Booster caster level and some really big claims...

[Devronq]

So what are some legitimate ways to boost your caster level to higher than your HD for arcane spell casting? I had some people suggest things in a previous thread i had but they seemed like pretty outrageous claims i was told you can get cl.39 at lv.16? I was also dont a few things that dont seem legitimate at all, like they said the key to this high caster level was using a trickster spell thief and using the master spell thief feat. I read the master spell thief feat and although it seemed useful its fairly obvious it won't allow you to go farther than the amount of class levels you have therefore wont help you make your CL higher than your HD. Also someone suggested that you use Ultimate magus and stack both the boosts on the same class... what allows you to do that? Cause one is memorized spell caster and one is spontaneous so it doesn't seem possible even if you were to make your spontaneous class be able to memorize spells (cause i know there's a few ways) they would simple become a spontaneous spell caster than can memorize, not a memorized spell caster. They only legitimate ways ive seen so far is that feat that lets you boost it by being stunned for soo many rounds and the boots red wizard gives but what other legitimate ways are there? and by the way please no answers that start with "first you level drain yourself" cause ya i just dont want to use them. Thank you all for your advise.

[Devronq]

also i apologize for the spelling errors i wrote it on my iphone and it auto-corrects alot of stuff the title of the thread was suppose to be boosting caster level not booster caster level and there's a few others but ya

[Yuki Akuma]

My God, man, use your carriage return!

CL boosts just in core: Orange ioun stone (+1 CL, slotless, 30k gp), Bead of karma (+4 CL, 20k gp)... that's about it.

Ultimate Magus does not actually raise your CL in a prepared caster class and a spontaneous caster class - what it does it raise your level in both classes at once, and also give a few bonus CLs to your lowest caster level class. It's possible to cheese that so all the bonuses go to one class.

It's also possible to make a Wizard a spontaneous caster with enough shenanigans (Signature Spell springs to mind, but it comes pretty late).

Master Spellthief + Chameleon can give you some pretty insane CL boosts, if you interpret it the right way (if not, well, it's still better than a normal Spellthief/Chameleon). Chameleon's CL is equal to twice its class level, while Master Spellthief adds all your arcane caster levels together - so a Spellthief 6/Chameleon 10's caster level would be something like 26.

[Hirax]

You mentioned red wizard, so I assume you know about circle magic, which at level 16 can get you to CL 40 easily. For instance, a wizard5/red wizard5/ur-priest2/theurge8 at level 16 could be casting and persisting consumptive field at CL 40, then feeding the consumptive field (with bags of tricks or other summoned things) for all day CL 60. If you use temporary CL boosters to cast consumptive field at a higher CL, it can provide a higher bonus, too. An alternative method to get consumptive field at high levels is arcane disciple (luck), so you can get it via miracle.

For additional cheese, hold several holy/unholy arrows, or anything else that gives you negative levels, so you can reduce your caster level to 1. Circle magic then raises your CL from 1 to 40. Get rid of the negative levels, and you're at 40+HD-1 for your CL, so 55 for a 16th level character. Then use a bead of karma, ioun stone, ankh of ascension, and band of spell enhancement, and other temporary CL boosters to cast consumptive field at a higher CL, meaning its bonus ceiling is higher. Here's a good list of CL boosters (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19872350/Raising_Caster_Level). Using the boosters I just named, consumptive field would be cast at CL 66, which means after feeding it, it would provide an additional +33 to CL, for an all day CL of 88.

[Devronq]

My God, man, use your carriage return! Derp? i have no idea what your trying to say here...

Bead of karma (+4 CL, 20k gp)- divine spells only

Ultimate Magus does not actually raise your CL in a prepared caster class and a spontaneous caster class - what it does it raise your level in both classes at once, and also give a few bonus CLs to your lowest caster level class. It's possible to cheese that so all the bonuses go to one class. can you explain how? and i didnt notice you get a cl boost of up to +4 for all arcane spells not just your lowest that's a start.


Master Spellthief + Chameleon can give you some pretty insane CL boosts, if you interpret it the right way (if not, well, it's still better than a normal Spellthief/Chameleon). I just read chameleon im sure the double caster level is only meant to appy to the chameleon spells, which i dont see that benefiting the build as a whole and even just simple not interpreting it as that i dont see why its better?

[Hirax]

[I]
Bead of karma (+4 CL, 20k gp)- divine spells only


That is not correct, the CL boost makes no mention of being exclusive to divine or arcane spells. You're presumably making a mistake with regards to the activation of the bead. An arcane caster could make a use magic device check to activate a bead of karma and benefit from it fully if successful.

[Devronq]

You mentioned red wizard, so I assume you know about circle magic, which at level 16 can get you to CL 40 easily. For instance, a wizard5/red wizard5/ur-priest2/theurge8 at level 16 could be casting and persisting consumptive field at CL 40, then feeding the consumptive field (with bags of tricks or other summoned things) for all day CL 60. If you use temporary CL boosters to cast consumptive field at a higher CL, it can provide a higher bonus, too. An alternative method to get consumptive field at high levels is arcane disciple (luck), so you can get it via miracle.

For additional cheese, hold several holy/unholy arrows, or anything else that gives you negative levels, so you can reduce your caster level to 1. Circle magic then raises your CL from 1 to 40. Get rid of the negative levels, and you're at 40+HD-1 for your CL, so 55 for a 16th level character. Then use a bead of karma, ioun stone, ankh of ascension, and band of spell enhancement, and other temporary CL boosters to cast consumptive field at a higher CL, meaning its bonus ceiling is higher. Here's a good list of CL boosters (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19872350/Raising_Caster_Level). Using the boosters I just named, consumptive field would be cast at CL 66, which means after feeding it, it would provide an additional +33 to CL, for an all day CL of 88.

Hmm well the circle magic is legit it does require a bunch of other red wizards to perform the circle magic with which the PC isn't going to always have available, or maybe even not have available at all. Also any level drain trick is in very bad taste IMO and i would never allow it. but thank you ima click on that link though :)

[Devronq]

That is not correct, the CL boost makes no mention of being exclusive to divine or arcane spells. You're presumably making a mistake with regards to the activation of the bead. An arcane caster could make a use magic device check to activate a bead of karma and benefit from it fully if successful.

Sorry reread it you are correct.

[Hirax]

Hmm well the circle magic is legit it does require a bunch of other red wizards to perform the circle magic with which the PC isn't going to always have available

That's a simple issue to fix, just make simulacrums of yourself. For the sake of completeness, Hathran (Player's Guide to Faerun) and Halruaan Elder (Shining South) are two other prestige classes that grant circle magic.

[Devronq]

That's a simple issue to fix, just make simulacrums of yourself. For the sake of completeness, Hathran (Player's Guide to Faerun) and Halruaan Elder (Shining South) are two other prestige classes that grant circle magic.

Hmm the simulacrums seem like a not bad idea, still heavy xp cost and what should they do when there not doing the circle? like follow you around and fight and such? seems kinda dangerous to risk letting them die cause there kinda weak being only half your level and costing minimum 1000xp each, again kinda risky to loose them and thank you ive never heard of those other 2 PRC classes i might do that...

[Hirax]

Have the simulacrums hang out in a rope trick until they're needed. They can cast it themselves, after all. Once you can cast 9th level arcane spells, ice assassin (Frostburn) is basically an improved version simulacrum, but also more expensive. If you make ice assassins of yourself, you also need to mindrape them to reprogram their desire to kill you.

[Yuki Akuma]

My God, man, use your carriage return! Derp? i have no idea what your trying to say here...

Carriage return. That thing you do that makes new lines.

Like this.

It's a reference to old typewriters.

[kardar233]

The point of Master Spellthief is that it can benefit from all the CL increasers that cap out at your character level or are set to a level below your normal one.

Take, for example, this Sorcerer build: Sorcerer6/Trickster Spellthief1/Eldritch Knight2/Abjurant Champion5/Eldritch Knight+6. Normally this has a CL of 18. But you see that the Martial Arcanist ability of Abjurant Champion (which sets your CL to your BAB) is going unused because your CL is higher than your BAB of +16. However, if you take the Master Spellthief feat and then use the Martial Arcanist ability on your Spellthief caster level (making it 16), you can add it to your Sorcerer caster level, making it 34. Then, since your Spellthief CL is only 16, you can get the Practiced Spellcaster feat and add it to your Spellthief CL, getting the entire +4 bonus and making it 20, which makes your Sorcerer CL 38.

