PDA

View Full Version : (3.5) First Time Warlock?



Furnok
2010-04-15, 09:25 AM
This is the first time I have/the DM has had a warlock in his campaign world. So the question I have is can the EB crit and if so do you roll double damage on all of the EB damage dice (our house rules are you dont have to confirm crits)? The reason I ask is this seems a little too powerful and the DM is thinking that as well. So what arguments can you give for allowing the damage to multiply?

Thanks

SilverStar
2010-04-15, 09:27 AM
The rules state that you can crit with any weapon-like spell such as a ray spell, threatening such on a natural 20 and dealing double damage if confirmed.

EB in its base form is a ranged touch attack, requiring an attack roll, so I'd assume the same applies. I believe the Complete Arcane will confirm this.

As for my arguments on why it should apply, well, why shouldn't it? It's a critical hit. If a warrior can smack down a guy for 4x damage with a scythe, why can't a warlock do it for a measly x2?

Swok
2010-04-15, 09:27 AM
Presumably it can, as spells with an attack roll can crit.

The Shadowmind
2010-04-15, 09:33 AM
A sorcerer with a orb of acid can deal more damage that the warlock can even if the EB crits. So a critical EB isn't really that much damage 12d6x2 at level 20, orbcerer 15d6 at level 15, and metamagic could still apply.

awa
2010-04-15, 10:04 AM
The damage might seem like a lot but a warrior with a two handed weapon and power attack will out pace you on a crit quite quickly not the least becuase it's easier for him to get crits

Edit and of course full casters can quickly make damage itself obsolete so theirs that to.

KillianHawkeye
2010-04-15, 10:22 AM
Let me put it to you this way: A 10th level Warlock does 5d6 damage with his eldritch blast, right? That's an average of 17.5 damage, or 35 on a crit. A 10th level Barbarian with an 18 Strength who wields a greataxe and Power Attacks for only 5 points deals 1d12+16, which averages 22.5 damage (or 67.5 on a crit). And that's not even including bonuses from rage or having a magic weapon.

Or to compare it to a Rogue's sneak attack, which doesn't get multiplied by a critical hit: realize that a flanking Rogue can get sneak attack on all his attacks (including attacks of opportunity), and may be wielding more than one weapon, while a Warlock gets only one eldritch blast (unless using eldritch glaive).

The Shadowmind
2010-04-15, 10:40 AM
Warmage, with lesser orb of X, level 1 spell, 6/day before Charisma bonus spells, and items.
Assuming INT of 14, with Does 5d8+2 damage without metamagic, and Spell resistance doesn't apply. And it possibly can critical as well. So 24.5 damage, and 49 damage on a critical. This is with a 1st level spell, the 4th level orb of X deals, 10d6+2, 35 average, 70 on a critica, the the target has to save of be sickened/dazed/. At this level,without the status effects, empowering the lesser orb would be a better use of his time though. 36.75 average, before critical, for a third level slot.

At 13th level, it would be Warlock 9, Binder 1, Hellfire Warlock 3, with Eldritch Glaive, then the warlock could do some real damage with the right build.

SilverStar
2010-04-15, 10:41 AM
Oh, and Lesser Globe of Invulnerability smashes a warlock down FLAT if she doesn't do stuff with her EB.

true_shinken
2010-04-15, 02:50 PM
Oh, and Lesser Globe of Invulnerability smashes a warlock down FLAT if she doesn't do stuff with her EB.
A Warlock focused on eldritch blast should have the higher level essences/shapes always available.

DaedalusMkV
2010-04-15, 05:55 PM
A Warlock focused on eldritch blast should have the higher level essences/shapes always available.
Even if they don't, effective spell level for your Eldritch Blast is equal to your Warlock level/2 rounded down (max 9). In other words, LGoI doesn't hurt a Warlock any harder than it hurts a Sorceror, and in some ways less since a level 8 Sorc only has ~5 4th level spell slots, max, while the 'lock can spam his EB (or other offensive invocations, since most Lessers are ESL 4) until the enemy stops moving. There is that one level where Wizard shuts them both down, though...

Sinon
2010-04-15, 07:20 PM
Even if they don't, effective spell level for your Eldritch Blast is equal to your Warlock level/2 rounded down (max 9)...

From the errata:


An eldritch blast is the equivalent
of a 1st-level spell. If you apply a blast shape or eldritch
essence invocation to your eldritch blast (see page 130),
your eldritch blast uses the level equivalent of the shape
or essence.

Prime32
2010-04-15, 08:32 PM
Remember, the difference between a normal hit and a crit is the same as the difference between a crit and a miss.

ShneekeyTheLost
2010-04-16, 12:01 AM
I should also like to point out that there's lots of fun things a Warlock can do besides blast, although they certainly can spam-blast quite easily.

Look up some of the extra Eldritch Essence invocations. Specifically: Hindering Blast (slows targets), Vitriolic Blast (ignores SR), and Utterdark Blast (negative levels to go with that damage). There's also Eldritch Essences that apply Blindness, Confusion, and Nauseated conditions.

Now combine that with Chain Blast. Now multiple opponents are locked down. An unlimited number of times per day.

Also, Warlocks have a lot of defenses as well. At-Will DimDoor is pretty darn spiffy, as is Greater Invisibility, Casting Stat to saves, Dispel that does damage to target (handy to spam and drop opponent buffs)

The thing about a Warlock is that he can apply these an unlimited number of times per day. Not too shabby when you are running a million-mob-marathon type game with a real time crunch to keep wizards from MMM'ing.

Endarire
2010-04-16, 12:13 AM
A Warlock is, at heart, an archer with some other minor tricks. 1d6 as a ranged touch attack at level 1 may be significant, but this spiffiness lessens as levels rise.

A level 1 melee character can do +6 per damage per hit from STR alone. A Warlock does d6. Who gets the better deal?

ShneekeyTheLost
2010-04-16, 12:17 AM
A Warlock is, at heart, an archer with some other minor tricks. 1d6 as a ranged touch attack at level 1 may be significant, but this spiffiness lessens as levels rise.

A level 1 melee character can do +6 per damage per hit from STR alone. A Warlock does d6. Who gets the better deal?

The typical answer is 'the one who hits'... however, the strength of the Warlock class isn't damage output, it is damage + status effect, an unlimited amount.

They can be a very effective lockdown class, if properly built.

Irreverent Fool
2010-04-16, 12:30 AM
So what arguments can you give for allowing the damage to multiply?


Attack Roll
An attack roll represents your attempt to strike your opponent on your turn in a round. When you make an attack roll, you roll a d20 and add your attack bonus. (Other modifiers may also apply to this roll.) If your result equals or beats the target’s Armor Class, you hit and deal damage.

