sense. His rational is weirdly irrational.
This approach just doesn't make sense of any sort. And makes it clear that a FAQ is pretty much required, when someone on the team is interpreting the requirement very, very differently from how most of the player base seems to.Interesting James. Thanks for the answer.
So which of the following would be correct? (Note: the bard cannot normally have a familiar.)
NG Wizard1/Bard7 (using bard arcane spellcaster level) can get a Pseudodragon
OR
NG Wizard1/Bard6 (add the two Arcane Spellcaster levels together) can get a Pseudodragon- Gauss
Only the first one, since you don't add those levels together.
But the pseudodragon would only have 1 level of wizard to get its powers from.
You, me and pretty much everyone who wants to take improved familiar agree with you that there needs to be a FAQ. Unfortunately, we have agreed on this for years and yet no FAQ.
James Jacobs on the subject of what Arcane Spellcaster level means.JJ view makes the whole things make far less sense. His rational is weirdly irrational.
This approach just doesn't make sense of any sort. And makes it clear that a FAQ is pretty much required, when someone on the team is interpreting the requirement very, very differently from how most of the player base seems to.Interesting James. Thanks for the answer.
So which of the following would be correct? (Note: the bard cannot normally have a familiar.)
NG Wizard1/Bard7 (using bard arcane spellcaster level) can get a Pseudodragon
OR
NG Wizard1/Bard6 (add the two Arcane Spellcaster levels together) can get a Pseudodragon- Gauss
Only the first one, since you don't add those levels together.
But the pseudodragon would only have 1 level of wizard to get its powers from.
A fair amount of the player base agrees with him.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In the new Inner Sea Intrigue it seems to confirm that classes that grant a familiar don't count for Improved Familiars.
Bonded Investigator
Familiar (Ex): At 2nd level, a bonded investigator gains a
familiar to aid him. This familiar functions as the wizard
arcane bond class feature, using the bonded investigator’s
class level to determine the familiar’s special abilities.
Improved Familiar (Ex): At 7th level, a bonded
investigator gains the Improved Familiar feat as a bonus
feat, treating his investigator level as his arcane caster
level for the purposes of determining what familiars are
available to him.
So here's a class that is explicitly letting you count as arcane caster levels for improved familiar, leading one to believe that without such wording it can't be done. Pathfinder is a permissive game, if the rules don't say you can you can't. Well, nothing in the rules says you get to freely count fighter levels as arcane spellcaster levels since you have a familiar granted by your class, therefore you don't.
It's not being used as I have a CL and it it arcane. It's being used as, I have levels of an arcane (spell)caster. Which fits perfectly with all the other rules and is a fine way to interpret the sentence. So it's either, the rules are consistent and this plays nicely with those rules. Or the rules are a mess and this muddies it up further. I prefer using the first.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In the new Inner Sea Intrigue it seems to confirm that classes that grant a familiar don't count for Improved Familiars.
Bonded Investigator
So here's a class that is explicitly letting you count as arcane caster levels for improved familiar, leading one to believe that without such wording it can't be done. Pathfinder is a permissive game, if the rules don't say you can you can't. Well, nothing in the rules says you get to freely count fighter levels as arcane spellcaster levels since you have a familiar granted by your class, therefore you don't.
Sigh. "Caster edition" indeed.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mind you, that rules text could be the result of a canny design team member avoiding any rules ambiguity by being explicit. In fact, if a design team member was trying to avoid the ambiguity landmines, that is exactly how I would expect them to do it.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
This approach just doesn't make sense of any sort. And makes it clear that a FAQ is pretty much required, when someone on the team is interpreting the requirement very, very differently from how most of the player base seems to.NG Wizard1/Bard7 (using bard arcane spellcaster level) can get a Pseudodragon
NG Wizard1/Bard6 (add the two Arcane Spellcaster levels together) can get a PseudodragonOnly the first one, since you don't add those levels together.
But the pseudodragon would only have 1 level of wizard to get its powers from.
Other than that he allowed stacking of the levels, I match him on how it works perfectly. So yes we need a FAQ because most of the players have different opinions on how this works.
It doesn't make sense to me to have a feat with a prerequisite being fulfilled by two separate classes when it benefits only one of them. So I wouldn't have allowed wiz1/bard7, and if I did I'd implement it the same way with only 1 level of familiar abilities.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That James quote is also pretty dated. There weren't very many non-arcane ways to get a familiar then, so his stance may have changed.
Since they hate to change things in the core book so much, what we really need is a new feat that does the same thing, but without the wizard baggage.
That James quote is also pretty dated. There weren't very many non-arcane ways to get a familiar then, so his stance may have changed.
Since they hate to change things in the core book so much, what we really need is a new feat that does the same thing, but without the wizard baggage.
Even better, a separate feat for each specific improved advanced familiar, with specific prerequisites and the ability to fill 20 pages with bankable rules text in an afternoon.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Even better, a separate feat for each specificimprovedadvanced familiar, with specific prerequisites and the ability to fill 20 pages with bankable rules text in an afternoon.
I can't tell if you are serious or joking. If serious, it's unlikely to happen. What's more likely is getting a FAQ how to apply Improved Familar.