[dextercorvia]

Human Wizard5/WildMage1/UltimateMagus10

Trait:Spellgifted (Conjuration)

Feats:
Flaw -- Spell Thematics
Flaw -- Practiced Spellcaster
Human -- Bloodline of Fire
1 -- Magical Training
3 -- Quicken
Otyugh Hole -- Iron Will
5 -- Spontaneous Divination
6 -- Reserves of Strength
9 -- Planar Touchstone CoI Artifice
12 -- Planar Touchstone Creation
15 -- Planar Touchstone Craft

+1d6(Wild Mage)+4(Ultimate Magus)+1(Spell Thematics)+2(BoF)+3(RoS)+4(Domain abilities)

At ECL16 That is CL 30+1d6 for any conjuration:creation/fire spell that you have picked for your Spell Thematics feat, and you can break the level caps.

[kabreras]

Ultimate Magus does not actually raise your CL in a prepared caster class and a spontaneous caster class - what it does it raise your level in both classes at once, and also give a few bonus CLs to your lowest caster level class. It's possible to cheese that so all the bonuses go to one class.

Arcane Spell Power (Ex): At 1st level, your caster level for all arcane spells increases by 1. It increases again at 4th level, 7th level, and 10th level (to a maximum of +4).

It doesnt just augment it for the lowest class, if go practiced spellcaster so you do not loose more than 2 casters levels to the main class you get a flat +2 CL at the end if the prc, you even get a the +4 if you go illuminan as race.

[Demonic_Spoon]

This (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=6654.msg414066#msg414066) has CL in the 4 digits. I don't know how legit it is but Kell usually knows what he's talking about.

[Devronq]

[QUOTE=kardar233;12500153]The point of Master Spell thief is that it can benefit from all the CL increases that cap out at your character level or are set to a level below your normal one.

Actually if you read the master spell thief feat, Your spellthief and arcane spellcaster levels also stack when determining your caster level for all arcane spells. your levels stack, not your CL it specifically, says your level there. you only have 1 level of spell thief and although it would be CL 16 only 1 of it would stack. That build has CL.20

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Any race will work, Bard 1/ Bloodline 3/ Spellthief 1/ Sorcerer 1/ Wizard 3/ Ultimate Magus 1/ Sublime Chord 1/ Ultimate Magus 9; which bloodline you choose is irrelevant. Earth Sense, Heighten Spell, Earth Spell, Master Spellthief, other feats are irrelevant.

Spellcasting ability:
(Line A) Bard 1; Sorcerer 1; Wizard 11 (Wizard 3, Ultimate Magus 1-3, 5, 6, 8-10); Sublime Chord 10 (Sublime Chord 1, Ultimate Magus 2-10).

Effective class levels for caster level (Line A+3, for Bloodline 3):
(Line B) Bard 4; Sorcerer 4; Wizard 14; Sublime Chord 13.

Sublime Chord states, "A sublime chord's caster level for both her sublime chord spells and the spells she gains from other arcane spellcasting classes is determined by adding her sublime chord level to her level in another arcane spellcasting class. If she had more than one arcane spellcasting class before becoming a sublime chord, she must choose to which class to add her sublime chord levels for the purpose of determining her sublime chord spellcaster level."

Master Spellthief stats, "Your spellthief and arcane spellcaster levels also stack when determining your caster level for all arcane spells."

Now, both of those state 'spellcaster levels' rather than 'caster levels' so anything that increases just your caster level will not be included before totaling your levels for the increased caster level. Thus, for the above two effects only numbers from Line B above will be included, since Bloodline levels contribute directly to your effective class levels.

A given spellcasting class has a caster level equal to its own class level plus the level of every other arcane spellcasting class, as per Master Spellthief, so all of Line B gets added together. Sublime Chord adds its own level again (from Line B) to your level of a given class to determine the caster level for that class, or it adds any one other class level (from Line B) to its own level to determine its own caster level. Therefore, the caster level of a given class is the total of all of Line B, plus Sublime Chord from Line B added in again, or for Sublime Chord you would use the total of all of Line B, plus Wizard from Line B added in again.

After all of that, you add in the Arcane Spell Power +4 bonus from Ultimate Magus, +1 for an Orange Prism Ioun Stone, +1 for a Ring of Arcane Might, and any other caster level bonuses such as Earth Spell.

You can cast up to 6th level Wizard spells at a caster level of 54, and you can cast 4th-9th level Sublime Chord spells at a caster level of 55.

[Devronq]

Any race will work, Bard 1/ Bloodline 3/ Spellthief 1/ Sorcerer 1/ Wizard 3/ Ultimate Magus 1/ Sublime Chord 1/ Ultimate Magus 9; which bloodline you choose is irrelevant. Earth Sense, Heighten Spell, Earth Spell, Master Spellthief, other feats are irrelevant.

Spellcasting ability:
(Line A) Bard 1; Sorcerer 1; Wizard 11 (Wizard 3, Ultimate Magus 1-3, 5, 6, 8-10); Sublime Chord 10 (Sublime Chord 1, Ultimate Magus 2-10).

Effective class levels for caster level (Line A+3, for Bloodline 3):
(Line B) Bard 4; Sorcerer 4; Wizard 14; Sublime Chord 13.

Sublime Chord states, "A sublime chord's caster level for both her sublime chord spells and the spells she gains from other arcane spellcasting classes is determined by adding her sublime chord level to her level in another arcane spellcasting class. If she had more than one arcane spellcasting class before becoming a sublime chord, she must choose to which class to add her sublime chord levels for the purpose of determining her sublime chord spellcaster level."

Master Spellthief stats, "Your spellthief and arcane spellcaster levels also stack when determining your caster level for all arcane spells."

Now, both of those state 'spellcaster levels' rather than 'caster levels' so anything that increases just your caster level will not be included before totaling your levels for the increased caster level. Thus, for the above two effects only numbers from Line B above will be included, since Bloodline levels contribute directly to your effective class levels.

A given spellcasting class has a caster level equal to its own class level plus the level of every other arcane spellcasting class, as per Master Spellthief, so all of Line B gets added together. Sublime Chord adds its own level again (from Line B) to your level of a given class to determine the caster level for that class, or it adds any one other class level (from Line B) to its own level to determine its own caster level. Therefore, the caster level of a given class is the total of all of Line B, plus Sublime Chord from Line B added in again, or for Sublime Chord you would use the total of all of Line B, plus Wizard from Line B added in again.

After all of that, you add in the Arcane Spell Power +4 bonus from Ultimate Magus, +1 for an Orange Prism Ioun Stone, +1 for a Ring of Arcane Might, and any other caster level bonuses such as Earth Spell.

You can cast up to 6th level Wizard spells at a caster level of 54, and you can cast 4th-9th level Sublime Chord spells at a caster level of 55.


What are bloodlines from? Bastards and bloodlines?

[dextercorvia]

What are bloodlines from? Bastards and bloodlines?

Unearthed Arcana.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

What are bloodlines from? Bastards and bloodlines?

Bloodlines (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/races/bloodlines.htm)
Pay close attention to the "Bloodline Levels" section.

[Devronq]

Bloodlines (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/races/bloodlines.htm)
Pay close attention to the "Bloodline Levels" section.

ya i read the whole section, i still dont believe in the slightest that it works the way everyone is saying it does... i think i have enough info on boosting caster levels it seems like most claims are just misinterpreting the rules as per usual but there is still quite a bit f useful information :)

[dextercorvia]

ya i read the whole section, i still dont believe in the slightest that it works the way everyone is saying it does... i think i have enough info on boosting caster levels it seems like most claims are just misinterpreting the rules as per usual but there is still quite a bit f useful information :)

Did you read my post above? There is not a drop of misinterpretation there. Also, Bloodlines are murky, but Biff's is the commonly accepted reading.

[CTrees]

Am I being blind, or is there really no mention yet of an undead or evil (the subtype, not the alignment) tainted scholar with ridiculous taint levels? And no mention of the vermin lord?

[gkathellar]

Am I being blind, or is there really no mention yet of an undead or evil (the subtype, not the alignment) tainted scholar with ridiculous taint levels? And no mention of the vermin lord?

Whether undead works for this is questionable, and since Evil subtype can get a NI casting stat with Tainted Scholar it seems to be considered poor form.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

ya i read the whole section, i still dont believe in the slightest that it works the way everyone is saying it does... i think i have enough info on boosting caster levels it seems like most claims are just misinterpreting the rules as per usual but there is still quite a bit f useful information :)

Even without Bloodline levels it works, the numbers just don't get quite as high. Switch the build to something like Spellthief 1/ Bard 1/ Wizard 7/ Ultimate Magus 1/ Sublime Chord 1/ Ultimate Magus 10. You have the following totals replacing Line B:
Spellthief 1; Bard 1; Wizard 15; Sublime Chord 10.

