Requirement of the dragon disciple:
Spellcasting: Ability to cast 1st-level arcane spells without preparation. If the character has sorcerer levels, he must have the draconic bloodline. If the character gains levels of sorcerer after taking this class, he must take the draconic bloodline.
Which classes (next to the sorcerer) could cast 1st-level arcane spells without preperation?
Can a wizard cast arcane spells without preperation (through a feat or something else)?-> I want to take the prestiege class, but i like the wizard class more then the sorcerer class.
Bard?
Admittedly, the requirement did not really say you had to be any good at casting arcane spells without preparation. a dip into a spontaneous class would suffice. Maybe do a cross blooded sorcerer to get some nice bloodline arcanas. This will take you a bit further than you would like from wizard, I know, but you might end up the stronger for it.
you can do it with bard as well
but doing it with wizard, magus, or witch requires either a bonded object or spell specialization. the latter 2 classes require the latter option because they don't normally have a bonded object.
but doing it with wizard, magus, or witch requires either a bonded object or spell specialization.
You think the bonded object count for this requirement?
I hope my GM see it the same way :-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
but doing it with wizard, magus, or witch requires either a bonded object or spell specialization.You think the bonded object count for this requirement?
I hope my GM see it the same way :-)
bonded object does let you cast a spell from your spellbook without preparation. once per day.
it is a cheesy loophole. but it actually works.
just like using precocious apprentice as a back-door to gain early entry to mystic theurge was in 3.5.
the feat technically gave a 2nd level slot to cast 1 spell from, a 2nd level spell at 1st level. you got to choose which one you took.
Greetings, fellow traveller.
You could also go sorc1/wizX/ddY. It really depends on what you want to do with the PrC; make sure to read Oterisk's guide in the Advice forum and the discussion thread accompanying it.
JJ replied in an old post where the question concerning wizard's bonded object and qualifying for dd PrC was asked, that he would lean towards allowing it--though that is not to say it is RAW/official Paizo canon.
Ruyan.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
read Oterisk's guide in the Advice forum and the discussion thread accompanying it.
Thank´s I read the guide before, and find the prestigeclass in oterisk´s (?) guide to the barbarian.
We play the kingmaker campagne with the pathfinder/lorefinder system in eberron.
The world and the system(s) complete new stuff for me and so i made a ... ah ... untypically character:
Elf 6 (House Thuranni)
Barbarian 4 (Invulnerable Rager)
Dragonmark Heir 2
Int 16
Dex 16
Str 14
Cha 10
Wil 10
Kon 10
Feats: Power Attack, Favoured of the House, Dragon Mark
My long time aim (today) is:
Barbarian (4)
Dragonmark Heir (5)
Wizard/Sorcerer (1)
Dragon disciple (10)
OR
Barbarian (12)
Dragonmark Heir (3)
Wizard/Sorcerer (1)
Dragon disciple (4)
I am not sure what´s the better version, but i think the wizard would be a better version as the sorcerer.
Is there a feat which you can take which grants the ability "to cast 1st-level arcane spells without preparation" to fullfil the casting requirement for a Dragon Disciple?
I am looking to make a Barbarian 5 / Dragon Disciple 1. I would prefer not to have to take a magical class just to meet the Dragon Disciple requirements (ex. Barbarian 4 / Sorcerer 1 / Dragon Disciple 1) if I can avoid it, but I'm not sure there is any way to do this?
Any suggestions?
You should be able to do it with just wizard. Pick a school that gives you a spell like ability, like basic evocation and Force Missile (Sp). And since you gain that spell like ability when you have 1st level spells it counts as a first level spell if it doesn't already mimic a spell that's first level (magic missile). Boom, you have a spontaneous casting for the pre-req.
@ Trampelnick
Picking a race like gnome or half-elf that has spell like abilities for a level 1 spell will count for the pre-req. Though you miss out on all the spell increases of the DD.
Thanks...
I'm trying make a Barbarian/DD dual-class with only the Barbarian Class plus DD (no Sorcerer, no Bard, no Wizard, no Witch, etc.).
I'm also trying to do it with a Suli race character. Would the Supernatural ability (ex. Elemental Assault) count?
Supernatural no, it has to be spell like to count.
On a side note I'm curious as to why you want a DD for a barbarian? Would bloodrager work just as well for you? You'd have a little less HP but you'd have caster levels to be increasing with the DD levels.
@ Trampelnick
Picking a race like gnome or half-elf that has spell like abilities for a level 1 spell will count for the pre-req. Though you miss out on all the spell increases of the DD.
If I picked a Race with SLA (ex. gnome), but not a casting Class (ex. bard, sorcerer, wizard, etc.), would I get any spells via levels gained in Dragon Disciple?
@ Trampelnick
Picking a race like gnome or half-elf that has spell like abilities for a level 1 spell will count for the pre-req. Though you miss out on all the spell increases of the DD.If I picked a Race with SLA (ex. gnome), but not a casting Class (ex. bard, sorcerer, wizard, etc.), would I get any spells via levels gained in Dragon Disciple?
No, if you don't have casting then the +1 casting does nothing for you and is wasted. If you go straight barb into DD you'll waste that part of DD. DD will not give you spells if you didn't have any before.
This is why I'm curious why you want to go in with just barb levels.
On a side note I'm curious as to why you want a DD for a barbarian? Would bloodrager work just as well for you? You'd have a little less HP but you'd have caster levels to be increasing with the DD levels.
Honestly, I'm a relative novice and did not know about the Hybrid Classes, but Bloodrager was exactly what I was trying to create!
GREAT TIP, THANKS!
On a side note I'm curious as to why you want a DD for a barbarian? Would bloodrager work just as well for you? You'd have a little less HP but you'd have caster levels to be increasing with the DD levels.Honestly, I'm a relative novice and did not know about the Hybrid Classes, but Bloodrager was exactly what I was trying to create!
GREAT TIP, THANKS!
No problem. I figured that it would work for what you were wanting.
You would need an SLA of a 1st level spell
Actually, for Dragon disciple, you need to be able to cast level 1 arcane spells spontaneously, so just having a level 1 arcane SLA would not meet the requirements.
first you have a few things wrong, and you're wrong.
DD has nothing about spontaneously, just "Ability to cast 1st-level arcane spells without preparation." Do SLA need preparation? NO they do not.
now this FAQ tells us that SLA can be used to qualify for prestige classes faq
And I don't want to find it now but there's also a ruling that saying being able to cast 1 spell/SLA counts for spells in PC pre-req.
first you have a few things wrong, and you're wrong.
DD has nothing about spontaneously, just "Ability to cast 1st-level arcane spells without preparation." Do SLA need preparation? NO they do not.now this FAQ tells us that SLA can be used to qualify for prestige classes faq
And I don't want to find it now but there's also a ruling that saying being able to cast 1 spell/SLA counts for spells in PC pre-req.
I am quite aware of that FAQ. I misread the requirement about spontaneous vs without preparation because 95% of the time without preparation is functionally identical to spontaneous casting, so I got one thing wrong, not "a few things".
While I may have been incorrect, you, sir, are a jerk.
I am quite aware of that FAQ. I misread the requirement about spontaneous vs without preparation because 95% of the time without preparation is functionally identical to spontaneous casting, so I got one thing wrong, not "a few things".While I may have been incorrect, you, sir, are a jerk.
You also got it wrong that "just having a level 1 arcane SLA would not meet the requirements" SO that is more than 1 thing wrong. That is two, and since few is "the actual dictionary definition of “few” is, “not many but more than one.” So, a "few" cannot be one, but it can be as low as two" so I was correct in saying few.
And I'm not a jerk, I'm correcting you. How else would I say you're wrong besides saying you're wrong? Because you were, you even just admitted that you were wrong
I am quite aware of that FAQ. I misread the requirement about spontaneous vs without preparation because 95% of the time without preparation is functionally identical to spontaneous casting, so I got one thing wrong, not "a few things".While I may have been incorrect, you, sir, are a jerk.
You also got it wrong that "just having a level 1 arcane SLA would not meet the requirements" SO that is more than 1 thing wrong. That is two, and since few is "the actual dictionary definition of “few” is, “not many but more than one.” So, a "few" cannot be one, but it can be as low as two" so I was correct in saying few.
And I'm not a jerk, I'm correcting you. How else would I say you're wrong besides saying you're wrong? Because you were, you even just admitted that you were wrong
You might want to look at the full quote in context. The reason I stated for that "just having an SLA" wouldn't work is was because the SLA isn't spontaneous. No where did I say or imply that SLA do not count for caster requirements. Again, I am only mistaken about the need for the SLA to be spontaneous, but please do carry on proving my second point...
I am sorry for my misunderstand of your post. You are now correct that there was only 1 thing wrong, I thought the second part meant something other than what you are now saying you meant with it. I apologize for that mistake.
I still wish to ascertain why you called me a jerk. How do you feel I should have gone about saying you were wrong other than the way that I did as to not be a jerk?
I am sorry for my misunderstand of your post. You are now correct that there was only 1 thing wrong, I thought the second part meant something other than what you are now saying you meant with it. I apologize for that mistake.
I still wish to ascertain why you called me a jerk. How do you feel I should have gone about saying you were wrong other than the way that I did as to not be a jerk?
"first you have a few things wrong, and you're wrong."
That is completely unnecessary and not good for promoting open healthy discussion.
If you had typed the exact same response without the first line, it would have been fine.
Now imagine for a second you are a first time poster on the forum who made the mistake of trying to quote a rule from memory, and got it wrong. Which response would make you feel welcome, and which response would make you feel unwelcome? One that opens with "You are wrong" or one that opens with the actual text of the rule and an explaination.
I do concede that your view is most likely the most prevalent one here on the forums. This is why I wanted to know and I will try to implement said advice in the future. Since I am aware that I often come across as abrasive or rude is why I try to ask for clarification when someone calls me out on it, and often apologize just in case and ask if I was when they don't say anything about it.
Either of the responses are fine. 1 very clearly lets me know that I was mistaken and to look for the answer in their post. the other I'm forced to try and figure out what they are posting about. Replying also could have worked looking back on it now, but I don't enjoy making my posts longer by quoting if I don't have to.
I find it good for discussion because you know clearly what I think of what you said, helps reduce misunderstanding. I am making my point clear and focusing on what I'm going to elaborate on.