Truespeak DCs

[noparlpf]

Hi all, I'm going to be playing a by-the-books Truenamer. Yeah, I know that most of you (all of you?) hate them and consider them largely unplayable, but I'm thinking of this as something of a challenge. Anyhow, I was wondering whether anybody knew what the Truespeak DCs are for the Utterances in the Lexicon of the Crafted Tool and the Lexicon of the Perfected Map, since as far as I know items and the world don't have CRs (though for magic items, maybe the CL of the magic effect counts as the item's CR?).

Please don't just talk about how unplayable the Truenamer is, because that's the point. I also don't really want to see posts talking about the "poor editing" and the like of the Tome of Magic without actually providing some useful feedback.

Thanks in advance for the help.

[BillyBobJoe]

Alright, first thing, take a dip into exemplar at 11th level. Just do it. The ability to take ten on your truespeak checks is invaluable. Secondly, read Zaq's sig. Thirdly, use that one affiliation in Complete Champion that gives a bonus to Truespeech.

[noparlpf]

Alright, first thing, take a dip into exemplar at 11th level. Just do it. The ability to take ten on your truespeak checks is invaluable. Secondly, read Zax's sig. Thirdly, use that one affiliation in Complete Champion that gives a bonus to Truespeech.

Is that this? http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=114269 (By the bye, I'm kind of new to this forum business. How do I condense a link into a word with a hyperlink?) I read most of it, but I don't remember if he mentioned the DCs for Lexicon of the Crafted Tool or Perfected Map.
I am using the Paragnostic Assembly; I read about that in Zaq's discussion.
What book is the Exemplar in? I think I've heard of it before but I don't remember seeing it myself. Of course being able to take ten would be great, because then there isn't the 5% fail chance on a nat 1 (this is before the Law of Resistance bumps those DCs up). (Of course, there is the argument that it's right for an arcane caster to wear light armor and suffer a 5% failure because all melee classes have the same 5% failure rate, but I don't agree with that, so I'd rather eliminate fail chances.) On the other hand, I kind of want to play Truenamer all the way through without multiclassing, but I'll have a look at the Exemplar.

[BillyBobJoe]

Is that this? http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=114269 (By the bye, I'm kind of new to this forum business. How do I condense a link into a word with a hyperlink?) I read most of it, but I don't remember if he mentioned the DCs for Lexicon of the Crafted Tool or Perfected Map.
I am using the Paragnostic Assembly; I read about that in Zaq's discussion.
What book is the Exemplar in? I think I've heard of it before but I don't remember seeing it myself. Of course being able to take ten would be great, because then there isn't the 5% fail chance on a nat 1 (this is before the Law of Resistance bumps those DCs up). (Of course, there is the argument that it's right for an arcane caster to wear light armor and suffer a 5% failure because all melee classes have the same 5% failure rate, but I don't agree with that, so I'd rather eliminate fail chances.) On the other hand, I kind of want to play Truenamer all the way through without multiclassing, but I'll have a look at the Exemplar.

Exemplar is a prestige class in the Complete Adventurer.

[danzibr]

Secondly, read Zaq's sig.
Yeah, you already found it... but this.

[Big Fau]

Hi all, I'm going to be playing a by-the-books Truenamer. Yeah, I know that most of you (all of you?) hate them and consider them largely unplayable, but I'm thinking of this as something of a challenge. Anyhow, I was wondering whether anybody knew what the Truespeak DCs are for the Utterances in the Lexicon of the Crafted Tool and the Lexicon of the Perfected Map, since as far as I know items and the world don't have CRs (though for magic items, maybe the CL of the magic effect counts as the item's CR?).

Please don't just talk about how unplayable the Truenamer is, because that's the point. I also don't really want to see posts talking about the "poor editing" and the like of the Tome of Magic without actually providing some useful feedback.

Thanks in advance for the help.


Check the ToM errata for the Perfected Map DCs. The Crafted Tool DCs are all based on the CL of the item in question (items with no CL have a special rule).

[noparlpf]

Thanks. There are so many prestige classes that it's hard to know all of them or know where they are. I'll have a look at it.

[Fouredged Sword]

First, don't. A by the books take on turespeak is horid.

Other than that remember that the skill check is king over everything else. Boost it as high as posible. take UMD and get wands of skilll boosting spells. Potions may be restored to fuctionality by useing the mending word to "repair them" within one round of drinking. Abuse this. Wands and staves may also function the same way. Speak to your dm for a reading on this.