You still total that line, and then add Sublime Chord again, for your non-Sublime Chord caster levels, and then add another +6 for Arcane Spell Power, Orange Prism Ioun Stone, and Ring of Arcane Might, for a total caster level of 33 for Wizard, with up to 8th level spells. Sublime Chord totals that line, and then adds Wizard again, and then the +6, for a total caster level of 38 for Sublime Chord, with 4th-9th level spells.

[kardar233]

I actually think there's some way you can infinitely loop caster levels using Knight of the Weave and Sublime Chord and maybe Master Spellthief, but I don't know the particulars.

[Flickerdart]

A psionic character/arcanist/cerebremancer with Psiotheurgist has a CL and ML of 30 for a school of magic and a discipline. Oh Dragon Magazine you zany thing.

[Devronq]

Even without Bloodline levels it works, the numbers just don't get quite as high. Switch the build to something like Spellthief 1/ Bard 1/ Wizard 7/ Ultimate Magus 1/ Sublime Chord 1/ Ultimate Magus 10. You have the following totals replacing Line B:
Spellthief 1; Bard 1; Wizard 15; Sublime Chord 10.

You still total that line, and then add Sublime Chord again, for your non-Sublime Chord caster levels, and then add another +6 for Arcane Spell Power, Orange Prism Ioun Stone, and Ring of Arcane Might, for a total caster level of 33 for Wizard, with up to 8th level spells. Sublime Chord totals that line, and then adds Wizard again, and then the +6, for a total caster level of 38 for Sublime Chord, with 4th-9th level spells.

Sigh it doesnt work! i just expalined that with master spell thief they have the exact same wording! They both say add level X to level Y not caster level X to caster level Y which means you still cant get higher than you Hd... Your adding caster levels together not levels could someone explain why im wrong?

Lets take that build
Spellthief 1/ Bard 1/ Wiz7/ Magus10/ Sublime cord1

Assuming you had master spell thief it simply means that all your different spell casting abilitys would be at CL.24. you have 20levels and +4 from magus. your spelltheifs cl is 24 your bards cl is 24 your wizards cl is 24, thats it nothing more nothing less...

[gkathellar]

I actually think there's some way you can infinitely loop caster levels using Knight of the Weave and Sublime Chord and maybe Master Spellthief, but I don't know the particulars.

Neither of those actually works, due to Sublime Chord's specific wording. It's questionable whether you can use Sublime Chord for CL stacking at all, actually, due to its very specific wording.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

There was a Magic Macross Missile build which was CL5 at level 1... I forgot how he managed it, though.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Sigh it doesnt work! i just expalined that with master spell thief they have the exact same wording! They both say add level X to level Y not caster level X to caster level Y which means you still cant get higher than you Hd... Your adding caster levels together not levels could someone explain why im wrong?

Lets take that build
Spellthief 1/ Bard 1/ Wiz7/ Magus10/ Sublime cord1

Assuming you had master spell thief it simply means that all your different spell casting abilitys would be at CL.24. you have 20levels and +4 from magus. your spelltheifs cl is 24 your bards cl is 24 your wizards cl is 24, thats it nothing more nothing less...

Ultimate Magus progresses two of your spellscasting classes for seven of its ten levels. Thus UM 10 adds +17 to your total number of levels. The "+1 level of existing class" is just as good as gaining a level in that class for purposes of spellcaster class levels.

Master Spellthief adds all of your levels together to determine your caster level. Sublime Chord adds itself into your other class to determine caster level, or adds your levels in one other class to itself for its own caster level. Thus, Master Spellthief totals everything you have, and then Sublime Chord adds itself to that total again; or everything gets totaled and then your levels in one other class gets added in again for Sublime Chord.

Prestige classes are not 'spellcasting classes' if they progress the spellcasting ability of another class. Only classes with their own spell list are considered 'spellcasting classes' and any '+1 level of existing class' adds directly to your level in that. If it specified 'class level' then it would count individual levels in a given class as you say it should; if 'caster level' then you could add in Arcane Spell Power and other bonuses before totaling everything together; but what it says is 'spellcaster level' which is the number which determines your spells per day and highest level spell capability. If you cast spells as a Spellthief 1, as a Bard 1, as a Wizard 15, and as a Sublime Chord 10, then those are your 'spellcaster levels' which get added together as per the wording on both abilities.

[Flickerdart]

There was a Magic Macross Missile build which was CL5 at level 1... I forgot how he managed it, though.
CL5 at 1st is easy even without Reserves of Strength. Spell Power, Spellgifted, Primitive Caster, Spell Thematics. Done.

[Devronq]

Ultimate Magus progresses two of your spellscasting classes for seven of its ten levels. Thus UM 10 adds +17 to your total number of levels. The "+1 level of existing class" is just as good as gaining a level in that class for purposes of spellcaster class levels.

Um no thats not what it does and no thats exactly what it doesnt do. It does not say "+1 level of existing class" it increase the spellcasting capability of that class to be AS IF it were one level higher so no it doesnt work.

Master Spellthief adds all of your levels together to determine your caster level. Sublime Chord adds itself into your other class to determine caster level, or adds your levels in one other class to itself for its own caster level. Thus, Master Spellthief totals everything you have, and then Sublime Chord adds itself to that total again; or everything gets totaled and then your levels in one other class gets added in again for Sublime Chord.

Yes master spellthief adds all you levels together for your caster level but no sublime cord doesnt add its self to the total again, nothing states that. Again your adding caster levels instead of spellcasting levels.

Prestige classes are not 'spellcasting classes' if they progress the spellcasting ability of another class. Only classes with their own spell list are considered 'spellcasting classes' and any '+1 level of existing class' adds directly to your level in that. If it specified 'class level' then it would count individual levels in a given class as you say it should; if 'caster level' then you could add in Arcane Spell Power and other bonuses before totaling everything together; but what it says is 'spellcaster level' which is the number which determines your spells per day and highest level spell capability. If you cast spells as a Spellthief 1, as a Bard 1, as a Wizard 15, and as a Sublime Chord 10, then those are your 'spellcaster levels' which get added together as per the wording on both abilities.

I still beleive that to be incorrect, can you prove it with a rules quote that backs up the level/cl/spellcasting class that were discussing?

[dextercorvia]

I still beleive that to be incorrect, can you prove it with a rules quote that backs up the level/cl/spellcasting class that were discussing?


It is fair to rule Master Spellthief and Sublime Chord's wording as mutually exclusive, but can you point to a rules quote that backs up that postition?

[Alienist]

Sorry reread it you are correct.

I'm still not convinced. The user needs to actually cast a divine spell before they can use the prayer beads. Umd won't let you emulate that (even if it lets you pretend to be a divine caster later)

[Devronq]

It is fair to rule Master Spellthief and Sublime Chord's wording as mutually exclusive, but can you point to a rules quote that backs up that postition?

“Caster Level: Generally equal to the number of class levels (see below) in a spellcasting class. Some prestige classes add caster levels to an existing class.
Character Level: The total level of the character, which is the sum of all class
levels held by that character. For instance, a character with three levels of fighter and three levels of rogue has six character levels.
Class Level: The level of a character in a particular class. For a character with levels in only one class, class level and character level are the same.” Dungeon masters guide p.176

“A sublime chord’s caster level for both her sublime chord spells and the spells she gains from other arcane spellcasting classes is determined by adding her sublime chord level to her level in another arcane spellcasting class.” Complete arcane p.61

“Spellcasting: At each level except 1st, 4th, and 7th, you gain new spells per day and an increase in caster level (and spells known, if applicable) as if you had also gained a level in both a prepared arcane casting class and a spontaneous arcane casting class to which you belonged before adding the prestige class level. You do not, however, gain any other benefit a character of those classes would have gained.
At 1st, 4th, and 7th level, you gain new spells per day and an increase in caster level (and spells known, if applicable) as if you had also gained a level in your arcane spellcasting class with the lowest caster level. For example, a 4th-level wizard/1stlevel sorcerer who gained one level of ultimate magus would gain increased spellcasting ability as if he had gained a level of sorcerer (since that class's caster level is lower than his wizard
caster level). If all your arcane spellcasting classes have equal caster levels, you can apply this benefit to any of your existing arcane spellcasting classes. You do not, however, gain any other benefit a character of those classes would have gained.” Complete arcane p.78

[dextercorvia]

I'm still not convinced. The user needs to actually cast a divine spell before they can use the prayer beads. Umd won't let you emulate that (even if it lets you pretend to be a divine caster later)

They can learn how by casting a divine spell, but there are all manner of ways to learn the activation for a magic item. In order to activate it, he must only emulate being capable of casting divine spells.