So, the bonded investigator indicates that "Arcane Spellcaster Level" means "Arcane Caster Level". That should open a backdoor for qualifying with a spell-like ability; they don't count a casting spells of a given level, but by the rulebook sorta-kinda definition of caster level, they certainly give you that.
Counterargument: SLA CLs don't count for item creation feats, as per a february 2015 FAQ. I've been unable to find the post from the design team corresponding to it, so I can't tell if it's specific to item creation or a complete FAQ-only redefinition of the term "Caster Level".
So, the bonded investigator indicates that "Arcane Spellcaster Level" means "Arcane Caster Level". That should open a backdoor for qualifying with a spell-like ability; they don't count a casting spells of a given level, but by the rulebook sorta-kinda definition of caster level, they certainly give you that.
Counterargument: SLA CLs don't count for item creation feats, as per a february 2015 FAQ. I've been unable to find the post from the design team corresponding to it, so I can't tell if it's specific to item creation or a complete FAQ-only redefinition of the term "Caster Level".
I'm quite certain that they aren't going back to letting any SLA "caster level" count for anything other than that SLA.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's that time again... let's see if we can get it answered!
Examples:
1) Classes which count as a wizard for acquiring familiars such as Shamans, Eldritch Guardians, Carnivalist, or from taking Eldritch Heritage or Familiar Bond.
2) Prestige Classes which improve arcane spellcasting ability such as Eldritch Knight, Arcane Trickster, or Mystic Theurge.
3) Non-arcane spellcasters who take an archetype which changes their spells to arcane. Arcane casters whose archetype causes their spells to be non-arcane.
If they do decide that equivalent Wizard levels count, the Shaman would still have an issue with...
If a spirit animal is lost or dies, it can be replaced after 24 hours through a special ritual that consumes material components worth 500 gp per shaman level. The ritual takes 8 hours to complete. The new spirit animal must be the same kind of creature as the previous one.
I have seen a number of people argue that Celestial/Anarchic/etc. Improved Familiars still count as the same type as the unimproved familiars, e.g. "a Celestial Cat is still a Cat." It would be nice to have this clarified as part of any response.
|
|
I just can't believe after all these years Paizo still refuses to give an official stance on this. I mean... I can believe it simply because of all the other big system questions that still linger without a proper explanation... But it just seems like they don't care.
How long ago was it that we were promised a grappling blog? Or how about a proper mounted combat explanation? Familiars are up there with the big questions and yet they keep churning out new familiar based archetypes with no further explanation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just can't believe after all these years Paizo still refuses to give an official stance on this. I mean... I can believe it simply because of all the other big system questions that still linger without a proper explanation... But it just seems like they don't care.
How long ago was it that we were promised a grappling blog? Or how about a proper mounted combat explanation? Familiars are up there with the big questions and yet they keep churning out new familiar based archetypes with no further explanation.
There are soooo many threads about these issues. Another one that crops up a lot are questions about whether Tumor Familiars can be Improved and how that would work. I had hoped that the Familiar Folio would address some of these issues, but it actually just added complications. I don't know if the Powers That Be don't think the issue is important enough to address or if it is such a big topic that they haven't decided how to address it. I would love a full blog post post on the Improved Familiar rules like they did for the Light and Darkness rules.
So, the bonded investigator indicates that "Arcane Spellcaster Level" means "Arcane Caster Level". That should open a backdoor for qualifying with a spell-like ability; they don't count a casting spells of a given level, but by the rulebook sorta-kinda definition of caster level, they certainly give you that.
Counterargument: SLA CLs don't count for item creation feats, as per a february 2015 FAQ. I've been unable to find the post from the design team corresponding to it, so I can't tell if it's specific to item creation or a complete FAQ-only redefinition of the term "Caster Level".
Spell-Like Abilities, Casting, and Prerequisites: Does a creature with a spell-like ability count as being able to cast that spell for the purpose of prerequisites or requirements?
Only if the pre-requisite calls out the name of a spell explicitly. For instance, the Dimensional Agility feat (Ultimate Combat) has "ability to use the abundant step class feature or cast dimension door" as a prerequisite; a barghest has dimension door as a spell-like ability, so the barghest meets the "able to cast dimension door prerequisite for that feat. However, the barghest's dimension door would not meet requirements such as "Ability to cast 4th level spells" or "Ability to cast arcane spells".
Some SLAs are arcane, and they certainly have a caster level. I am pretty sure that means you have an arcane casting level.
While it does not meet the "Ability to cast arcane spells" per the FAQ, the Improved Familiar feat is not asking about casting spells, but "sufficiently high level (see below)", which states "Arcane Spellcaster Level". Does the FAQ even apply? It does not require you to cast some kind of spells. The feat also does not require you to have class levels as a caster, only spellcaster levels.
Sufficiently high Level is a singular number no matter how many different spells you can cast. So Eldritch Heritage (Arcane) nets you the ability to gain a familiar, and a caster level. Possibly not "arcane", but given the feat's tittle, I think it can be argued RAI it is arcane also.
/cevah