I think the DC's are based on the CL of the item and 15 respectivly. I may be off though as I am AFB.

[The Dark Fiddler]

How do I condense a link into a word with a hyperlink

You can either click that picture of the Earth and a chain link above the posting window, or use the following code: text and stuff (theurlyouwant)



What book is the Exemplar in?

Complete Adventurer.

[noparlpf]

You can either click that picture of the Earth and a chain link above the posting window, or use the following code: text and stuff (theurlyouwant)

Complete Adventurer.

Thanks. n.n


Check the ToM errata for the Perfected Map DCs. The Crafted Tool DCs are all based on the CL of the item in question (items with no CL have a special rule).

Do you know where in the book it talks about that? It doesn't say the thing about Crafted Tool DCs in the blurb before the list of them.
I did just download the errata. I don't think that that rule fits with the rest of the Truenamer because of the scaling-by-level thing, but hey, poor editing everywhere. It can't be helped.

[Big Fau]

Do you know where in the book it talks about that? It doesn't say the thing about Crafted Tool DCs in the blurb before the list of them.

The DC is on page 195, right under the formula for the Evoling Mind DCs.

[noparlpf]

The DC is on page 195, right under the formula for the Evolving Mind DCs.

Woah. I have no idea how I missed that, but thanks a lot. So based on this, pre-errata the DC for Lexicon of the Perfected Map utterances would have been just 25?

How does it even make sense for a CL 1 magic item's DC to be 17, while a nonmagic item's DC is 25? (Yes I know, poor editing and playtesting on WotC's part.)

[Divide by Zero]

Of course being able to take ten would be great, because then there isn't the 5% fail chance on a nat 1 (this is before the Law of Resistance bumps those DCs up).
Skill checks don't fail on a nat 1. That only applies to saves and attack rolls.

Of course, there is the argument that it's right for an arcane caster to wear light armor and suffer a 5% failure because all melee classes have the same 5% failure rate, but I don't agree with that, so I'd rather eliminate fail chances.
:smallconfused: I don't think I've ever seen anyone suggest that.

[Person_Man]

Actually, all you really need to fix RAW Truespeak is an Item Familiar (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/itemFamiliars.htm).



Invest Skill Ranks

Whenever a character with an item familiar gains skill points, he may choose to put some or all of those skill points into his item familiar. He assigns the skill points normally, but notes that they now reside in the item familiar. For every 3 ranks he assigns to the item familiar, he gains a +1 bonus that he can apply to any single skill. This bonus can be applied to a skill in which he already has maximum ranks. He can apply multiple bonuses to the same skill, but he may not have more points of bonus in a skill than he has ranks.

So basically you give up 3 Skill Points per level, but gain a +1 bonus per level to 1 Skill. Assuming you invest full ranks into Truespeak and your Item Familiar to boost Truespeak, and your Skill check becomes d20 +3 + (level * 2) + Int bonus, which nicely parallels the 15 + (2xCR) DC needed to effect enemies. Put the Item Familiar together with your standard Truespeak and Intelligence boosting magic items (which together give you another +15-20ish) and you shouldn't have trouble effectiving CR appropriate enemies multiple times per combat.

The real down side to the Truenamer is that like the Healer and Warmage, their "spell" list is so limited that there's really not an affirmative reason why you would want to play them over other common alternatives.

[noparlpf]

Skill checks don't fail on a nat 1. That only applies to saves and attack rolls.

:smallconfused: I don't think I've ever seen anyone suggest that.

Oh yeah, that's right. I think I was confused because earlier today I read a post saying something about a nat 1 being an autofail for skill checks. Thanks for that.

Yeah, I once read somewhere the argument that since anyone who has to roll to attack or the like suffers the 5% failure chance for rolling a nat 1, it's not putting arcane casters at a real disadvantage to wear light armor with a 5% spell failure chance.

[Flickerdart]

Oh yeah, that's right. I think I was confused because earlier today I read a post saying something about a nat 1 being an autofail for skill checks. Thanks for that.

Yeah, I once read somewhere the argument that since anyone who has to roll to attack or the like suffers the 5% failure chance for rolling a nat 1, it's not putting arcane casters at a real disadvantage to wear light armor with a 5% spell failure chance.
It's trivial to get ASF down to 0% even on heavy armour.

[noparlpf]

Actually, all you really need to fix RAW Truespeak is an Item Familiar (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/itemFamiliars.htm).