“Caster Level: Generally equal to the number of class levels (see below) in a spellcasting class. Some prestige classes add caster levels to an existing class.
Character Level: The total level of the character, which is the sum of all class
levels held by that character. For instance, a character with three levels of fighter and three levels of rogue has six character levels.
Class Level: The level of a character in a particular class. For a character with levels in only one class, class level and character level are the same.” Dungeon masters guide p.176

“A sublime chord’s caster level for both her sublime chord spells and the spells she gains from other arcane spellcasting classes is determined by adding her sublime chord level to her level in another arcane spellcasting class.” Complete arcane p.61

“Spellcasting: At each level except 1st, 4th, and 7th, you gain new spells per day and an increase in caster level (and spells known, if applicable) as if you had also gained a level in both a prepared arcane casting class and a spontaneous arcane casting class to which you belonged before adding the prestige class level. You do not, however, gain any other benefit a character of those classes would have gained.
At 1st, 4th, and 7th level, you gain new spells per day and an increase in caster level (and spells known, if applicable) as if you had also gained a level in your arcane spellcasting class with the lowest caster level. For example, a 4th-level wizard/1stlevel sorcerer who gained one level of ultimate magus would gain increased spellcasting ability as if he had gained a level of sorcerer (since that class's caster level is lower than his wizard
caster level). If all your arcane spellcasting classes have equal caster levels, you can apply this benefit to any of your existing arcane spellcasting classes. You do not, however, gain any other benefit a character of those classes would have gained.” Complete arcane p.78

Is there any reason you are quoting Ultimate Magus at me to explain how Sublime Chord and Master Spellthief interact? You have provided no rules explanation for why your reading should be accepted over the one that Biff has presented.

[Hirax]

I'm still not convinced. The user needs to actually cast a divine spell before they can use the prayer beads. Umd won't let you emulate that (even if it lets you pretend to be a divine caster later)

Casting a divine spell lets you understand how to activate the prayer beads. The activation of the beads is in no way reliant on casting the divine spell, as opposed to items such as runestaffs. To activate them, you either need to cast a divine spell, which then confers the knowledge of how to activate them upon you, at which point you never need to cast a divine spell to get them to work again. Alternatively, if you can make a DC 25 UMD check to activate an item blindly, then it will work just fine, and you'll gain +2 on subsequent checks to activate it blindly again.

[Alienist]

Casting a divine spell lets you understand how to activate the prayer beads. The activation of the beads is in no way reliant on casting the divine spell, as opposed to items such as runestaffs. To activate them, you either need to cast a divine spell, which then confers the knowledge of how to activate them upon you, at which point you never need to cast a divine spell to get them to work again. Alternatively, if you can make a DC 25 UMD check to activate an item blindly, then it will work just fine, and you'll gain +2 on subsequent checks to activate it blindly again.

I grant that in the general case that is how it works, but specifically in the case of the strand of prayer beads I disagree.

I think the difficulty is the first section, where it talks about casting a divine spell

If I can extrapolate, you seem to think that is merely an alternative to (for instance ) casting Identify.

I on the other hand, see it as an additional prerequisite that must be met before the item can be used.

So if I was the DM and a player identified the strand of prayer beads I might tell them "it's a strand of prayer beads, you need to cast a divine spell before you can activate it". I would let a player use UMD blindly to activate it, but only AFTER they had cast a divine spell (in which case they wouldn't need to? Factotum perhaps???)

[dextercorvia]

So if I was the DM and a player identified the strand of prayer beads I might tell them "it's a strand of prayer beads, you need to cast a divine spell before you can activate it". I would let a player use UMD blindly to activate it, but only AFTER they had cast a divine spell (in which case they wouldn't need to? Factotum perhaps???)

If you were DM, that would be your prerogative, however that isn't how it is stated.


This item appears to be a normal string of prayer beads until the owner casts a divine spell. Once that occurs, the owner instantly knows the powers of the prayer beads and how to activate them.

How to activate, not allowed to activate it. It isn't conditional.

[Alienist]

If you were DM, that would be your prerogative, however that isn't how it is stated.



How to activate, not allowed to activate it. It isn't conditional.

Well, specific trumps general.

In any case, perhaps I misunderstand the rules for activation.
Can a wizard tell a non-spell caster "how to activate" a wand of fireballs and thus bypass the need for UMD? I think your interpretation of what "how to activate" means is sufficiently broad as to render UMD obsolete.

[dextercorvia]

Well, specific trumps general.

In any case, perhaps I misunderstand the rules for activation.
Can a wizard tell a non-spell caster "how to activate" a wand of fireballs and thus bypass the need for UMD? I think your interpretation of what "how to activate" means is sufficiently broad as to render UMD obsolete.

The fighter still has no means of activation. If the wizard told him the command word, then he could use Use a Wand instead of Activate Blindly.

Specifically, UMD's blind activation allows you to activate a magic item without knowing how or actually doing the activation activity. That applies here.

[Flickerdart]

Can a wizard tell a non-spell caster "how to activate" a wand of fireballs and thus bypass the need for UMD? I think your interpretation of what "how to activate" means is sufficiently broad as to render UMD obsolete.
Can a brain surgeon tell an accountant how to operate on his brain? Yes, but it's not going to do any good.

[Alienist]

Can a brain surgeon tell an accountant how to operate on his brain? Yes, but it's not going to do any good.

+1 Exactly.

[Devronq]

They can learn how by casting a divine spell, but there are all manner of ways to learn the activation for a magic item. In order to activate it, he must only emulate being capable of casting divine spells.



Is there any reason you are quoting Ultimate Magus at me to explain how Sublime Chord and Master Spellthief interact? You have provided no rules explanation for why your reading should be accepted over the one that Biff has presented.

Ah ok sorry i wasn't sure if you were talking about the whole build or just that specifically, the interaction between the two can be easily explained.

Ok let use this build for the purposes of explaining it.
Wiz 8 Bard 1 Spellthief 1 Sublime Cord 10 with master spell thief feat and i will quote books to explain.

Line A This will represent your actually levels in the various classes
Wiz 8 Bard 1 Spellthief 1 Sublime Cord 10

Line B This will represent your caster level in the various classes
Wiz 20 Bard 20 Spellthief 20 Sublime cord 20

"Your spellthief and arcane spellcaster levels also stack when determining your caster level for all arcane spells." Complete scoundrel p.79

What this means is that all your levels are added together to determine your caster level (because all your levels are arcane spellcaster levels and it says all arcane spells) making all you classes have a caster level of 20, because 20 is the combined total of all your levels. I believe we both agree at this point yes?

“A sublime chord’s caster level for both her sublime chord spells and the spells she gains from other arcane spellcasting classes is determined by adding her sublime chord level to her level in another arcane spellcasting class. If she had more than one arcane spellcasting class before becoming a sublime chord, she must choose to which class to add her sublime chord levels for the purpose of determining her sublime chord spellcaster level.” Complete arcane p.61

So what i believe the mistake your making here is that your doing this

Caster level=Sublime cord level+Caster level

Which is incorrect, but if it said "A sublime chord’s caster level for both her sublime chord spells and the spells she gains from other arcane spellcasting classes is determined by adding her sublime chord level to her caster level in another arcane spellcasting class." then it would be correct.

What is says and what is written here is

Caster level=Sublime cord level+Level of a single spellcasting class you own

Which means

Caster level= 10+8+18cl (wizard being the highest single class) but since you are getting 20 caster level from your master spell theif feat you would take the higher value and use the 20.

Also as a note the reason why spellthief doesn't have the same issue is for two reasons, 1 it adds all spellcasting classes not just one of your choice and 2 it specifically says all arcane spells.

It that sufficient reason or any questions?

[dextercorvia]

It that sufficient reason or any questions?

No, you have presented your argument in much the same way as Biff did, but referring to the same text, and asserting that this was the way to interpret it. You asked him for supporting rules text, by which I assumed you meant something other than what he had already referred to, and I'm asking you for the same.

Take a Spellthief1/Bard2/Wizard6/UltimateMagus1/SublimeChord1/Ultimate Magus9

First of all, when determining CL, we have the usual PrC advancement,
At each level (except # sometimes) you gain new spells per day and an increase in caster level (and spells known, if applicable) as if you had also gained a level in X

So, you add relevant PrC levels in when calculating CL. Since class level is the default CL, you want to do this first.

Assuming, I always advanced Wizard, and advanced Sublime Chord 7 times, that makes my Wizard class level (for determining CL) 16, and my Sublime Chord class level (for determining CL) 8.