Automatic Misses and Hits
A natural 1 (the d20 comes up 1) on an attack roll is always a miss. A natural 20 (the d20 comes up 20) is always a hit. A natural 20 is also a threat—a possible critical hit.

Source: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsincombat.htm

Critical Hits
When you make an attack roll and get a natural 20 (the d20 shows 20), you hit regardless of your target’s Armor Class, and you have scored a threat. The hit might be a critical hit (or "crit"). To find out if it’s a critical hit, you immediately make a critical roll—another attack roll with all the same modifiers as the attack roll you just made. If the critical roll also results in a hit against the target’s AC, your original hit is a critical hit. (The critical roll just needs to hit to give you a crit. It doesn’t need to come up 20 again.) If the critical roll is a miss, then your hit is just a regular hit.

A critical hit means that you roll your damage more than once, with all your usual bonuses, and add the rolls together. Unless otherwise specified, the threat range for a critical hit on an attack roll is 20, and the multiplier is ×2.

Source: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsincombat.htm

If it's an attack roll, it can crit. If it deals damage, it gets multiplied on a confirmed critical. No arguments needed.
[/thread]

obnoxious
sig

Person_Man
2010-04-16, 08:28 AM
Irreverent Fool et al are correct. If you roll an attack, it can crit.

Also, while there are a few tricks he can pull off (Hide in Plain Site at level 1, Fear combos, endless Hellfire with Strongheart Vest) Warlocks are generally considered weaker then full casters, Dragonfire Adepts, ToB builds, Incarnum builds, Psionics, etc.

Optimystik
2010-04-16, 08:49 AM
There's a common belief that a Warlock is weaker than a Dragonfire Adept, and in a naked comparison this belief is not without merit. But the Warlocks true strengths are Deceive Item and Imbue Item, which puts them just behind Artificers and Incarnum in terms of shoring up their defenses with goodies.

Deceive Item lets them reliably make UMD checks in combat starting as early as level 4. Once Imbue Item comes into play at 12, they can start crafting items for any spell from any class, effectively becoming a walking Magic Mart. Both are well within the bounds of mid-level games.

Raendyn
2010-04-16, 09:09 AM
EB can crit, it has attack roll.

take that invocation that allows you to fly for 24 hours, the other 1 that makes you small. take halfling, you are a tiny BEE that flies & pew pew everything that moves with imba AC( & touch ac) & imba attack roll.

Optimystik
2010-04-16, 09:15 AM
Or just start small - Hengeyokai, Pixie, Petal etc.

Tinydwarfman
2010-04-16, 09:17 AM
Indeed, it always ticked me off that one of the warlocks' best abilities was deceive item and imbue item, which just didn't seem to fit with the flavor.

kamikasei
2010-04-16, 09:18 AM
"Imba" AC and attack? Aren't they just +2 each?

Jeff240sx
2010-04-16, 09:42 AM
Improved Critical + Eldritch Glaive + Belt of Battle & Anklets of Translocation?

Warlock4/Binder1/Ur-Priest2/E Disciple3/Hellfire Warlock3 = Level 13.
4th Level Cleric Spells
Warlock 10

Divine Power + 11d6 damage. 19-20 x2 crit. Reach, interative attacks.

+13/+8/+3, touch attacks, at 11d6 each, plus 1.5x STR (which just got a +6 buff), and a 10% crit chance.

Figuring a 18STR, and a +5 power attack, you'd have a touch attack of 11d6 + 11 per hit.

Get a house-ruled Practiced Spellcaster for Eldritch Blasts and get your 3 EB levels back, for another 1d6 and a further 1d6 next level.
The house-ruled feat shouldn't be too hard, as Arcane, Divine and Psionics get it.

Warlocks can do damage, they need a ton of feats and a different build than Warlock20.

Optimystik
2010-04-16, 09:46 AM
Indeed, it always ticked me off that one of the warlocks' best abilities was deceive item and imbue item, which just didn't seem to fit with the flavor.

Why not? I thought a tricky ancestor was an important bit of the default fluff.

And if you're skilled at manipulating magical energy, it stands to reason you'd be better at UMD than a purely non-magical class (like Rogue) that just fakes it.

Tinydwarfman
2010-04-16, 10:03 AM
Why not? I thought a tricky ancestor was an important bit of the default fluff.

And if you're skilled at manipulating magical energy, it stands to reason you'd be better at UMD than a purely non-magical class (like Rogue) that just fakes it.

Maybe it's just our different perceptions of UMD and magic items in general, but they seem very counter intuitive to the raw, instinctive powers of the warlock; while creating magic items always seem like a very scientific wizard thing.

And a warlock's ancestors aren't always tricky, the standard is demons or devils, but it can be any "dark and chaotic power".

The Shadowmind
2010-04-16, 10:48 AM
Maybe it's just our different perceptions of UMD and magic items in general, but they seem very counter intuitive to the raw, instinctive powers of the warlock; while creating magic items always seem like a very scientific wizard thing.

Fluff wise UMD is activated not by knowledge, but raw magic energy since it is from CHA instead of INT, which is something Warlock's have an infinite supply of. So the item creation aspect could be forcing the warlock's magic strait into the item the shaping it into the desired effect.

Optimystik
2010-04-16, 11:31 AM
You can create art through instinct every bit as much as through formal training. While this runs into the classic magic/sociology debate ("Is it Art, or Science?" The correct answer is both), it does account for warlock abilities quite well.

These class features definitely grant an edge to the Warlock over the DFA in my opinion - especially when magic items are harder to come by.

ShneekeyTheLost
2010-04-16, 03:07 PM
Improved Critical + Eldritch Glaive + Belt of Battle & Anklets of Translocation?

Warlock4/Binder1/Ur-Priest2/E Disciple3/Hellfire Warlock3 = Level 13.
4th Level Cleric Spells
Warlock 10

Divine Power + 11d6 damage. 19-20 x2 crit. Reach, interative attacks.

+13/+8/+3, touch attacks, at 11d6 each, plus 1.5x STR (which just got a +6 buff), and a 10% crit chance.

Figuring a 18STR, and a +5 power attack, you'd have a touch attack of 11d6 + 11 per hit.

Get a house-ruled Practiced Spellcaster for Eldritch Blasts and get your 3 EB levels back, for another 1d6 and a further 1d6 next level.
The house-ruled feat shouldn't be too hard, as Arcane, Divine and Psionics get it.

Warlocks can do damage, they need a ton of feats and a different build than Warlock20.

Actually, it's a lot easier. You see, Divine Power is a 4th level spell, thus can be stored in a Wand, which Warlocks can never fail their UMD check on...