I know how the Item Familiar works. I'm considering using one, but I'm not sure whether I want to. With one, I would get the character's Truespeak check up to +84 at 16th level (my group plays a lot of 16th level one-shots), including a +10 competence item, which is still technically RAW because rules to create such things exist in the DMG. That leaves tons of room for quickening, extending, empowering, uttering defensively, etc. I just feel like you shouldn't need to use a variant like that to play a class well.

[Flickerdart]

It's Truenamer. You need everything you can get to play the class at all.

[Fouredged Sword]

Just make your item familier out of rivintene and bonded to oyu in a non removeable fashion (like being formed wholesale as a belt with no clasp already around your body. Remember magic items resize to the wearer.)

[Divide by Zero]

it's not putting arcane casters at a real disadvantage to wear light armor with a 5% spell failure chance.

True, but it does make their massive advantage slightly smaller, and there's really no reason to do it when you can trivially get it down to 0% anyway.

[noparlpf]

84-19=63. CR 16+4 (highest we're likely to see) = 20, DC = 55. That still leaves enough room for "meta-utterance" feats and everything else.

Though, knowing the DM I usually play with, CR 20 isn't uncommon at level 16. We played an adventure once at 16th level that was seafaring-themed in which we had to fight the Leviathan. We nearly killed the weaker Aspect of the Leviathan with no party losses, so mid-combat he boosted it to the CR 20 one, and we still beat it without any deaths and only one character permanently insane. The moral of the story is, I should expect high-CR combats. I might go with the Item Familiar just in case.

[noparlpf]

Just make your item familiar out of riverine and bonded to you in a non-removable fashion (like being formed wholesale as a belt with no clasp already around your body. Remember magic items resize to the wearer.)

I've had a character cut in half before...so that might not work. I think it might be better to get a contingent spell to have the item familiar magically return to your possession if it ever got separated from you for more than an hour. Alternatively, get it actually implanted in your body. "Hey Cleric, would you mind cutting me open, sticking this item in between my left lung and my heart somewhere, and then healing me back up?"

[golem1972]

Make your item familiar out of a graft. I suggest the warforged brain from faiths of eberron. It seems to fit thematicaly, to me at least.

Dcs, we set items at 15 + 2x caster level or + 2x size category above fine.

[noparlpf]

Make your item familiar out of a graft. I suggest the warforged brain from faiths of Eberron. It seems to fit thematically, to me at least.

DCs, we set items at 15 + 2x caster level or + 2x size category above fine.

My group doesn't really use Eberron though...

Yeah, the book apparently says that magic items are DC 15 + (2xCL). Is the second part there a houserule? Because apparently the book says nonmagic items (technically including terrain, before the errata came out) have a constant DC of 25 (which will often be higher than the DC for a magic item at low levels).

[noparlpf]

I looked up construct grafts. I don't feel like the Wakeful Mind graft fits well, considering the -2 to all knowledge checks.

[Lans]

Actually, all you really need to fix RAW Truespeak is an Item Familiar (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/itemFamiliars.htm).



So basically you give up 3 Skill Points per level, but gain a +1 bonus per level to 1 Skill. Assuming you invest full ranks into Truespeak and your Item Familiar to boost Truespeak, and your Skill check becomes d20 +3 + (level * 2) + Int bonus, which nicely parallels the 15 + (2xCR) DC needed to effect enemies. Put the Item Familiar together with your standard Truespeak and Intelligence boosting magic items (which together give you another +15-20ish) and you shouldn't have trouble effectiving CR appropriate enemies multiple times per combat.

The real down side to the Truenamer is that like the Healer and Warmage, their "spell" list is so limited that there's really not an affirmative reason why you would want to play them over other common alternatives.

You don't actually give up the skill points, you just lose them if the IF is destroyed


Also get a master work tool of truenaming for another +2. Marshal dip is also good to reduce MAD

[noparlpf]

Also get a master work tool of truenaming for another +2. Marshal dip is also good to reduce MAD

A masterwork tool provides a +2 circumstance bonus, right? What kind of tool would improve your enunciation?

How does a level in Marshal help? I'm not incredibly familiar with the Marshal, but I just skimmed it and I don't see what good it does for a Truenamer.

[Baka Nikujaga]

Zaq's Guide to Particles of Speech? Or some other type of book that could help with pronunciation. And the Marshal can use a minor aura to add his or her charisma modifier to a skill check.

[noparlpf]

Oh. How often can you use an aura, how long does it last, and what action is it to activate?