Now we will do the Sublime Chord thingy:


A sublime chord’s caster level for both her sublime chord spells and the spells she gains from other arcane spellcasting classes is determined by adding her sublime chord level to her level in another arcane spellcasting class.

So, now I get to add my Sublime Chord class level (effectively 8, since we are still determining CL) to my Wizard class level (effectively 16, since we are still determining CL). This puts my new 'base' CL at 24 for wizard. Now lets look at the Master Spellthief Feat.


Your spellthief and arcane spellcaster levels also stack when determining your caster level for all arcane spells.

Cool. I can stack my spellthief level. That's only a +1, but wait, I can also stack my arcane spellcaster levels. I'm already counting Wizard (since that is what CL I'm working on), but I can still add 2 for bard and 8 for Sublime Chord (arcane spellcaster level is your effective class level for determining spells per/day etc.). That gives me a CL for wizard of 34.

[Flickerdart]

But your Sublime Chord CL is also 24, so shouldn't your CL be 49?

[dextercorvia]

But your Sublime Chord CL is also 24, so shouldn't your CL be 49?

Your Sublime Chord CL is 24, but that isn't what you add in anywhere. You add in your spellcaster level, or class levels in Sublime Chord (that you use to determine CL).

[Flickerdart]

Oh, right. That makes sense, then. Here's hoping that maybe 5e will have the thesaurus problem down pat.

[dextercorvia]

Oh, right. That makes sense, then. Here's hoping that maybe 5e will have the thesaurus problem down pat.

I have been intending for the last year or so to write a CL terminology miniguide, but I can never find the motivation.

I like that Legend differentiated between level, level, and level. I wasn't wild about the name circle at first, but it has grown on me.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

This thread is relevant to your interests. (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19872350/Raising_Caster_Level) My favorite is Suffer the Flesh, combined with Persistent Spell and a Rod of Bodily Restoration.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Using your own example of: Wizard 8; Bard 1; Spellthief 1; Sublime Chord 10

Sublime Chord makes it so your caster level in a given class is equal to your level in that class plus your Sublime Chord level. So you're adding Sublime Chord and one other class together for your caster level for any given class.

"Your spellthief and arcane spellcaster levels also stack when determining your caster level for all arcane spells."

The above means that all of your levels that contribute to arcane spellcasting ability, plus your Spellthief levels, also get added together in addition to other effects. Thus you still add Sublime Chord plus one other class, but then you add up all your levels of spellcasting ability again to determine your total caster level.

You have two separate abilities which add levels in multiple classes together to determine your caster level. One adds two classes together, the other adds all of your classes together including one that already got added in once, so your caster level does indeed surpass your total character level. The two abilities are not exclusive of one another, mathematically you have something like Wizard=8; Bard=1; Spellthief=1; Sublime Cord=10;

Your caster level for X class is normally just X by default; Sublime Chord states (+C), so with that alone you have X+C;
Master Spellthief makes all other values get added to X, so with that alone you use W+B+S+C, one of which is X. (i.e. for Wizard, it would be X+B+S+C, X=W.)
Combined, you use W+B+S+C+C to determine your caster level for anything but Sublime Chord. If X=C, you replace (+C) with (+W), so it's instead W+B+S+C+W.
Neither of these abilities excludes the other, your caster level for a given class is the sum of that class plus your levels in all other classes plus your Sublime Chord level again.

Note that the wording of spellcaster level doesn't mean caster level, because that's not what it says, and it doesn't mean class level, because that's also not what it says, because it's referring to your level in a given class on which your spellcasting ability is determined. Using Ultimate Magus in the build increases your spellcaster level in two classes simultaneously for seven of its ten levels, thus further increasing your already excessive caster level.

[Devronq]

Can you please quote me somewhere in any book the definition of spellcaster level? I know you just gave it but can you quote its definition from a book, like book and page number or give me an idea of where to look?

[dextercorvia]

Can you please quote me somewhere in any book the definition of spellcaster level? I know you just gave it but can you quote its definition from a book, like book and page number or give me an idea of where to look?

Page 20, and 46 of Complete Arcane demonstrates that it is different from both class level (either in Alienist or the base class) and class level.

[candycorn]

I grant that in the general case that is how it works, but specifically in the case of the strand of prayer beads I disagree.Then specifically, in the caste of the strand of prayer beads, you are incorrect.


Some magic items are activated by special words, thoughts, or actions. You can activate such an item as if you were using the activation word, thought, or action, even when you’re not and even if you don’t know it. You do have to perform some equivalent activity in order to make the check. That is, you must speak, wave the item around, or otherwise attempt to get it to activate. You get a special +2 bonus on your Use Magic Device check if you’ve activated the item in question at least once before.Emphasis mine. Even if you don't know the action required to activate it, you wave it around, make a DC 25 check, and poof! It activates. That's the general.


This item appears to be a normal string of prayer beads until the owner casts a divine spell. Once that occurs, the owner instantly knows the powers of the prayer beads and how to activate them.Ok, casting a divine spell makes you know how to activate it. This has no bearing on UMD, which explicitly does not require knowledge of how to activate it.


I on the other hand, see it as an additional prerequisite that must be met before the item can be used.Incorrect. It is not phrased as a prerequisite for using it. It is an additional benefit. Any divine caster that has them when he/she casts, gets the knowledge free. That doesn't invalidate other means of learning that information, or other means of using the item without it.


So if I was the DM and a player identified the strand of prayer beads I might tell them "it's a strand of prayer beads, you need to cast a divine spell before you can activate it". I would let a player use UMD blindly to activate it, but only AFTER they had cast a divine spell (in which case they wouldn't need to? Factotum perhaps???)And that's perfectly within your power as a DM. Houserules are within your authority.

However, claiming they're the base rules is not.

[Devronq]

Page 20, and 46 of Complete Arcane demonstrates that it is different from both class level (either in Alienist or the base class) and class level.

Sorry could you be more specific i read those pages and i dont see anything relevant about class level and spell casting level.

Also to clarify the only thing I'm not agreeing with at this point is your definition of arcane spellcaster levels

[dextercorvia]

Sorry could you be more specific i read those pages and i dont see anything relevant about class level and spell casting level.

Also to clarify the only thing I'm not agreeing with at this point is your definition of arcane spellcaster levels

Both of those PrC's have SLAs with CL = arcane spellcaster level. This implies it can't just be class level (because that would have been clearer to say) either in the PrC, or the base class(which would be weird).

One of those in my post was supposed to say caster level. The ability sets the CL of itself to the arcane spellcaster level, as opposed to just the character's CL. This is an acknowledgement that a character can have more than one CL, and that it can be modified in ways that arcane spellcaster level can not. The default CL for a wizard(or whatever) is equal to his arcane spellcaster level. But, CL can be affected further by feats, traits, items, spells, and other racial and class abilities. This doesn't change your spellcaster level.

[Alienist]

Then specifically, in the caste of the strand of prayer beads, you are incorrect.

Emphasis mine. Even if you don't know the action required to activate it, you wave it around, make a DC 25 check, and poof! It activates. That's the general.

Ok, casting a divine spell makes you know how to activate it. This has no bearing on UMD, which explicitly does not require knowledge of how to activate it.

Incorrect. It is not phrased as a prerequisite for using it. It is an additional benefit. Any divine caster that has them when he/she casts, gets the knowledge free. That doesn't invalidate other means of learning that information, or other means of using the item without it.

And that's perfectly within your power as a DM. Houserules are within your authority.

However, claiming they're the base rules is not.

The phrase "once that occurs" does in fact signal a prerequisite in normal usage of the English language. You can argue that is not the case in the D&D rules, but you then have to point to the substitution. (I show how this is done below)

The essence of the disagreement I was having with the other chaps has to do with how "how to activate" should be interpreted in this specific case.

Neither is 'my interpretation' so easily dismissed just by calling it a house rule. Is interpretation called for here? If there is no clear definition then yes, it is down to interpretation. Labelling my interpretation a house rule doesn't change the fact that your interpretation is just as much a house rule as mine. You should not pretend that the RAW is clear cut, because in fact there is no definition of this troublesome phrase in the rules. It is not to be found in WotC's glossary either.

So let us say that we have two competing definitions. Yours and mine. (Or theirs and mine if you prefer) Can we say they are equally valid? Not so fast, is there really no criterion by which they can be judged?

We could choose plain English. In plain English knowing how to do something is practically synonymous with having the power or ability to do that thing. So in that case all that is required is for one player to cast the divine spell, and then hand it off to his buddy the Bard who can now freely use it. But now we must explain why that usage of "how to activate" does not also apply to everything else in the game which requires specialist knowledge. Now we have anybody using any magic item simply because someone told them "how". Arcane using Divine? Doesn't matter, he told me how.

