| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If this works like Archmic say it does than you can have unlimited caster level. What is to prevent you from putting the 2 levels of caster you got from Mystic Theuge back into Eldritch Knight to gain two more levels with an arcane caster, which goes back into Mystic Theuge, Which …? This is obviously broken and no sane GM is ever going to allow it.
The other thing he is missing is the increase caster level is a class ability of the prestige class. Even if a Mystic Theuge has a caster level the ability to increase it is clearly a class ability of the prestige class. This is backed up by the fact that the increase in caster level is tied to specific levels of the prestige class. A Mystic Theuge simply gets this class ability at every level, but others do not. The Dragon Disciple does not gain increase spell casting at 1st, 5th or 9th level.
|
Hahahaha. I'm dreadfully sorry but using Wizards of the Coast, who are the kings of underdeveloped books, almost nullifies any credibility you might have had. This has been an interesting read for sure. However, I agree with the simple statement of proof being your burden. I've seen several quite valid counterarguments, but no amount of proof will change your perspective.I did prove... oh never mind.
If burden of proof of what is or isn't a spell casting class requires something that can't be provided then there are no such thing as a spell casting class in this game.
All those classes that supposedly cast "magic" are really just really really good at bluffing.
If I'm wrong in this prove it. The burdens on you now. Just remember,
when you find that proof, you'll have more than likely validated my point with this build and have lost the bigger argument.Until then, I still believe that my class is legal, with in the limits of the books it was written in and there fore will be submitting it to Paizo so that they can either A.) Approve it for society play; or B.) Create an errata to fix it.
Well I think that's quite easy. You don't need to roll a bluff check to cast a spell. It's a virtue of your base class abilities. As for the proof of what is a spell casting class, it's been provided. You've been proven wrong a dozen times over. But I suppose a numbered spells per day list is the easiest way. Prestige classes don't have that. They just have a section that tells what classes they add to.
With that in mind, your subtle attempt to create enough traffic as to attract developer comment is clever but unlikely.
A spellcasting class is one that has its own caster advancement, it's own spell progression, spells known or castable, and own caster list.
A class that references another class to advance its spellcasting is not a spellcasting class...it is a class that advances another spellcasting class.
There IS a difference.
Furthermore, advancing the casting of an arcane spellcasting class certainly isn't going to advance any divine spellcasting that may happen to be there.
You can't look at MT and call it a spellcasting class. It's a class that advances the spellcasting of spellcasting classes. Thus, it's never a source or core that can be referred to for advancement.
Any time you use a PrC that advances spellcasting, you must refer to a class with its own intrinsic spell progression and guidelines. PrC's that do not have their own progressions are not valid targets for this ability.
=================
Having said all that, you're obviously using 3.5 material. There were some hideously complex ways to get BAB 16 and 9th level spells in both arcane and divine classes, but I'm pretty sure that they used 10 level PrC's with accelerated casting progression to do so.
==Aelryinth
Plus the terminology is different. MT and EK use the class ability "Spells Per Day" while the casting base classes list the ability to cast spells under the feature "Spells".
So either MT effect the class ability "Spells Per Day" and thus cannot modify base classes OR they only affect aspects of the "Spells" class ability and thus do not affect each other because the prestige classes don't have a "Spells" class ability.
Or we all just accept that Archmic is not interested in discussion on this point and is using the silence of the game's developers as proof that they accept his interpretation. Because they obviously have seen this post and they obviously would comment if it was wrong, so without a comment they obviously support his argument. Obviously.
Having said all that, you're obviously using 3.5 material. There were some hideously complex ways to get BAB 16 and 9th level spells in both arcane and divine classes, but I'm pretty sure that they used 10 level PrC's with accelerated casting progression to do so.
==Aelryinth
"Ur Priest" Bro.
One of my buddies loved making multi 9th lvl spell progression characters. His worse offender would get 9th level spells in 3 classes, plus being like a 10 level binder.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As much as people believe that it becomes the community's responsibility to disprove everyone's class combinations, it is actual the player's responsibility to sway the community, who can then sway the Devs. We have all read what Archmic has had to say about his combo, and not even one person is convinced. So, as far as I can tell, the case is closed. Not only would I deem the player illegal at my table, I would send Mike Brock his player number and what was going on so he couldn't try and waste any other GM's time with this. (And yes, unfortunately, I have too many players take their illegal characters and just run off to the next table until they can find someone who doesn't know any better.)