Or, if you want to do some real cheese, go Warlock4/cleric3/E.Disciple 4 and not only get Divine Power, but be able to DMM Persist it all day long. Then in a couple of levels, DMM Persist Righteous Might, and go to town.

Jeff240sx
2010-04-16, 03:33 PM
Actually, it's a lot easier. You see, Divine Power is a 4th level spell, thus can be stored in a Wand, which Warlocks can never fail their UMD check on...

Or, if you want to do some real cheese, go Warlock4/cleric3/E.Disciple 4 and not only get Divine Power, but be able to DMM Persist it all day long. Then in a couple of levels, DMM Persist Righteous Might, and go to town.

DMM cheese is predicated on A) getting Nightsticks, and B) being immune to the book-to-the-head (su.) ability of the DM.

I get where you're going. I <3 Ur-Locks though. Full (with Practiced Invoke homebrew feat) Warlock EB progression, plus 6d6 Hellfire damage that doesn't diminish on the Eldritch Chain shape, and 9th level Divine. /drool.

Optimystik
2010-04-16, 03:37 PM
DMM cheese is predicated on A) getting Nightsticks, and B) being immune to the book-to-the-head (su.) ability of the DM.

You don't need Nightsticks; they just make things easier. You can get by just with repeatedly taking Extra Turning, and the Undeath domain, for instance - especially if you're only persisting Divine Power.


I get where you're going. I <3 Ur-Locks though. Full (with Practiced Invoke homebrew feat) Warlock EB progression, plus 6d6 Hellfire damage that doesn't diminish on the Eldritch Chain shape, and 9th level Divine. /drool.

You don't need Ur-Priest to get Dark Invocations and 9th-level divines. A non-evil Eldritch Disciple can use Divine Magician to qualify for Mystic Theurge, and get them that way.

Divide by Zero
2010-04-16, 03:40 PM
You don't need Ur-Priest to get Dark Invocations and 9th-level divines. A non-evil Eldritch Disciple can use Divine Magician to qualify for Mystic Theurge, and get them that way.

Eldritch Theurge?

Optimystik
2010-04-16, 03:54 PM
Eldritch Theurge?

No, Eldritch Disciple. Eldritch Theurge is double-arcane, and won't benefit from Mystic Theurge. ED is Arcane-Divine, just like MT is.

Divide by Zero
2010-04-16, 04:17 PM
No, Eldritch Disciple. Eldritch Theurge is double-arcane, and won't benefit from Mystic Theurge. ED is Arcane-Divine, just like MT is.

Eldritch Theurge is warlock/arcane. How are you advancing warlock with Mystic Theurge?

Optimystik
2010-04-16, 04:31 PM
Eldritch Theurge is warlock/arcane. How are you advancing warlock with Mystic Theurge?

Divine Magician (Complete Mage) is a Cleric ACF, that trades one of your domains for a small selection of arcane spells. This gives you "ability to cast x-level arcane spells" that you need to qualify for Mystic Theurge. Once you're in the class, you can use it to advance Warlock and Cleric, just like Eldritch Disciple does.

Cloistered Cleric is your best bet here - you get a free domain to trade in for Divine Magician, thus keeping two for general use (I advise you keep the Knowledge domain for all knowledge skills as class skills.) But it's not required, you can get by just fine with one domain.

The build is as follows: (credit to Logicninja)


Cloistered Cleric 4 (Divine Magician)/Warlock 1/Eldritch Disciple 10/Mystic Theurge 5.

You end with:

Invocations as Warlock 16 (1 Dark)
Spells as Cleric 18 (-1 CL from Warlock, -1 from ED 1): 9th level spells.
9 free arcane spells, one per spell level, from the Abjuration, Necromancy or Divination schools.

Divine Magician is definitely one of the nicer points of the build, letting you add goodies like Shivering Touch, Enervation, Protection from Arrows and Avasculate to your spell list.

This is a way for good Eldritch Disciples to get Dark Invocations and 9ths, since they can't become Ur-Priests.

Jeff240sx
2010-04-16, 05:17 PM
Divine Magician (Complete Mage) is a Cleric ACF, that trades one of your domains for a small selection of arcane spells. This gives you "ability to cast x-level arcane spells" that you need to qualify for Mystic Theurge. Once you're in the class, you can use it to advance Warlock and Cleric, just like Eldritch Disciple does.

Cloistered Cleric is your best bet here - you get a free domain to trade in for Divine Magician, thus keeping two for general use (I advise you keep the Knowledge domain for all knowledge skills as class skills.) But it's not required, you can get by just fine with one domain.

The build is as follows: (credit to Logicninja)


Cloistered Cleric 4 (Divine Magician)/Warlock 1/Eldritch Disciple 10/Mystic Theurge 5.

You end with:

Invocations as Warlock 16 (1 Dark)
Spells as Cleric 18 (-1 CL from Warlock, -1 from ED 1): 9th level spells.
9 free arcane spells, one per spell level, from the Abjuration, Necromancy or Divination schools.

Divine Magician is definitely one of the nicer points of the build, letting you add goodies like Shivering Touch, Enervation, Protection from Arrows and Avasculate to your spell list.

This is a way for good Eldritch Disciples to get Dark Invocations and 9ths, since they can't become Ur-Priests.

Unfortunately, this doesn't work. The prereq for Eldritch Theurge is "the ability to cast 2nd level arcane spells (emphasis mine).

Divine Magician ACF gives you "a single wizard spell of that level" each time you gain access to another level of cleric spells.

As such, you only gain 1 level 2 arcane spell, which is selected and has no method of change or relearning.

And.. it loses 6d6 damage vs. Hellfire builds.

Divide by Zero
2010-04-16, 05:25 PM
Unfortunately, this doesn't work. The prereq for Eldritch Theurge is "the ability to cast 2nd level arcane spells (emphasis mine).

Divine Magician ACF gives you "a single wizard spell of that level" each time you gain access to another level of cleric spells.

As such, you only gain 1 level 2 arcane spell, which is selected and has no method of change or relearning.

That's an argument of semantics. I might rule it either way, depending on the overall power of the build.


And.. it loses 6d6 damage vs. Hellfire builds.

6d6 damage or 9th level spells? I know which one I'd pick. Might be more of a toss-up in a campaign that wasn't going to 20th, though.

Optimystik
2010-04-16, 05:41 PM
Uh, I'm not talking about Eldritch Theurge. I'm talking about Eldritch Disciple.

And the point was never Hellfire blasting, but to allow non-evil Disciples to get 9ths and Darks.