Why stop at magic items? Why not keep going? A wizard tells a commoner how to cast wish and pretty soon all the beggars in the land are riding everywhere. A fighter watches his buddy the cleric turning undead and suddenly deduces how to do it himself... etc. (There is something similar to this in the rules for levelling up of course, but if you want to stick a level in divine caster simply to use the Prayer Beads, be my guest)

Or we might, for instance, select the definition that does the least injury to the rest of the rules.

Mine is the clear winner there. Because my interpretation of "how to activate" is consistent with the framework that the rules establish which is that knowing "how" something is done is not the same as actually being able to do it. In other words, there is how and then there is how. If you lack the class feature of the how, then being "told how" all day long will do you not a bit of good.

Perhaps I am not explaining myself very clearly. I know how the logic works, but I cannot explain it clearly enough to be understood?

Similarly, in 3.5 at least there is the conceptual framework of innate knowledge, or inherent knowledge, that cannot be adequately explained in mere words. This is captured in class features. It is entirely reasonable, under that framework, to read the bit about "Once that occurs, the owner instantly knows the powers of the prayer beads and how to activate them" and conclude that the prerequisite conveys a special kind of inherent knowledge, one that cannot be explained, but must be experienced. Cleric A could explain to fellow Cleric B what the sensations feel like, but until Cleric B actually meets the pre-requisite personally he will not truly know it. It must be experienced, it cannot be merely explained.

Perhaps the plain English of what the word "know" means is not so plain after all.

(Hint: there would be far fewer books on Epistemology if it were really as easy as your interpretation requires it to be!)

I could tell you "how" to jump 100 feet into the air (with your legs press rapidly against solid ground with a force of X Newtons), but you would certainly not be able to do it.

So the crutch on which my fellow debaters argument rests proves to be a thin reed indeed. If it snaps, then what?

Then we must fall back on deciding whether the prerequisite should be a "freebie" or a restriction. To that end, I recommend the user take a look at the Prayer Bead. Yes, the caster level bonus is good, almost too good. That alone makes it pretty amazing, but keep looking. Oh? What is this?



Bead of summons Summons a powerful creature of appropriate alignment from the Outer Planes (an angel, devil, etc.) to aid the wearer for one day. (If the wearer uses the bead of summons to summon a deity’s emissary frivolously, the deity takes that character’s items and places a geas/quest upon him as punishment in the very least.)


(emphasis added)

Here's a one-shot power that grabs your Deity's personal attention and causes him or her to take a personal interest in your case.

If you use it frivolously, they (the Deity, personally) take all your magic items. YIKES!
And (and? seriously? we need an and after losing all our items???)
places a geas or quest on you. YOWZA!

Now here's a thought exercise. Is the item which contains the most powerful caster level boost in the game, which in one version forms some kind of personal bat-phone straight to your celestial sponsor...

... is that item going to come with freebies that other magic items don't have that make it absurdly much easier to use than otherwise?

Is that how Relics and Artifacts work? (I dunno, maybe it is, find me a precedent, I'm willing to be convinced)

OR

Is it more likely that these extremely powerful items of nigh-artifactiness are just ever so slightly more locked down than normal?

Is your Deity going to leave his cell-phone lying around with the pin number sticky-note taped to the back?

Or is he going to only give out his personal number to a select few? And if he does (somehow) get a crank caller in the middle of the night (e.g. a Wizard using the bead of karma) is he going to be happy? I suspect not...

You tell me what is more reasonable. If you insist that there is one and only one true way to read it, then point me to it in the glossary, "once that occurs" I will believe you and admit I am wrong.

Now let us look for a bit of context.

Sustaining spoon: must be placed in an empty vessel. Could you use UMD to bypass this prerequisite?

Tome of Clear Thought, must be read - what if you read it aloud? Would not everyone in hearing range get the bonus as well? Can you use UMD to get the bonus without reading it?

What about Druid's Vestment? That might be a little closer to what you are getting at (see, I'm not just cherry picking them in my favour). You need to have "the wild shape ability". So lets emulate it! DC is 20. Now we can wild shape, right? Never mind the DM saying "hang on, you don't actually have that ability, you're just pretending to have it..."

Oh, oh wait.



This skill does not let you actually use the class feature of another class. It just lets you activate items as if you had that class feature.


Oops! Maybe UMD isn't quite as all powerful as you make it out to be...

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

I'm pretty sure "spellcaster level" is one of those things that they just thought should be obvious, similar to the presumed drawbacks of the 'dead' condition. I've gone looking, and found the following:

PHB p313:
spellcaster: A character capable of casting spells.

Thus, "spellcaster level" would be the level at which your character is capable of casting spells.

Then you have the following examples (http://www.google.com/cse?cx=015155386140379294602%3Ak9hv7ukafn4&cof=FORID%3A1&q=spellcaster+level&sa=GO&siteurl=www.d20srd.org%2Findexes%2Fclasses.htm#gsc .tab=0&gsc.q=%22spellcaster%20level%22) of that term in use:

(Source (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/spellsIntro.htm)) Antimagic field does not automatically suppress epic spells as it does standard spells. Instead, each time an epic spell is subject to an antimagic field, make a dispel check as a 20th-level caster (1d20 + 20). The epic spell has a DC of 11 + the epic spell’s spellcaster level. If the suppression check is successful, the epic spell is suppressed like any other spell. If the dispel check is unsuccessful, the epic spell functions normally.

Thus, only your level of spellcasting capability, rather than whatever your caster level for the spell was, is what contributes to your epic spells overcoming an Antimagic Field.

Improved Familiar (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm) has a minimum arcane spellcaster level for acquiring a given familiar, with another version of the feat appearing in CW, thus your level of spellcasting ability determines what familiar you can gain, rather than your caster level for a given spell.

A Demilich (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/monsters/demilich.htm) gains the following Spell-Like Abilities:
At will—alter self, astral projection, create greater undead, create undead, death knell, enervation, greater dispel magic, harm (usually used to heal itself), summon monster I-IX, telekinesis, and weird; 2/day— greater planar ally. Demiliches use these abilities as casters of a level equal to their spellcaster level, but the save DCs are equal to 10 + the demilich’s HD + the demilich’s Charisma modifier.

Thus, the caster level of a Demilich's spell-like abilities is equal to its spellcasting capability, not whatever it can boost its caster level to. I seriously doubt a Wizard 5/ Incantatrix 10/ Archmage 5/ Epic Incantatrix 20 Demilich would only be able to use its spell-like abilities at a caster level of 5, for only having Wizard 5 despite being able to cast spells as though he were a 40th level Wizard.

There are many more examples, but I think it's pretty clear that "spellcaster level" refers to the definition of "spellcaster" plus the character's level of capability in whatever class grants that status.

[Vendle]

Alienist,

A large part of your post seemed to be (in my impression) refuting a strawman arguement.

candycorn stated that UMD lets a PC activate an item blindly, instead of learning how an item works. Without actually casting divine spells, the PC would have to activate the Beads blindly every time they wanted to use them, although familiarity with success would net the +2 bonus. This would even apply to PCs who can cast divine spells but who, for some reason, so far have only used arcane spells.

Appealing to the relative power of the item is also a logical pitfall, as many items are absurdly broken. On a side note, personally I like the suggestion that a diety would immediately confront and punish the powergaming PC wizard that tried to use his prayer beads. Gives the DM in me a grin.

The phrase "once that occurs" can also denote the order of events in a given example, as it seems to serve in this case. The caster who casts a divine spell gains the knowledge after casting. It does not appear to be a prerequisite to discovering how to use the item through other methods (possibly UMD, an Identify spell, etc.).

[Hirax]

Appealing to the relative power of the item is also a logical pitfall, as many items are absurdly broken. On a side note, personally I like the suggestion that a diety would immediately confront and punish the powergaming PC wizard that tried to use his prayer beads. Gives the DM in me a grin.


The deity probably doesn't care about the beads. Deities probably get mad if you summon their minions for frivolous purposes, regardless of the means you use. So don't summon solars or pit fiends with the hopes of turning them into your personal shoppers. :smallbiggrin:

Regardless, this isn't a situation where the rules are vague, it's unambiguously clear that UMD works.

[Chronos]

If you're really bothered about UMDing a Bead of Karma, just get a friendly cleric to cast Imbue with Spell Ability (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/imbueWithSpellAbility.htm) on you. Poof, you cast a divine spell, and the beads only require you to do that once, ever. You're fine now. Now all you have to do is meet the UMD check for activating a spell trigger item.