[Baka Nikujaga]

Activating an aura is a swift action, can be used an unlimited amount of times per day (or close to that) and they last for as long as the Marshal isn't dazed, stunned, etc. In any case it's found in the Miniature's Handbook if you want more information.

[noparlpf]

That's pretty interesting. On the other hand, I do want to play a straight Truenamer. Marshal and Exemplar both have their perks, but it's not quite what I'm going for.
Thanks for the info, though.

[Baka Nikujaga]

Not a problem. Just remember to look through the The Tao of Truenaming (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=8270.0) and the Enough new material to warrant a handbook? (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=8489.0) threads as well.

[Cog]

Marshal and Exemplar both have their perks, but it's not quite what I'm going for.
If you want an alternate means of taking 10 on your checks, Hardened Criminal from City of Stormreach works for any one skill you select when you take the feat.

[Divide by Zero]

A masterwork tool provides a +2 circumstance bonus, right? What kind of tool would improve your enunciation?

How does a level in Marshal help? I'm not incredibly familiar with the Marshal, but I just skimmed it and I don't see what good it does for a Truenamer.

Book of common truename syllables, maybe?

And Marshal's Motivate Intelligence minor aura lets you add Cha to Int-based checks. With a high-Cha character, it's a good boost.

Edit: refresh the page before posting...

[Baka Nikujaga]

http://i54.tinypic.com/200whs1.jpg
Wait...you can Polymorph into a Garbler? Does this mean you could use a Phylactery of Change and never make a Truespeak check again?

[Lans]

I was thinking a rosary type instrument

[noparlpf]

Wait...you can Polymorph into a Garbler? Does this mean you could use a Phylactery of Change and never make a Truespeak check again?

I think I've fought a Garbler before...what book is that? And where's the Phylactery of Change?
EDIT: Never mind, it was some other weird monster that looked like a Garbler. I don't know what it was, I can't remember. Anyway, it might be read that the Garbler only auto-succeeds on its own inherent utterances, not utterances it can use from a class. That's one of those RAW debates, and I doubt WotC ever expected a Truenamer to try to turn himself into a Garbler. Besides, Garblers are specifically described as speaking random nonsense. I can't imagine that that helps with intentional Treuspeech.


If you want an alternate means of taking 10 on your checks, Hardened Criminal from City of Stormreach works for any one skill you select when you take the feat.

Like I think I've said before, my group doesn't really use Eberron. I'll take a look at it anyhow, though. Thanks.

[Cog]

It's from an Eberron book, but unlike warforged grafts there's no real thematic tie. Variable mileage, etc, etc.

[noparlpf]

I checked out Hardened Criminal. Not only doesn't the fluff really fit with the typical Truenamer, it costs two feats. Since skill checks don't auto-fail on a nat 1, I'm less concerned with taking ten than with having a high modifier, and if it takes two feats, I don't think it's quite worth it to me.

[NecroRick]

Basically with the Truenamer there are some things to keep in mind

DCs for the skill go up at essentially 2 per level. People complain about this being unfair, because you can only invest one rank per level.

However, all that you need to do is get an additional +1 per 1 level and you maintain parity. There are lots of ways of doing this:

(1) items
(2) attribute increases
(3) feats

So lets assume that you're incrementally creating a +truenaming item. Now not only are you maintaining parity, your natural rate of feats and attribute increases (and things like item familiars which net you 4 per 3) will slowly edge you ahead.

As noted, if you have a buffer of +20 before you even need to start rolling for failure, the first 10 or so times you use each utterance each day is going to have 'room on top' for some kind of +5 or +10 midifier ('meta-naming' effects).

Additionally, lets say you have 10 powers and you can use them each 10x per day, that is a lot more individual uses than any spell caster can get spells per day, even allowing for dual progression wierdness. And all you need to do is craft yourself another +2 from somewhere et viola! All your 'spells' got another daily use.

Now then, the actual effects of the utterances are a bit underwhelming (the supremely good low level spell Heat Metal you don't get until 8th level for instance. And when you do you can only effect one item at a time, instead of 1 item per two levels like the spell.) But they HAVE to be. Otherwise nobody would play a Wizard! The standard advice on the forums would be "don't bother playing a Wizard, just play a Truenamer, you get 2-3x as many daily 'slots' and your 'spells' are just as good". Another example - the Truenamer healing pales in comparison to what a halfway decent cleric can dish out.

But here's the point, they didn't set out to make another tier 1 class.