Divide by Zero
2010-04-16, 05:43 PM
Uh, I'm not talking about Eldritch Theurge. I'm talking about Eldritch Disciple.

To be fair, Mystic Theurge has the same requirement. It's still semantics, though.

Optimystik
2010-04-16, 06:41 PM
To be fair, Mystic Theurge has the same requirement. It's still semantics, though.

If he disallows that, he's also disallowing Precocious Apprentice, Improved Krau Illumians, Sanctum Spell and just about every other early entry method with similar wording (read: all of them.)

In which case, he may as well just ban MT and cut out the middle man.

And mine isn't even meant for early entry - just a way to continue ED progression past 10.

Jeff240sx
2010-04-16, 06:49 PM
To be fair, Mystic Theurge has the same requirement. It's still semantics, though.

Eldritch / Mystic Theurge - same "Ability to cast 2nd level arcane spells" requirement.

RAW, it's fairly explicit in how it's typed.

The ACF is typed out with intent to prevent it from being used to qualify for these things.
The first step in it's Intent is "This class feature can be chosen only once." Without that, it would be feasible to give up both domains to get level x arcane spells.
Second part of it's Intent is stating that you add a single spell of the same level.
This prevents you from taking Cloistered and Standard Cleric to get the ACF in each class, and prevents you from adding another spell of any level you can cast, like Sorcerers and Wizards. This also prevents taking multiple spells of the same level to qualify for PrCs.

The other Intent in "spells" is that classes which require a single spell, like Swiftblade, True Necromancer, Shadowbane Stalker and others, explicity state which spell is required for entry.

I know Rule 0 is different for everyone, but Divine Magician would never qualify for Theurge in my house.

sofawall
2010-04-16, 06:53 PM
If he disallows that, he's also disallowing Precocious Apprentice,

Yes.


Improved Krau Illumians, Sanctum Spell and just about every other early entry method with similar wording (read: all of them.)

No. The other methods make your first level spells count as second level. Unless you only have one first level spell, every method but Precocious Apprentice and Divine Magician work.

On a side note, Alternate Spell Source.

BEEP.

Jeff240sx
2010-04-16, 06:53 PM
If he disallows that, he's also disallowing Precocious Apprentice, Improved Krau Illumians, Sanctum Spell and just about every other early entry method with similar wording (read: all of them.)

In which case, he may as well just ban MT and cut out the middle man.

And mine isn't even meant for early entry - just a way to continue ED progression past 10.

I humbly disagree. Precocious Apprentice and another are all RAW early entry cheese for classes requiring a single spell to enter. Classes requiring spell*s* and entering with your one spell is tantamount to classes require "xxxx class feature" and getting in with an item granting it.

*ninjad!!*

sofawall
2010-04-16, 06:54 PM
Classes requiring spell*s* and entering with your one spell is tantamount to classes require "xxxx class feature" and getting in with an item granting it.

I lack an understanding of your post. The second part is perfectly legal, yet you obviously think the first is not. You then proceed to say they are tantamount to each other.

BEEP.

Jeff240sx
2010-04-16, 06:58 PM
I lack an understanding of your post. The second part is perfectly legal, yet you obviously think the first is not. You then proceed to say they are tantamount to each other.

BEEP.

We were on the same page for a minute. Precocious Apprentice and Divine Magician, both granting *one* spell, does not qualify for PrCs requiring spellS.


The class feature quip? Shadowbane Stalker requires "Detect Evil" class feature. Simply casting it as a divine spell is not the same as a class feature, i.e. a class-granted ability.

So an Evasion class feature cannot be overcome by an item - using the same logic.

Were it to just require Evasion, it wouldn't matter how you got evasion, as long as you have it at each level-up. The "class feature" addendum is more than semantics.

sofawall
2010-04-16, 07:01 PM
So an Evasion class feature cannot be overcome by an item - using the same logic.

Well, the logic on that one is that the ring doesn't say it gives you Evasion at all, just let's you avoid damage as if you had it. The whole "need it as a class feature" bit doesn't even come into it.

BEEP.

Jeff240sx
2010-04-16, 07:09 PM
Well, the logic on that one is that the ring doesn't say it gives you Evasion at all, just let's you avoid damage as if you had it. The whole "need it as a class feature" bit doesn't even come into it.

BEEP.

Roflcakes. Ok, technicality.

Here's one.
Highland Stalker, CArcane. Requires "Sneak Attack class feature".
Daggerspell Mage, CAdventurer. Requires "Sneak Attack +1d6".

There are many ways to get +1d6 sneak attack... there's only 1 way to get it as a class feature, and that's to take a class granting it.

Optimystik
2010-04-16, 07:14 PM
I know Rule 0 is different for everyone, but Divine Magician would never qualify for Theurge in my house.

And it would in mine. *shrug*

Jeff240sx
2010-04-16, 07:30 PM
And it would in mine. *shrug*

That's unfortunate. Sofawall also states that you are using an improper entry, when there are perfectly good entries to get spells of a given level.

The unfortunate part isn't that you're simply violating both RAW and RAI, but it's that you are violating them in order to build a character that is 75% dual-progression classes.

Dual progression classes are powerful and give a lot over their 10 levels. And they try to cost a lot to enter (True Necro, Fochlucan Lyrist).

Eldritch Disciple is admittedly easier to enter, but it has 9/10 and 10/10 progression.

Eldritch Theurge really wants you to be 3 Warlock / 3 Wizard in order to enter it, because it gives 10/10 on both sides.

Your liberal reading allows it to be greater than the actual class designed to blend cleric/warlock, by only costing 1 ACF.

Amphetryon
2010-04-16, 07:43 PM
Your liberal reading allows it to be greater than the actual class designed to blend cleric/warlock, by only costing 1 ACF.I respectfully disagree that it'd be 'greater than' a straight cleric, and 'greater than' a straight warlock on a power scale is not, as I see it, a damnable feature. Straight warlock is the arcane equivalent of a fighter; its primary strength is in its inexhaustible pew-pew. In many groups, a warlock needs a boost over its baseline to be viable at higher levels... like when a PrC starts showing up.

Jeff240sx
2010-04-16, 08:14 PM
I respectfully disagree that it'd be 'greater than' a straight cleric, and 'greater than' a straight warlock on a power scale is not, as I see it, a damnable feature. Straight warlock is the arcane equivalent of a fighter; its primary strength is in its inexhaustible pew-pew. In many groups, a warlock needs a boost over its baseline to be viable at higher levels... like when a PrC starts showing up.

That's not what I mean, and I agree, Cleric is superior.

I meant that the standard Warlock/Cleric theurge PrC is Eldritch Disciple, which is 9/10 Divine and 10/10 Invoking. It loses a divine caster level.