[Devronq]

I'm pretty sure "spellcaster level" is one of those things that they just thought should be obvious, similar to the presumed drawbacks of the 'dead' condition. I've gone looking, and found the following:

PHB p313:
spellcaster: A character capable of casting spells.

Thus, "spellcaster level" would be the level at which your character is capable of casting spells.

Then you have the following examples (http://www.google.com/cse?cx=015155386140379294602%3Ak9hv7ukafn4&cof=FORID%3A1&q=spellcaster+level&sa=GO&siteurl=www.d20srd.org%2Findexes%2Fclasses.htm#gsc .tab=0&gsc.q=%22spellcaster%20level%22) of that term in use:

(Source (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/spellsIntro.htm)) Antimagic field does not automatically suppress epic spells as it does standard spells. Instead, each time an epic spell is subject to an antimagic field, make a dispel check as a 20th-level caster (1d20 + 20). The epic spell has a DC of 11 + the epic spell’s spellcaster level. If the suppression check is successful, the epic spell is suppressed like any other spell. If the dispel check is unsuccessful, the epic spell functions normally.

Thus, only your level of spellcasting capability, rather than whatever your caster level for the spell was, is what contributes to your epic spells overcoming an Antimagic Field.

Improved Familiar (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm) has a minimum arcane spellcaster level for acquiring a given familiar, with another version of the feat appearing in CW, thus your level of spellcasting ability determines what familiar you can gain, rather than your caster level for a given spell.

A Demilich (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/monsters/demilich.htm) gains the following Spell-Like Abilities:
At will—alter self, astral projection, create greater undead, create undead, death knell, enervation, greater dispel magic, harm (usually used to heal itself), summon monster I-IX, telekinesis, and weird; 2/day— greater planar ally. Demiliches use these abilities as casters of a level equal to their spellcaster level, but the save DCs are equal to 10 + the demilich’s HD + the demilich’s Charisma modifier.

Thus, the caster level of a Demilich's spell-like abilities is equal to its spellcasting capability, not whatever it can boost its caster level to. I seriously doubt a Wizard 5/ Incantatrix 10/ Archmage 5/ Epic Incantatrix 20 Demilich would only be able to use its spell-like abilities at a caster level of 5, for only having Wizard 5 despite being able to cast spells as though he were a 40th level Wizard.

There are many more examples, but I think it's pretty clear that "spellcaster level" refers to the definition of "spellcaster" plus the character's level of capability in whatever class grants that status.

I don't disagree with what you said here it just seems like A and B could both be correct statments.

A."PHB p313:
spellcaster: A character capable of casting spells.

Thus, "spellcaster level" would be the level at which your character is capable of casting spells."

B."PHB p313:
spellcaster: A character capable of casting spells.

Thus, "spellcaster level" would be the total combined levels of all your spell casting classes."

Both to me seem logical and with my thinking the demilich, which by the way has 21st level spellcasting for its 21hd, and specifically says 21st level wizard in its special ability's, and no default class levels, would have 51 caster level and 51 spellcaster levels.

Lets look at p.47 of the complete arcane, the initiate of the sevenfold viel, as someone previously suggested that i look there.

For its personal ward it says the duration is 1min a level. It doesn't specify caster level, spellcaster level class level or anything.

Look at the example build, its abjurer 9 initiate 2. Its personal ward lasts 3mins... Why 3? that doesn't back up ether of our arguments...

[Alienist]

.

The phrase "once that occurs" can also denote the order of events in a given example, as it seems to serve in this case. The caster who casts a divine spell gains the knowledge after casting. It does not appear to be a prerequisite to discovering how to use the item through other methods (possibly UMD, an Identify spell, etc.).

So if event A must happen before event B, you are saying that A is not a prerequisite of B.

.... righto ....

Anyway, I'm done arguing about the semantics of this, I've had my quota for the week. :smallbiggrin:


If you're really bothered about UMDing a Bead of Karma, just get a friendly cleric to cast Imbue with Spell Ability (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/imbueWithSpellAbility.htm) on you. Poof, you cast a divine spell, and the beads only require you to do that once, ever. You're fine now. Now all you have to do is meet the UMD check for activating a spell trigger item.

+1 completely agree without any reservations.

Would agree with again. :smallbiggrin:

[Curious]

I just realized, while we are on the topic of caster level, that this (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/sorcerer/archetypes/paizo---sorcerer-archetypes/wildblooded/sanguine) sorceror bloodline is incredibly broken.

It just straight up increases your caster level whenever you cast a necromancy spell. No restrictions, no time limit, just bam, plus one caster level. I hope I'm missing something, 'cause otherwise this desperately needs errata.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

First of all, the sample Demilich is based on a Wizard 21, if you read below about creating a Demilich you'll see that they don't all automatically have 21 HD and 21st level spellcasting ability, it's based on their class levels prior to gaining the template. They get "Spells: The demilich can cast any spells it could cast as a lich." That means the stat block for my example would contain "40th-level Wizard spellcaster" because that's what level of spellcasting that particular character has, and by precedent that's how it would be denoted in the stat block.

In my example it would have a 40th level spellcasting ability, as well as 40 HD, but by your reasoning it would only have a caster level of 5 for those spell-like abilities. I seriously doubt this is what the designers intended.


I've just been googling "spellcaster level" and it appears that the general consensus is that any prestige class level that grants "+1 level of existing spellcasting class" gives you an increase to your spellcaster level for all things spell-related, but not things that are class-level-related such as familiar benefits. As I said, "spellcaster level" is your level of spellcasting capability, and it needs to be officially spelled out just as much as the drawbacks of character death need to be officially spelled out.

[Alienist]

I just realized, while we are on the topic of caster level, that this (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/sorcerer/archetypes/paizo---sorcerer-archetypes/wildblooded/sanguine) sorceror bloodline is incredibly broken.

It just straight up increases your caster level whenever you cast a necromancy spell. No restrictions, no time limit, just bam, plus one caster level. I hope I'm missing something, 'cause otherwise this desperately needs errata.

Its just the same as spellgifted but without the drawback, or a reserve feat but without the bonus.

No errata necessary.

I can see that a rules lawyer might try to argue that it is a permanent increase, but there is nothing in the feat to indicate that it is permanent. The lack of the word permanent is a big glaring failure for the argument, but of course that wouldn't stop any but the lowest CR rules lawyer.

When you stop casting the necromancy spell the condition for getting the plus one caster level goes away, and so does the benefit.

Consider this use of the word whenever:


Here’s perhaps the most fundamental variant to the d20 rules: Don’t use a d20! Instead, roll 3d6 whenever you would roll a d20, applying bonuses and penalties normally. The possible results when rolling 3d6 (or any other multiple dice) form a bell curve—that is, a range of odds that favors average results much more than extreme results.


Does playing with this variant mean we roll 3d6 the first time we would have rolled a d20, and then 6d6 the second time, and then 9d6 the third time? Pretty quickly you'd run out of d6es!!

No, any gains or replacements that require a "whenever" end naturally when the whenever does too. As another example, consider the favoured enemy bonus. It is untyped, and thus stackable right? So every time I attack my favoured enemy I get a permanent +2 bonus to hit and damage?! Wow. That must be why Ranger is tier 4 and paladins and fighters are tier 5!!!!!!!!!!! :D

[Curious]

I can see that a rules lawyer might try to argue that it is a permanent increase, but there is nothing in the feat to indicate that it is permanent. The lack of the word permanent is a big glaring failure for the argument, but of course that wouldn't stop any but the lowest CR rules lawyer.

There is nothing in the ability to indicate it is temporary either, and if we assumed that everything that gave a bonus wasn't permanent unless stated otherwise, things like weapon specialization would only apply on a single roll.



No, any gains or replacements that require a "whenever" end naturally when the whenever does too. As another example, consider the favoured enemy bonus. It is untyped, and thus stackable right? So every time I attack my favoured enemy I get a permanent +2 bonus to hit and damage?! Wow. That must be why Ranger is tier 4 and paladins and fighters are tier 5!!!!!!!!!!! :D

That is a different situation; the ranger bonus does not imply that you gain a new bonus every time you attack an enemy, just a straightforward +2 to hit and damage. On the other hand, the bloodline ability allows a new bonus to be gained every time you cast a necromancy spell, with no limitation.

[dextercorvia]

Lets look at p.47 of the complete arcane, the initiate of the sevenfold viel, as someone previously suggested that i look there.

For its personal ward it says the duration is 1min a level. It doesn't specify caster level, spellcaster level class level or anything.