And even if the combo was legal [WHICH IT IS NOT], do you really think the Devs would release something in one class that could make three individual classes near obsolete. I think this whole situation falls under the 'Don't be a jerk' rule, and we should all just quit giving him any time of day.
I made this mistake when Mystic Theurge first came out and took levels in MT and then another prestige class. After a close examination of the rules (at least for 3.5, I haven't checked as thoroughly for Pathfinder) it doesn't work.
You're not trying to duplicate spellcasting levels, you're trying to duplicate a class feature which duplicates spellcasting levels and that's outside the realm of what the PrCs grant.
However you're of course free to run the rules differently if that's what you want for your games.
Having said all that, you're obviously using 3.5 material. There were some hideously complex ways to get BAB 16 and 9th level spells in both arcane and divine classes, but I'm pretty sure that they used 10 level PrC's with accelerated casting progression to do so.
==Aelryinth
"Ur Priest" Bro.
One of my buddies loved making multi 9th lvl spell progression characters. His worse offender would get 9th level spells in 3 classes, plus being like a 10 level binder.
Ah, yes, and that 'negative Druid' class, and the Bard Sublime Chord class that got 9th level spells. Those were the big ones. PrC's that referenced PrC's that referenced combinations of PrC's.
==Aelryinth
I did prove... oh never mind.
Oh, good god. Ok, last try: you say you'd proved that mt is a spellcasting class km it's own. So you're able to make a list of his spells, let's say a list of spells you'd prepare for the day of adventure. Or if you want you surely list the sources from which you get the spells. Or something similar. I invite you to list me the spells of this mt:
Tiefling qinggong monk 4/ mt10. Qinggong substitute slow fall for augury spell like. That's a totally legal build. Now, would you be so gentle to point me to the list of spells this mt could draw on? You said it has it's own list. Show me the list on this build.
Until then, I still believe that my class is legal, with in the limits of the books it was written in and there fore will be submitting it to Paizo so that they can either A.) Approve it for society play; or B.) Create an errata to fix it.
Funny. You want paizo to solve a problem that you're the only one that see (despite your babbling about how you know how to read the rules), while to prove your argument you going to draw on other rpgs, because the spaghetti monster exist.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The tone of this thread is getting somewhat personal. Please keep it civil.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Me Likey this thread
Can you play it? Sure. It doesn't do what you want it to do, because EK doesn't advance MT, but you can play it.
I did prove... oh never mind.
Oh, good god. Ok, last try: you say you'd proved that mt is a spellcasting class km it's own. So you're able to make a list of his spells, let's say a list of spells you'd prepare for the day of adventure. Or if you want you surely list the sources from which you get the spells. Or something similar. I invite you to list me the spells of this mt:
Tiefling qinggong monk 4/ mt10. Qinggong substitute slow fall for augury spell like. That's a totally legal build. Now, would you be so gentle to point me to the list of spells this mt could draw on? You said it has it's own list. Show me the list on this build.
Until then, I still believe that my class is legal, with in the limits of the books it was written in and there fore will be submitting it to Paizo so that they can either A.) Approve it for society play; or B.) Create an errata to fix it.Funny. You want paizo to solve a problem that you're the only one that see (despite your babbling about how you know how to read the rules), while to prove your argument you going to draw on other rpgs, because the spaghetti monster exist.
Like duh, that's easy. The spell list is a copy of a Malconvoker. Burden of proof is on you now. I love how logic and arguments work. Make outrageous claims and deny burden of proof. LALALA I can't hear you. Wait..is that how it's meant to go?