This entry, however dubious, allows a divine class to be advanced by Mystic Theurge, which is 5/5 Arcane and 5/5 Divine...

TheMadLinguist
2010-04-17, 12:29 AM
I humbly disagree. Precocious Apprentice and another are all RAW early entry cheese for classes requiring a single spell to enter. Classes requiring spell*s* and entering with your one spell is tantamount to classes require "xxxx class feature" and getting in with an item granting it.

*ninjad!!*

Yeah, I can cast 2nd level spell*s*.

Just let me pick the 10 hour period I cast them in, OK?


What? You never specified they had to be "different kinds of spells".

Amphetryon
2010-04-17, 06:31 AM
That's not what I mean, and I agree, Cleric is superior.

I meant that the standard Warlock/Cleric theurge PrC is Eldritch Disciple, which is 9/10 Divine and 10/10 Invoking. It loses a divine caster level.

This entry, however dubious, allows a divine class to be advanced by Mystic Theurge, which is 5/5 Arcane and 5/5 Divine...

More powerful than a standard theurge PrC isn't a ringing endorsement in most campaigns. Action economy and delayed access to higher level spells combine to make theurges into traps of varying degrees without early entry shenanigans.

Optimystik
2010-04-17, 07:14 AM
It's not "unfortunate" at all. Anyone who wants to get 9ths and Dark Invocations without Divine Magician can simply do so - quite RAW legally, since you're so fixated on that - by using Ur-Priest instead of Cleric.

The Divine Magician ED is considerably weaker than the Ur-lock. There's no room in this build for even Hellfire Warlock, but the Ur-lock can take all three levels without losing 9ths.

So in short, you're comparing an ED-MT to the wrong benchmark. Of course it's stronger than a base Warlock - that's the whole point. And you can't even say for certain that it's stronger than a cleric, since you get every spell from 3rd-level to 9th-level on a delayed progression compared to a cleric 20.

If you want to just parrot "theurges should be weak" without actually examining the power level in question critically, by all means do so at your table, but don't tell me it's "unfortunate" when I allow it at mine until you have some actual figures to back it up. Thanks.


Yeah, I can cast 2nd level spell*s*.

Just let me pick the 10 hour period I cast them in, OK?

What? You never specified they had to be "different kinds of spells".

You're my hero.

Penitent
2010-04-17, 07:37 AM
FYI, anyone who can cast a 3rd level spell and a second level spell can still cast second level spells. Because they can use higher level slots to cast lower level spells.

Jeff240sx
2010-04-18, 06:50 PM
FYI, anyone who can cast a 3rd level spell and a second level spell can still cast second level spells. Because they can use higher level slots to cast lower level spells.

That's not really FYI... that's saying that you can cast the same 2nd level spell twice, at different levels.

Grats.

Tinydwarfman
2010-04-18, 06:58 PM
That's not really FYI... that's saying that you can cast the same 2nd level spell twice, at different levels.

Grats.

Yes, but as others have pointed out, it never says the two second level spells you need to be able to cast need to be different spells. You must just be able to cast two second level spells. So you can't do it if you only have one second level spell slot.

Jeff240sx
2010-04-18, 06:59 PM
It's not "unfortunate" at all. Anyone who wants to get 9ths and Dark Invocations without Divine Magician can simply do so - quite RAW legally, since you're so fixated on that - by using Ur-Priest instead of Cleric.

While you were reading my posts and finding out what I'm fixated on, it's strange you seem to have missed where I was advocating ur-priest for 9th Divine and Dark invocations.


The Divine Magician ED is considerably weaker than the Ur-lock. There's no room in this build for even Hellfire Warlock, but the Ur-lock can take all three levels without losing 9ths.

Yep.


So in short, you're comparing an ED-MT to the wrong benchmark. Of course it's stronger than a base Warlock - that's the whole point. And you can't even say for certain that it's stronger than a cleric, since you get every spell from 3rd-level to 9th-level on a delayed progression compared to a cleric 20.

If you want to just parrot "theurges should be weak" without actually examining the power level in question critically, by all means do so at your table, but don't tell me it's "unfortunate" when I allow it at mine until you have some actual figures to back it up. Thanks.

Wow man. You seem to have gone off the deep end. Your build was posted to give an *non-evil* warlock 9th divine and dark invocations. Your build uses a questionable entry that seems divided on it's legality.

The ED/ET is it's own debate, nothing to do with theurges being weak, and not being judged beside Ur-priest cheese.
By skirting the rules to get 10/10 arcane (to your divine class) progression makes ET a better theurge than ED, the intended divine/invoking theurge class, as ED only gets 9/10 to it's divine. In the same strain, using the same shenanigans with MT, you are getting 5/5 arcane (to your divine) plus 5/5 invocations. Something no other intended divine/invoking class brings.

Tinydwarfman
2010-04-18, 07:11 PM
While you were reading my posts and finding out what I'm fixated on, it's strange you seem to have missed where I was advocating ur-priest for 9th Divine and Dark invocations.



Yep.



Wow man. You seem to have gone off the deep end. Your build was posted to give an *non-evil* warlock 9th divine and dark invocations. Your build uses a questionable entry that seems divided on it's legality.

The ED/ET is it's own debate, nothing to do with theurges being weak, and not being judged beside Ur-priest cheese.
By skirting the rules to get 10/10 arcane (to your divine class) progression makes ET a better theurge than ED, the intended divine/invoking theurge class, as ED only gets 9/10 to it's divine. In the same strain, using the same shenanigans with MT, you are getting 5/5 arcane (to your divine) plus 5/5 invocations. Something no other intended divine/invoking class brings.

Actually, he was responding to your post #48, where you said it was unfortunate that it was allowed at his table.

Also: WTF? Gone off the deep end? :smallannoyed: Seriously?

Jeff240sx
2010-04-18, 07:22 PM
Actually, he was responding to your post #48, where you said it was unfortunate that it was allowed at his table.

Also: WTF? Gone off the deep end? :smallannoyed: Seriously?

Was I quoting you? Sorry you took it that way, but I wasn't talking to you.

Tinydwarfman
2010-04-18, 07:26 PM
Was I quoting you? Sorry you took it that way, but I wasn't talking to you.

I'm sorry if I feel obliged to point out that you were rude and were under some misconceptions? :smallwink:

CyMage
2010-04-18, 07:57 PM
Here is something for Jeff240sx.

Lets take Eldritch Knight out of the DMG. The prerequistes for it as taken from the SRD:


Weapon Proficiency: Must be proficient with all martial weapons.

Spells: Able to cast 3rd-level arcane spells.

A 6th level Sorcerer has 3 third level spell slots, but only knows ONE third level spell. It's not until level 7 does he know more then one.

Yet nobody has any issue with Ftr1/Sorc6/EK just because he casts the same 3rd level for a while.

Jeff240sx
2010-04-18, 09:00 PM
Here is something for Jeff240sx.

Lets take Eldritch Knight out of the DMG. The prerequistes for it as taken from the SRD:



A 6th level Sorcerer has 3 third level spell slots, but only knows ONE third level spell. It's not until level 7 does he know more then one.

Yet nobody has any issue with Ftr1/Sorc6/EK just because he casts the same 3rd level for a while.

That's a good point. But the sorcerer can cast 3rd level spells, he simply has one.
The ACF grants 1 spell and 1 spell only, of each level. It's not a class-granted ability to cast from that level, it's an ACF giving access to 1 spell.

Either way, it really doesn't matter in the end. If your DM allows it, go for it.
I'm going not going to be at his table, and he won't be at mine, so this is really an exercise in futility.
If you're going to use Eldritch Disciple then Mystic Theurge, why lose the Divine caster level at all with ED - especially if you're the healer? Why not just get Eldritch Theurge (10/10 arcane - now divine) from the start?

Optimystik
2010-04-19, 07:09 AM
While you were reading my posts and finding out what I'm fixated on, it's strange you seem to have missed where I was advocating ur-priest for 9th Divine and Dark invocations.
...
Yep.

Which is what baffles me about your argument. Ur-lock is far more powerful than ED/MT. So why would you ban the latter and not the former? Simply out of reverence for RAW?

If that's all it is, let me point out to you that reverence for RAW is a double-edged sword. MadLinguist's rebuttal to you - which you handily ignored - proves it. "Able to cast x-level spells" does not indeed specify that the spells have to be different - just that you can cast more than one. Well, over a long enough time period I can cast ni 2nd-level spells, by preparing the one I learned via DM repeatedly. So even by strict RAW, your objections don't have a leg to stand on.


Wow man. You seem to have gone off the deep end. Your build was posted to give an *non-evil* warlock 9th divine and dark invocations. Your build uses a questionable entry that seems divided on it's legality.

No more questionable than Precocious Apprentice - which, if you'll look around these boards and CharOp, tends not to be questioned as an entry method.

Well, except by you. But I'd rather be "off the deep end" than anywhere near that gaming table anyway.

Autopsibiofeeder
2010-04-19, 08:00 AM
While I do agree (for as far as that matters) with Optimystik on the spell vs spells thingy, there is one other thing I am wondering about:

I read the Divine Magician as 'you add a wizard spell to your cleric list'. Doesn't this basically convert the spell to a divine spell, seeing how it is on 'your' cleric list, you use wisdom to cast it, do not use a spellbook nor is it 'ingrained' in your mind? As such I would not allow this ACF as a qualifier for Theurge goodiness. But that aside ;) (or am I completely misreading the intent of that ACF in the build?).

Optimystik
2010-04-19, 09:25 AM
While a DM could feasibly rule that way, it goes against the intent of the book. First of all, Complete Mage is an arcane sourcebook - the successor to Complete Arcane, in fact. Second of all is this line prefacing the ACF section:


This section provides alternative class feature options for the eleven classes from the Player's Handbook, as well as some classes from supplements. Many of these alternative class features grant a minor arcane talent or twist to a character, while others provide some protection against the tactics commonly used by arcane spellcasters.

The intent, therefore, is that the ACFs grant arcane abilities. They also generally require Knowledge (Arcana.)

Then we look at the ACF itself - not only does it specifically give you "wizard spells"; it also specifically states "you give up some of your divine power." It wouldn't make sense for you to give up divine power... for divine power. Even though they are cast with Wisdom, you have to use arcane material components to cast them rather than your divine focus (because the ACF does not specify otherwise) - therefore, they are arcane spells.

Casting stat does not determine a spell's status; otherwise, Shugenja and Archivists would be arcane casters, because they use Cha and Int respectively rather than Wis.

And even if your DM ignores all that and rules otherwise, you can simply use Alternative Source Spell to cast them as arcane spells anyway.

Autopsibiofeeder
2010-04-19, 09:47 AM
It is very much dependent on how the DM or the gaming group reads and appreciates these types of ACF's. Rulings can go both ways and still make sense. I mostly brought it up because I think it is a lot more of a sensible arguement against the build that was proposed than the spells vs spell semanthics.


[snip]...And even if your DM ignores all that...[snip]

As such I would not say 'ignores all that' but rather 'interprets it differently' :).

OldFart
2010-04-19, 02:11 PM
Cymage covered this somewhat with the Eldritch Knight example, but I want to expound on the implications of the "spells vs. spell" argument.

From the SRD, requirements to enter Mystic Theurge are:

Spells: Able to cast 2nd-level divine spells and 2nd-level arcane spells.
Now, Jeff240sx argues that the Divine Magician ACF from Complete Mage would not qualify. The problem comes from applying this strict interpretation to any and all characters seeking entrance into the PrC. Certainly, Wally the 3rd-level wizard (with a 14+ Int) may both know and cast 2+ 2nd-level spells/day.

But consider Billy the 4th-level bard, whose Cha is >= 14 but < 22. He knows two 2nd-levels spells, but cannot cast more than 1/day. Must he wait until 5th level to qualify for the class? Can his munchkin friend Bart the Bard, who managed to obtain a 22 Cha by 4th level, qualify for MT, even though Billy can't?

How about Sammy the 4th-level sorcerer (Cha 14), who can cast four 2nd-level spells, but won't know more than one until level 5 (depending on feat choice). Must he wait a level to qualify?

I'm only seeing three options to deduce RAI from RAW:

1) Able to Cast x level spells = character can cast these spells at all. Specific PrCs may mention a specific spell because of their flavor and/or class abilities.
2) It's really number of spells/day. In which case Divine Magician ACF still lets one qualify, just later, level 5+ instead of 3+ (since one can use higher-level slots to cast lower-level spells). However, this also means, per the Bart and Billy example above, that with certain classes having sufficiently high stats allows one to enter PrCs at earlier levels.
3) It's number of spells of a given level known. In this case, Divine Magician ACF never qualifies for MT. However, Wizard qualifies for the PrC two levels before Sorcerer, and Bard qualifies one level before. So it's easier for the minstrel to become a MT than for someone who is magic incarnate.

Hmmmm.... I'm going to go with option #1. YMMV.