Personally, I think that over time there was a clear evolution in class design, things like the Warlocks with their limited number of powers and all the ToB stuff where they only get one stance/maneuver per level. Truenamer fits in that continuum as a 'when you go up a level, gain a new power' class. Yes, 4th edition is where they took this. I view these classes as 'prototypes' for the 4th edition style of class design. As such, it is utterly unsurprising if the last stronghold of the reprobates desperately clinging to 3.0 and 3.5 doesn't much like this class! :smalltongue:

The same people saying "don't play a Truenamer" seem to be the same people who say "don't play a Fighter". Now, given that there are plenty of people happily playing Fighters... I think that advice should be weighed appropriately.

-----

Some things to take away from Zaq's dissertation on the Truenamer:
(1) regularly passing a high DC check turns out to be spectacularly easy if you set your mind to it
(2) in their fight with the BBEG, the DM's feedback was that the Truenamer did the vast majoirty of the damage.
(3) it wasn't entirely clear to me why he quit, it sounded like he just got bored/tired. Given that he was (apparently, see point 2) the most powerful character in the party at the time it wasn't due to a lack of oomph unless Zaq succumbed to the dark side of the munchkin
(4) He wasn't even using the Heat Metal utterance, which if memory serves me right is an even better damage over time attack than whatever he was using

There's some caveats to go with that though, if I remember correctly he was in a small party, so a class like Truenamer which fills multiple niches (badly) is going to be proportionately better than it would be in a party where those niches are already filled.

-----

Overall, if I was going to redo the Truenamer from scratch, I'd try to figure out a way to nicely blend it and the Artificer together. The Truenamer will become more powerful, the artificer less so.

[noparlpf]

I much prefer 3.5 to 4E, but I like the Fighter and Monk plenty, unlike most people. I also don't mind the Truenamer much now I've gotten to know it better. I think people are really just too hard on classes which are difficult to optimize.

[Divide by Zero]

stuff about Truespeak DCs

As I'm sure Zaq will be "happy" to tell you, the problem with Truenamers is not the skill check. It's that the Law of Sequences makes it difficult to effectively use your best utterances, and even when they do work they're nothing spectacular (as I said in another thread, if you let them auto-succeed on the check and took away the LoS, they'd probably be about on par with a warlock power-wise). And unlike the skill check, there is no way to solve either of those problems outside of houserules/homebrew.

[noparlpf]

Sure there is. Get a +200 to Truespeak. Then you can utter all day and keep going the entire next day before you have to go to sleep. It's probably doable somehow.

[NecroRick]

As I'm sure Zaq will be "happy" to tell you, the problem with Truenamers is not the skill check.

Why would he tell me that? I already said the same thing in my post!

[Divide by Zero]

Sure there is. Get a +200 to Truespeak. Then you can utter all day and keep going the entire next day before you have to go to sleep. It's probably doable somehow.
That solves neither problem I mentioned. Even if they were totally at will, you can still only affect one target at a time, and your utterances are still for the most part mediocre. Fixing the former requires modifying or removing the LoS, and fixing the latter requires homebrew utterances.

Why would he tell me that? I already said the same thing in my post!
You seemed to be implying that they weren't glaring problems with the class, but rather something that keeps them from breaking the game in the other direction.

[Baka Nikujaga]

http://i54.tinypic.com/200whs1.jpg
It's unfortunate that Speak Unto the Masses is granted at level seventeen...

[Lans]

As I'm sure Zaq will be "happy" to tell you, the problem with Truenamers is not the skill check. It's that the Law of Sequences makes it difficult to effectively use your best utterances, and even when they do work they're nothing spectacular (as I said in another thread, if you let them auto-succeed on the check and took away the LoS, they'd probably be about on par with a warlock power-wise). And unlike the skill check, there is no way to solve either of those problems outside of houserules/homebrew.

LoS actually has a loop hole where you can up the check to make the utterance to count as a higher level, and thus not be stopped by it.

[noparlpf]

LoS actually has a loop hole where you can up the check to make the utterance to count as a higher level, and thus not be stopped by it.

I think that's a slightly loose reading of the Law of Sequence.