Basically there is not a "mystic theurge level" to increase. If you are a 4th lvl Wiz/4th lvl Clr/4th MT, then you cast spells as a 8th lvl Wizard and a 8th lvl Cleric. You do not cast spells as a 4th lvl Mystic Theurge. So when choosing a caster level to advance as a Eldritch Knight, your only choice is wizard. Mystic Theurge does not have its own "caster level."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm actually on the fence with this one guys
When a new mystic theurge level is gained, the character gains new spells per day as if he had also gained a level in any one arcane spellcasting class he belonged to before he added the prestige class and any one divine spellcasting class he belonged to previously. He does not, however, gain other benefits a character of that class would have gained. This essentially means that he adds the level of mystic theurge to the level of whatever other arcane spellcasting class and divine spellcasting class the character has, then determines spells per day, spells known, and caster level accordingly.
arcane trickster[/url] When a new arcane trickster level is gained, the character gains new spells per day as if she had also gained a level in a spellcasting class she belonged to before adding the prestige class. She does not, however, gain other benefits a character of that class would have gained, except for additional spells per day, spells known (if she is a spontaneous spellcaster), and an increased effective level of spellcasting. If a character had more than one spellcasting class before becoming an arcane trickster, she must decide to which class she adds the new level for purposes of determining spells per day.
The only issue is, what are our definitions for a spellcasting class?
If it's a class that grants spells or spell access, then i'd say OP is right, if it's a class that grants a spell list, then he's wrong.
Or is it a non-prestige class that grants a spell list, so classes such as red mantis do not apply
If we can not find a suitable definition of this within the rules, then we must leave this to a dm.
my argument is that the class grants spells, with a list being depended on other classes, and therefore is technically viable for the rule... yet should be disallowed based on power issues.
Only because it say's "Gains new spells per day as if she had also gained a level in a spellcasting class she belonged to before adding the prestige class."
and mystic theurge says "When a new mystic theurge level is gained, the character gains new spells per day as if he had also gained a level in any one arcane spellcasting class he belonged to before he added the prestige class and any one divine spellcasting class he belonged to previously."
Which would lead me to believe that the former can be lended to the ladder. by sheer virtue of the wording that states the the theurge gains new spells as if, not the theurge adds his level to a class to determine. the wording leans towards yes.
again I would never allow this and i think it's kind of funky, but i can see where his argument comes from.
I want no part in any of the mudslinging that's going on in here though, please no hostilities towards me I simply am stating my interpretations. I want a clear meaning of the term "Spellcasting class", and would like to request everyone stays civil Including the Original Poster while we discuss this, requesting an FAQ might be desired if we reach a third page.
Thank you
*EDIT*
actually two posts above me wasn't on the page when I started typing. I think I agree with him under the circumstance that in place of "Devoid of all other classes" should be expanded to " devoid of all other Spell granting classes"
Which would become inclusive to prc's that require class features like sneak attack to be taken, such as the red mantis
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wouldn't it be safe to say that spellcaster classes all include Class Feature (Spells)?
Wouldn't it be safe to say that spellcaster classes all include Class Feature (Spells)?
THIS!
Basically there is not a "mystic theurge level" to increase. If you are a 4th lvl Wiz/4th lvl Clr/4th MT, then you cast spells as a 8th lvl Wizard and a 8th lvl Cleric. You do not cast spells as a 4th lvl Mystic Theurge. So when choosing a caster level to advance as a Eldritch Knight, your only choice is wizard. Mystic Theurge does not have its own "caster level."
This right here.
@Timebomb. I can see where you are coming from but, being brief:
The Paladin can atone and the Druid can wait 24 hours after touching metal. They remain spellcasters albeit with short term loss of said ability (but not class feature).
OTOH, Quiggong Monks and Rouges with the Major/Minor Magic talent are not spellcasting classes. They are options (archetype and talents) that grant SLA's (Spell-Like Abilities) which are not spells; i.e. no metamagic, rods, spell list/slots, etc.
No. A spell-like ability is not a spell, having a spell-like ability is not part of a class's spell list, and therefore doesn't give the creature the ability to activate spell completion or spell trigger items.
Although, with the newest FAQ ruling on SLA's, this does make for a nasty situation in which one can qualify for a PRC but then not have any caster level or spell slots to increase.
|
Wouldn't it be safe to say that spellcaster classes all include Class Feature (Spells)?This doesn't include the odd corner cases like Quiggong Monk or Rouges with the Major/Minor Magic talent though. And fallen paladins/druids would be in a strange grey area where they cant actually cast spells but are still spell casting classes.
It is certainly a simple solution that works in almost all cases. It would be good enough for 95% of tables, but perfect it is not.
"A 'Spellcasting Class' is any class which allows the character, devoid of all other spell granting classes, to cast spells" is dangerously close to a self-referencing definition and instantly asks the definition of spell granting class. I personally don't mind classifying the Red Mantis Assassin as a "Spellcasting Class". I would be ok with an Eldritch Knight advancing Red Mantis Assassin casting, even if it would create a couple awkward situations.
Actually, this does work, as the Quiggong Monk and Rogue's Minor/Major talents are called out as Spell Like Abilities, which isn't actual casting. So Jarl's definition works perfectly, and disallows this combination quite cleanly.
As for fallen Druids/Paladins/Clerics, they're still casting classes even if they can't cast. That's an intrinsic part of their class, even if they can't cast at the time.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There will ALWAYS be people like the OP. Some are trolls and some really don't know the rules nearly as well as they think they do. Instead of letting them make you angry ignore them. I am used to people like this so it does not bother me that much. No matter whether he is serious or not, it is not worth any grief of headaches it may cause.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There will ALWAYS be people like the OP. Some are trolls and some really don't know the rules nearly as well as they think they do. Instead of letting them make you angry ignore them. I am used to people like this so it does not bother me that much. No matter whether he is serious or not, it is not worth any grief of headaches it may cause.
There will ALWAYS be people like the OP. Some are trolls and some really don't know the rules nearly as well as they think they do. Instead of letting them make you angry ignore them. I am used to people like this so it does not bother me that much. No matter whether he is serious or not, it is not worth any grief of headaches it may cause.
Do these boards even have an ignore function?
There will ALWAYS be people like the OP. Some are trolls and some really don't know the rules nearly as well as they think they do. Instead of letting them make you angry ignore them. I am used to people like this so it does not bother me that much. No matter whether he is serious or not, it is not worth any grief of headaches it may cause.Do these boards even have an ignore function?
Nope, but there is a script you can find to make it happen. :) Search for the greasemonkey script on these boards.
Nope...we're all supposed to love and accept on another's crap.
|
|
So we are using an OR function to qualify... (as long as I can qualify for arcane spellcasting OR divine spellcasting).
Then using an AND function for the benefits... (Since I qualify, both arcane AND divine spellcasting are improved).
While ignoring thematic concerns, explicit arcane-only wording and the definition of a spellcasting class.
...
It's like saying I can make a true neutral cleric/life oracle. I choose to channel negative energy as a cleric, but my life oracle gets to channel positive energy like a cleric.
Now I am going to take selective channeling, then say that while I channel, I can use both negative and positive channeling at the same time (because thematic concerns and explicit wording be damned), and apply the selective channeling to heal all my friends with positive energy and hurt all my enemies with negative energy. (Because since I qualify, I can apply them to both!)
...
That would be one awesome cleric/life oracle though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So we are using an OR function to qualify... (as long as I can qualify for arcane spellcasting OR divine spellcasting).
Then using an AND function for the benefits... (Since I qualify, both arcane AND divine spellcasting are improved).
While ignoring thematic concerns, explicit arcane-only wording and the definition of a spellcasting class.
...
It's like saying I can make a true neutral cleric/life oracle. I choose to channel negative energy as a cleric, but my life oracle gets to channel positive energy like a cleric.
Now I am going to take selective channeling, then say that while I channel, I can use both negative and positive channeling at the same time (because thematic concerns and explicit wording be damned), and apply the selective channeling to heal all my friends with positive energy and hurt all my enemies with negative energy. (Because since I qualify, I can apply them to both!)
...
That would be one awesome cleric/life oracle though.
What's interesting to point out is just like the build in the OP, this really wouldn't be broken/unbalanced, but it would be an exploit. Really, the character he proposed winds up about as powerful as a bard with an expanded spell list and can take a few fighter only feats, but gives up all the useful bard stuff and skills.
Meh. I would let him play it exactly as he envisions it. It's a terrible build. If he wants me to bend the rules to allow his horrifically underpowered character it's no skin off my nose.