Jeff240sx
2010-04-19, 03:07 PM
I'm only seeing three options to deduce RAI from RAW:

1) Able to Cast x level spells = character can cast these spells at all. Specific PrCs may mention a specific spell because of their flavor and/or class abilities.
2) It's really number of spells/day. In which case Divine Magician ACF still lets one qualify, just later, level 5+ instead of 3+ (since one can use higher-level slots to cast lower-level spells). However, this also means, per the Bart and Billy example above, that with certain classes having sufficiently high stats allows one to enter PrCs at earlier levels.
3) It's number of spells of a given level known. In this case, Divine Magician ACF never qualifies for MT. However, Wizard qualifies for the PrC two levels before Sorcerer, and Bard qualifies one level before. So it's easier for the minstrel to become a MT than for someone who is magic incarnate.

Hmmmm.... I'm going to go with option #1. YMMV.

There's been a lot of good debate here, and as always, it's entirely debate-able. I also know that strict adherance to RAW will result in pure silliness, so I'm not trying to be a stickler for it. And I completely understand that Ur-Priest is far more powerful than any of these combinations. But to me, there's a very slippery slope going on.

In response to this breakdown:
It doesn't mention spells known/per day anywhere. I see where you were going with that.

Here's the issue. Does an ACF grant you the ability to cast level 2 arcane spells? Or does it grant you use of a single spell, from the arcane list?

How it's a slippery slope is... if this is indeed a legal build, why bother stopping here with builds that are purely arcane PrCs and use them to level the divine side?
I mean, Incantatrix Cleric abusing DMM would be crazy good.
What if someone realized that the best gish came from Divine buffs, and did a Cloistered Swiftblade? You'd need to get "the ability to cast Haste" from somewhere, like the Celerity domain. But pushing your Divine caster level with the +6 from Swiftblade, in addition to having Divine Power, Righteous Might, Domain abilities (feats), Knowledge Devotion.

I mean really - my issue is why stop at using it as entry to Mystic Theurge in this one situation simply because I should shut up and it's less powerful than Ur-Priest, which does the same thing.

Really, you're saying that by taking 1 ACF and applying a liberal interpretation of the rules, any Arcane PrC can advance your divine casting.

Again. Does it grant the abililty to cast 2nd level spells, or does it grant access to a single arcane spell of each level?

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-19, 03:36 PM
There's been a lot of good debate here, and as always, it's entirely debate-able. I also know that strict adherance to RAW will result in pure silliness, so I'm not trying to be a stickler for it. And I completely understand that Ur-Priest is far more powerful than any of these combinations. But to me, there's a very slippery slope going on.

In response to this breakdown:
It doesn't mention spells known/per day anywhere. I see where you were going with that.

Here's the issue. Does an ACF grant you the ability to cast level 2 arcane spells? Or does it grant you use of a single spell, from the arcane list?

How it's a slippery slope is... if this is indeed a legal build, why bother stopping here with builds that are purely arcane PrCs and use them to level the divine side?
I mean, Incantatrix Cleric abusing DMM would be crazy good.
What if someone realized that the best gish came from Divine buffs, and did a Cloistered Swiftblade? You'd need to get "the ability to cast Haste" from somewhere, like the Celerity domain. But pushing your Divine caster level with the +6 from Swiftblade, in addition to having Divine Power, Righteous Might, Domain abilities (feats), Knowledge Devotion.

I mean really - my issue is why stop at using it as entry to Mystic Theurge in this one situation simply because I should shut up and it's less powerful than Ur-Priest, which does the same thing.

Really, you're saying that by taking 1 ACF and applying a liberal interpretation of the rules, any Arcane PrC can advance your divine casting.

Again. Does it grant the abililty to cast 2nd level spells, or does it grant access to a single arcane spell of each level?


I'm pritty sure you can do a cloistered cleric swift blade. Celerity domain and then theres a feat or something that lets you use your domain spells for normal spells or something. Spontanious domain ACF or feat. Can qualify for swift blade.

Jeff240sx
2010-04-19, 04:02 PM
I'm pritty sure you can do a cloistered cleric swift blade. Celerity domain and then theres a feat or something that lets you use your domain spells for normal spells or something. Spontanious domain ACF or feat. Can qualify for swift blade.

Yea. It's not the qualification. It's advancing cleric with the +1 arcane caster level that could happen if reading this ACF in that manner.

OldFart
2010-04-19, 04:05 PM
Here's the issue. Does an ACF grant you the ability to cast level 2 arcane spells? Or does it grant you use of a single spell, from the arcane list?I agree - that's a much better topic for debate than entry requirements to MT.

Especially as it's a mechanic that is used/duplicated for several other PrCs.

There are some far-reaching implications. Like Optimystik noted, there's all manner of early entry tricks for MT. However, Divine Magician allows entry into MT at 5th level - assuming 1 level of arcane caster, so that there's actually a point in taking the class at all - with no "feat tax" or race restriction. And losing only one CL (effectively putting one even with spontaneous casters) in exchange for a wealth of arcane casting makes MT much less a "trap." Looking at the Domain Access ACF from Complete Champion, one could do the same trick with a single level of divine caster (and starting MT @ level 7). Since Sorcerers are already one CL behind non-spontaneous casters, this might not be all that bad a trade for them.

So, the issues really are: 1) Is this RAW? - which most likely will devolve into a semantics debate
2) Is this RAI? Which depends on whether one sees these ACFs as "cheese" because they allow for early entry or "fixes" because they make a PrC that most people feel, well, "teh sux" palatable.

I feel like I owe everyone an apology for pulling this thread off the topic of Warlock builds and onto PrC requirements and dodges to fulfill them.

The Cat Goddess
2010-04-19, 04:46 PM
The Divine Oracle PrC gives the Oracle Domain to anyone who takes the class. It only grants the Domain Power to Clerics, but it does grant spells. It also gives a version of Evasion that works in any form of armour.

Clearly, the class is meant for Clerics... but Wizards/Sorcerers can qualify, it just takes a bit longer because of 8 ranks Knowledge (Religion).

Fortunately, the PrC is written so that it improves +1 level of spellcasting class.

IMHO, if a Cleric qualifies for Swiftblade... then the PrC should advance his Clerical casting.

As for Divine Magician ACF... it says: "You can add one 1st-level abjuration, divination, or necromancy wizard spell to your cleric spell list." It says nothing about the spell being Arcane and it says nothing about the spell not being treated as a Cleric Spell (or only being able to cast it once per day). Further, the flavor text says: "Some clerics, however, choose to explore magical powers beyond those commonly provided by the gods. By giving up some of their divine power, these clerics gain access to spells normally beyond their abilities." Again, nothing that says the spell is "an arcane spell".

Of course, the Arcane Disciple Feat gives you access to the spells of a Domain... and even specifically says that you can only prepare (or cast) each Domain spell once per day and you use your Wisdom modifier to determine the Save DC and access (Wisdom 14, only up to level 4 Domain Spells)... however, the second sentence clearly states: "You learn to cast the spells associated with that domain as arcane spells."

Of course, a Duskblade could use that feat to get the Celerity Domain and qualify for Swiftblade at level 13! (Well, 14... since you have to spend a level where the only 4th level spell you cast is Haste.)

Edit: Then again, the Domain Access ACF for Sorcerers does win, since it states: "Your depth of belief allows you to channel divine power the way a cleric does." It would also allow the Sorcerer to qualify for Divine Prestige Classes that specifically require a certain Domain.

Wizards, not so much... unless something requires a Domain Granted Power.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-19, 04:50 PM
Yea. It's not the qualification. It's advancing cleric with the +1 arcane caster level that could happen if reading this ACF in that manner.

I could have sworn there was a way around that as well.

Jeff240sx
2010-04-19, 07:38 PM
The Divine Oracle PrC gives the Oracle Domain to anyone who takes the class. It only grants the Domain Power to Clerics, but it does grant spells. It also gives a version of Evasion that works in any form of armour.

Clearly, the class is meant for Clerics... but Wizards/Sorcerers can qualify, it just takes a bit longer because of 8 ranks Knowledge (Religion).

Fortunately, the PrC is written so that it improves +1 level of spellcasting class.

IMHO, if a Cleric qualifies for Swiftblade... then the PrC should advance his Clerical casting.


Qualifying for a class that requires a cross-class skill isn't unheard of. And it's more than happenstance (was written so it...) that it improves +1 level of existing spellcasting class. There is nothing preventing a straight Wizard from taking it, and there's even adaptation for if you want to 86 the deity fluff.
The void disciple has the same wording, and requires 2nd level divine or arcane. There are many classes that can benefit either side.

But getting +1 arcane caster level to boost your divine casting class is tantamount to letting a Sorcerer take the feat to get the Sun domain and it's one granted level 1 divine spell... and then boosting your Sorcerer caster level with Radiant Servant of Pelor's +1 level of existing divine spellcasting class.

If it's a class that allows +1 [any] caster level, I'm all for figuring the best way into it and how to use it to it's fullest. I'm against using clearly arcane/divine caster level increases to boost your opposite-casting character at the "expense" of an ACF - what could end up being the single most powerful ACF - if combined correctly.

The Cat Goddess
2010-04-19, 11:26 PM
And yet, what about my example of a Duskblade qualifying for the Swiftblade PrC?

As for a Sorcerer qualifying for Radiant Servant of Pelor... why not? The majority of the PrC's class features would be pretty worthless to the Sorcerer.

Of course, the Cleric (and anyone else using "Domain Access") would fail to qualify because of one simple line: "Special: Must have spent the entire previous level using all 3rd level spell slots to exclusively cast haste." Since they can't cast Haste as a 3rd level spell, they can't qualify.

Divide by Zero
2010-04-20, 12:24 AM
Of course, the Cleric (and anyone else using "Domain Access") would fail to qualify because of one simple line: "Special: Must have spent the entire previous level using all 3rd level spell slots to exclusively cast haste." Since they can't cast Haste as a 3rd level spell, they can't qualify.

They made a comment about that when the Trapsmith PrC (which gets haste as a first-level spell) came out, but I don't know if it was ever officially errata'ed. I'd probably houserule it in regardless, though, along with it working for divine if they went to that much trouble and were willing to pay the caster levels.

Jeff240sx
2010-04-20, 07:47 AM
And yet, what about my example of a Duskblade qualifying for the Swiftblade PrC?

As for a Sorcerer qualifying for Radiant Servant of Pelor... why not? The majority of the PrC's class features would be pretty worthless to the Sorcerer.

Of course, the Cleric (and anyone else using "Domain Access") would fail to qualify because of one simple line: "Special: Must have spent the entire previous level using all 3rd level spell slots to exclusively cast haste." Since they can't cast Haste as a 3rd level spell, they can't qualify.

I don't know how to say it any other way...

... it isn't about qualifying for a class. You can stuff nearly any class into any PrC with enough planning.

It's about having the +1 Arcane caster level improving your Divine class casting. Which is bad and shouldn't be house-ruled, imo.

mmkay?

Optimystik
2010-04-20, 08:56 AM
As for Divine Magician ACF... it says: "You can add one 1st-level abjuration, divination, or necromancy wizard spell to your cleric spell list." It says nothing about the spell being Arcane and it says nothing about the spell not being treated as a Cleric Spell (or only being able to cast it once per day). Further, the flavor text says: "Some clerics, however, choose to explore magical powers beyond those commonly provided by the gods. By giving up some of their divine power, these clerics gain access to spells normally beyond their abilities." Again, nothing that says the spell is "an arcane spell".

The beginning of that ACF section specifies that the ACFs grant "an arcane talent or twist." Therefore, the abilities are arcane.

Furthermore, Complete Mage is an arcane sourcebook. Why wouldn't it grant arcane abilities?


But to me, there's a very slippery slope going on.

Slippery Slope is a logical fallacy for a reason. Judge a given combination by its own power, and if your players try to do anything degenerate down the line, deal with it. Pre-emptive and sweeping bannings are simply laziness.

The Cat Goddess
2010-04-20, 10:16 AM
The beginning of that ACF section specifies that the ACFs grant "an arcane talent or twist." Therefore, the abilities are arcane.

Furthermore, Complete Mage is an arcane sourcebook. Why wouldn't it grant arcane abilities?

Slippery Slope is a logical fallacy for a reason. Judge a given combination by its own power, and if your players try to do anything degenerate down the line, deal with it. Pre-emptive and sweeping bannings are simply laziness.

1) For the same reason that there are feats in the Complete Divine that don't grant Divine Powers. For the same reason there are feats in the Complete Warrior that are only available to characters who already have Divine Powers.

I'm not overly concerned when someone qualifies for Geomancer as a Favored Soul/Duskblade... but I am concerned when someone qualifies for Mystic Theurge with Just Cleric. Since you can, given your logic, justify gaining +1 caster level to your Cleric half twice. After all, if one class meets the prereqs for both caster types, it should get the benefit granted to both caster types... right?

If you look at it any other way... then anything that gives you +1 to existing Divine casting class would not raise your caster level for the purposes of casting your Divine Magician spells... simply because they were "arcane" spells.

As for Arcanists qualifying for Divine PrCs & vice-versa... I don't see the big deal. Most of the time, the benefits aren't significant enough.

And why shouldn't there be a Divine varient of the Green Star Adept, for example?