THE LAW OF SEQUENCE
All utterances obey the Law of Sequence. If you speak an utterance with an ongoing duration, you can’t speak that utterance again until the duration of that utterance ends. It’s okay to use a different utterance while the first is still active, however. It’s also okay to use a higher-level version of an utterance while a lower-level version is active, or vice versa, because these constitute different utterances. The reverse of an utterance is treated as the same utterance for the purpose of the Law of Sequence. For example, you could speak a 2nd-level lesser word of nurturing utterance on one ally, then target another ally with a 1st-level minor word of nurturing utterance. But you could not use the 2nd-level lesser word of nurturing utterance on an ally, and while it was still in effect, target an ally with the same utterance or an enemy with the reverse of that utterance.
I'm pretty sure that "higher-level version" and "lower-level version" by RAI means things like Greater Speed of the Zephyr vs Speed of the Zephyr, or like in the example, Minor Word of Nurturing vs Lesser Word of Nurturing. My interpretation of your interpretation of this suggests that adding 4 to the Truespeak DC would turn a Minor Word of Nurturing into a Lesser Word of Nurturing.

[noparlpf]

LoS actually has a loop hole where you can up the check to make the utterance to count as a higher level, and thus not be stopped by it.

I think that's a slightly loose reading of the Law of Sequence.

THE LAW OF SEQUENCE
All utterances obey the Law of Sequence. If you speak an utterance with an ongoing duration, you can’t speak that utterance again until the duration of that utterance ends. It’s okay to use a different utterance while the first is still active, however. It’s also okay to use a higher-level version of an utterance while a lower-level version is active, or vice versa, because these constitute different utterances. The reverse of an utterance is treated as the same utterance for the purpose of the Law of Sequence. For example, you could speak a 2nd-level lesser word of nurturing utterance on one ally, then target another ally with a 1st-level minor word of nurturing utterance. But you could not use the 2nd-level lesser word of nurturing utterance on an ally, and while it was still in effect, target an ally with the same utterance or an enemy with the reverse of that utterance.
I'm pretty sure that "higher-level version" and "lower-level version" by RAI means things like Greater Speed of the Zephyr vs Speed of the Zephyr, or like in the example, Minor Word of Nurturing vs Lesser Word of Nurturing. My interpretation of your interpretation of this suggests that adding 4 to the Truespeak DC would turn a Minor Word of Nurturing into a Lesser Word of Nurturing.

[Lans]

True it is a little loose, but its far from op and it doesn't hurt.

[noparlpf]

Do you think that adding 4 to the DC for a Minor Word of Nurturing should make it become a Lesser Word of Nurturing? Because then you would still only be able to have that one Lesser Word running at once. I think it might work to bypass the Law of Sequence slightly for utterances that only have one form, but only after they've been used three times is it worth it to try this once, and the second time would still be the same DC for the "higher level" and "lower level" versions of the same utterance.

And what's the consensus on the Garbler idea?

[Baka Nikujaga]

http://i52.tinypic.com/qn1lqa.jpg
From what I understand the author's intent was to clarify the point that Utterances with similar names or "grades" could be active at the same time without interfering with one another. However, the Word of Nurturing example doesn't strike me as particularly right as each Word of Nurturing is clearly a separate Utterance. So instead this leaves us with "it's okay to use a higher-level version of an utterance while a lower-level version is active, or vice versa, because these constitute different utterances," which can arguably mean that a Minor Word of Nurturing (heightened to level two) is not the same as Minor Word of Nurturing. So, no, increasing the check by four should not change a Minor Word of Nurturing into a Lesser Word of Nurturing. Or in a similar vein a heightened Cure Light Wounds does not become a Cure Moderate Wounds as each spell is unique.

And the Garbler's ability to ignore Truespeak checks for Utterances falls under its Skills category so I'd assume it's an actual racial trait rather than a special exception for its Random Utterance ability.

[Note]
That was already the consensus concerning the Utterances wasn't it...? Ugh.

[noparlpf]

I think that the Law of Sequence isn't able to be bypassed by raising the DC by 4 and calling it a different utterance. I also think that we're pretty much hopelessly off-topic by now, considering my original question was answered ages ago.

I'll check with my DM about the Garbler, but I definitely think that's a neat way to get around it (and still probably be able to quicken, empower, extend (once you've taken the feats, anyhow), utter defensively, overcome SR, and anything else that might be necessary, all for free). I just didn't remember whether anybody else had said anything about it.

[Aharon]

@Azazer
yupp, that's the way I figured it would work :smallsmile:

@Azazer's [note]/noparlpf's question regarding Garbler legality
Well, nobody who was interested enough in my handbook attempt questioned the legality of this trick. This might be skewed by the fact that those that read a handbook on truenamer exploits are, with a rather great likelihood, people who would like the truenamer not to suck. But there wasn't any opposition to my interpretation, so I guess it's a consensus because too few people care :smallwink: