Rules as Written there is no limitation on how often you can use this, save that it uses your swift action for that round. Yes, if you use multiple weapons, this benefit applies to all of them, including natural weapons.
No. Each class has separate caster level (except for prestige classes that specifically increase caster level of existing class).
I vaguely recall another thread that argues that since arcane strike says your caster levels rather than your caster level it would stack. I don't know how that thread ended though.
Very weak argument. There is no way to grammatically write that sentence without using plural form of "level" in the sequence discussed.
Caster levels don't stack unless explicitly stated they would stack for some purpose - if they were meant to be added together from all arcane classes to calculate them it would be explicitly written as unique (or almost unique) approach to caster level usage.
'For every five caster levelS you possess'.
Bard 2/Sorcerer 3 is definitely 5 caster levels.
The rules assumes you are single classed. Caster level don't stack unless it is specifically stated.
If you have 5 levels of druid, and 5 levels of wizard you are still a level 5 caster so when you use Arcane strike or try to overcome a creature's spell resistance you only get to count that 5 for the purpose of the effect.
The rules assumes you are single classed. Caster level don't stack unless it is specifically stated.
If you have 5 levels of druid, and 5 levels of wizard you are still a level 5 caster so when you use Arcane strike or try to overcome a creature's spell resistance you only get to count that 5 for the purpose of the effect.
It says "for every 5 caster levels you possess"
if you possess 5 caster levels from druid and 5 caster levels from wizard, you possess 10 caster levels.
It doesn't say "for every 5 caster levels beyond 5th" which is what it would say (and other abilities do say) if it wanted to check caster level rather than total applicable levels.
Clearly it means any weapons you own. So if you own all the weapons the party uses, everyone benefits.
More seriously, I agree that RAW is that caster levels from multiple sources stack for Arcane Strike. I can't think of anywhere that would cause a problem (it really helps weaker characters more than anything). If they wanted it just from one class, it could have specified that.
Why would it have to specify it if the normal rules assume they don't stack?
I vaguely recall another thread that argues that since arcane strike says your caster levels rather than your caster level it would stack. I don't know how that thread ended though.Very weak argument. There is no way to grammatically write that sentence without using plural form of "level" in the sequence discussed.
Caster levels don't stack unless explicitly stated they would stack for some purpose - if they were meant to be added together from all arcane classes to calculate them it would be explicitly written as unique (or almost unique) approach to caster level usage.
I would tend to agree with you, but there is a way to write that sentence grammatically without using a plural of the word 'level'.
"For every five caster levels you possess, this bonus increases by +1, to a maximum of +5 at 20th level."
Rewrite:
'Each time your caster level reaches a multiple of 5, the bonus increases by +1, to a maximum of +5 at caster level 20.'
Why would it have to specify it if the normal rules assume they don't stack?Clearly it means any weapons you own. So if you own all the weapons the party uses, everyone benefits.
More seriously, I agree that RAW is that caster levels from multiple sources stack for Arcane Strike. I can't think of anywhere that would cause a problem (it really helps weaker characters more than anything). If they wanted it just from one class, it could have specified that.
Don't stack for what purposes?
Casting a spell? You use the Caster Level for that class. There's no question of what you use. Pre-req for a feat? It specifies a minimum caster level, so you need that minimum from a class.
This ability doesn't use the wording that would restrict it to caster levels from one class. It doesn't say, "At Caster Level 5 and every 5 Caster Levels therafter, this bonus increases by 1."
It just said, for every 5 caster levels you possess. It's the wording that matters.
Hmm, regarding my joke above, it should probably say "all weapons you use this round" or something like that. It clearly is avoiding "all weapons you wield" to ally it to be used with throwing weapons.
So which caster levels stack. Is it only arcane caster levels since you have to be arcane caster to even get the feat or is it all caster levels?
Can I take 1 level of wizard, and 4 levels of cleric to get a +2?
Yes or no and why?
Since it has a hard cap of +5 many of these things are not a real concern. Sure it might be able to be cheesed so it gets there faster (might being the key word here as much of this is suspect at best.)
Though its value is something I feel is underestimated by some. Firstly static bonuses are ALWAYS more valuable then extra dice. So while its damage is slightly less then 2 SA dice its considerably more valuable.
Even the fact that static is better if there was a feat that gave 1-2 SA dice it would be a often used feat I am sure of it. Heck it even trumps both weapon specialization feats combined. Granted they are weak feats but both in one would be a solid feat.
Of course its value comes down to swift action economy. If your build has no other use for swift actions (which is not uncommon.) then its gold. If you need swift actions though then it could be as low as trash.
A very strict reading would allow any caster level to work. Probably the RAI is for arcane caster levels only.So which caster levels stack. Is it only arcane caster levels since you have to be arcane caster to even get the feat or is it all caster levels?
Can I take 1 level of wizard, and 4 levels of cleric to get a +2?
Yes or no and why?
ok..I am more inclined to agree with that since I don't think it's game breaking..
Extending it to divine casters or SLA based caster levels might cause problems since a class can have a caster level for SLA's and actual class based caster levels. So could certain monsters like dragons or outsiders.
There are feats that require a caster level of X, and as far as I'm aware, those prerequisites are looking at non-stacked caster levels.
Would you argue otherwise? Why?
Could a wizard 3/cleric 6 qualify for Craft Rod, by claiming that their caster levels stack up to the required CL 9? Why?
Off-topic:
Every time someone has "simple question" in the title, the answer has never been really been simple. :)
|
....
(I'm not very impressed with Arcane Strike overall, we're talking about something that ends up being worth a bit more than a die of SA. Granted, you don't need flanking, but it isn't anything to sweat over).
With one feat and one swift action each round you get the equivalent of weapon specialization at level 5, greater weapon specialization at level 15 with all the weapons you use during the round.
And it stack with weapon specialization.Yes, not impressive at all. /sarcasm
- * -
RAW I think what matter is your highest caster level in a arcane class.
I see no problems in allowing a character to sum up all of his arcane caster levels in different classes for the use with Arcane strike, but traits (or feats) like Magical Knack would still be incapable to raise his CL above his character level.
The interpretation that you only need to be capable to cast Arcane spells only to take the feat but that the benefit isn't limited to your arcane caster levels seem a stretch but is a possible interpretation.