Look at the example build, its abjurer 9 initiate 2. Its personal ward lasts 3mins... Why 3? that doesn't back up ether of our arguments...

Examples are wrong all the time. They are not rules text.

I said to look on page 46.


An initiate’s caster level for these veils is equal to her arcane spellcaster level.

[SirFredgar]

There is nothing in the ability to indicate it is temporary either, and if we assumed that everything that gave a bonus wasn't permanent unless stated otherwise, things like weapon specialization would only apply on a single roll.



That is a different situation; the ranger bonus does not imply that you gain a new bonus every time you attack an enemy, just a straightforward +2 to hit and damage. On the other hand, the bloodline ability allows a new bonus to be gained every time you cast a necromancy spell, with no limitation.

In regaurd to your Weapon specialization example, I don't think it entirely fits. The bonus would aplly to any attack roll, simply because you always have the feat when you attack.


I am interested, however, in the bloodline. I cannot access the srd from here, would you be able to quote relevent ability?

EDIT: After taking a look at the srd (finally got home from work), It looks to operate as a clerics domain power would. Sure, the language is slightly different, but nothing in there screams "permanent increase". What it does state, as Alienist asserts, is that Whenever you cast a necromancy spell, you increase your caster level by 1.

Why would that +1 persist longer then the condition that brings it about? And going back to your weapon specialization analog; if feats/abilities did work like this, then it'd be more like you get a cumultive +2 to damage rolls for every damage roll you make.... forever. IF such were the case, TO boards would be full of level 4 fighters with Weapon Specialization, with the other 16 levels dedicated to finding a way to deliver that infinite damage to any target.

Also... pathfinder is meh.

[Curious]

In regaurd to your Weapon specialization example, I don't think it entirely fits. The bonus would aplly to any attack roll, simply because you always have the feat when you attack.


I am interested, however, in the bloodline. I cannot access the srd from here, would you be able to quote relevent ability?

EDIT: After taking a look at the srd (finally got home from work), It looks to operate as a clerics domain power would. Sure, the language is slightly different, but nothing in there screams "permanent increase". What it does state, as Alienist asserts, is that Whenever you cast a necromancy spell, you increase your caster level by 1.

Why would that +1 persist longer then the condition that brings it about? And going back to your weapon specialization analog; if feats/abilities did work like this, then it'd be more like you get a cumultive +2 to damage rolls for every damage roll you make.... forever. IF such were the case, TO boards would be full of level 4 fighters with Weapon Specialization, with the other 16 levels dedicated to finding a way to deliver that infinite damage to any target.

Also... pathfinder is meh.

While the sane interpretation is indeed to interpret it as simply increasing your caster level by 1 when casting necromancy spells, the actual text states-


Whenever you cast a spell of the necromancy school, your effective caster level is increased by 1.

Since it has no language placing a time limit or restriction on the ability, you could theoretically increase your caster level infinitely by casting necromancy spells.

Also, pathfinder is 3.5, but with rules patches. It is fine.

[candycorn]

The phrase "once that occurs" does in fact signal a prerequisite in normal usage of the English language. You can argue that is not the case in the D&D rules, but you then have to point to the substitution. (I show how this is done below)Irrelevant.

Once that occurs, you know the powers of the item, and you know how to activate it.

Let's say we want to take a trip on the Subway.
Normally, you need a token to ride the Subway.
If you go to the booth and pay some money, you get a token.
But, if you ran the marathon this week, you don't need a token to ride.

Now, in this example, the token is knowledge of how to activate the item and what its powers are.
Going to the booth and paying? That's casting a divine spell.
Running the marathon? That's using UMD successfully.

Does a marathon runner need to go to the booth and get a token? No. Why? Because, they don't need a token to ride.

Does a UMD user need to cast a divine spell to use the item? No. Why? Because, they don't need knowledge of the items activation method or powers to activate the item.


Neither is 'my interpretation' so easily dismissed just by calling it a house rule.Correct. It is easily dismissed by being a houserule.

A prerequisite for gaining knowledge is not necessary when knowledge is not needed. That's the honest to goodness literal rules.

The rules state that normally, the user of a magic item must know how to activate the item in order to do so.
Do you dispute this?

The rules state that a UMD user does not need to know how to use an item to activate it.
Do you dispute this?

The rules state that the bearer of a Strand of Prayer Beads learns what it does and how to use it when they cast a divine spell.
Do you dispute this?

Now, based on these two, show rules that state that UMD cannot be used to bypass the knowledge requirement of this item. Without that clear contradiction, UMD rules hold sway, and your argument has no merit.

Activating an item blindly circumvents the need for knowing how they work. And nothing, either in the english language, or the defined game terms, suggests that casting a divine spell does anything for a strand of prayer beads owner besides identifying the item and its activation method. You can say it does, but then again, I can say that bread is made of cheese curds and turkey. That doesn't make it true.


So let us say that we have two competing definitions. Yours and mine. (Or theirs and mine if you prefer) Can we say they are equally valid?Let's say we have two competing interpretations. Yours, and ours. Can we say they are equally valid? No.

We can say that one uses the terms of the english language, and existing defined game terms, to establish the restrictions on use.

And then there is yours, which creates an additional restriction, with no valid rules text to suggest or support it.

So the first is supported by rules, and the second is not.

Not so fast, is there really no criterion by which they can be judged? Yes. The english language.

"doing X means you know how to to y."
"doing z means you don't need to know how to do y, you just do it anyway"

That's the simplest way to put it. You're adding in:
"doing x means you know how to do y, and under no other circumstance or method are you ever allowed to use y, no matter how you try or what you do".

That is not supported. Any other text you have posted is irrelevant to the basic facts of the matter.


We could choose plain English. In plain English knowing how to do something is practically synonymous with having the power or ability to do that thing.And in plain english, the text of UMD states that is not the case.


Perhaps I am not explaining myself very clearly. I know how the logic works, but I cannot explain it clearly enough to be understood?If you are not grasping that UMD explicitly allows the use without knowledge, then you don't. UMD grants the ability to use an item, even if you know nothing at all about it.


Perhaps the plain English of what the word "know" means is not so plain after all. Perhaps that's irrelevant, considering that UMD explicitly states that you don't need to know.

You can say, debate, argue, complain, or whatever else you like. But if a UMD user doesn't need to know how to use an item to activate it, then an action which has no function other than to grant the knowledge of how to activate that item is superfluous.

No matter what else you say, that is true. Which is why your position is not.


So if event A must happen before event B, you are saying that A is not a prerequisite of B.

.... righto ....
A (casting a spell) is one possible prerequisite of B (knowing how an item is activated).

So yes, A is a prerequisite of B (in the same manner that Wildshape is a prerequisite of Warshaper).

However, B is not "activating the item".
B is knowing how to activate the item, which is a requirement for activating the item normally.

UMD to activate the item blindly is not activating the item normally. Knowledge (B) is not required. So any prerequisites for activating the item normally based on knowledge are irrelevant.

[SirFredgar]

While the sane interpretation is indeed to interpret it as simply increasing your caster level by 1 when casting necromancy spells, the actual text states-



Since it has no language placing a time limit or restriction on the ability, you could theoretically increase your caster level infinitely by casting necromancy spells.

Also, pathfinder is 3.5, but with rules patches. It is fine.

Okay, so if I understand the basis of your argument (I might not, you never know) because the ability states increase and does not specify a time frame, that this means to permanently increase? I would say that saying the incease is permanent would qualify as a timeframe, but I digress.

Increase has a number of uses in the english language, most notable synonyms would be to gain, raise, or add . I hope we can all agree on this.


Whenever you cast a spell of the necromancy school, your effective caster level is increased by 1.

In this case, the bolded statement could be expressed as a simple +1 CL. So: "Whenever you cast a spell of the necromancy school, you get +1 CL" This slight alteration already seems to reduce the connotation of the permanent increase, just by using equivilent, and just as valid, game terms.

Whenever coniditon X is met (Casting a necromancy spell), you have Y benfeit. (+1 CL). If you are not doing X, you should not be receiving Y, unless Y states that it persists beyond it's triggering condition.... it doesn't.

[Curious]

In this case, the bolded statement could be expressed as a simple +1 CL. So: "Whenever you cast a spell of the necromancy school, you get +1 CL" This slight alteration already seems to reduce the connotation of the permanent increase, just by using equivilent, and just as valid, game terms.

Indeed. If it actually said that, this would be much more clear-cut.


Whenever condition X is met (Casting a necromancy spell), you have Y benefit. (+1 CL). If you are not doing X, you should not be receiving Y, unless why states that it persists beyond it's triggering condition.... it doesn't.

It does not say that the benefit ever ends either, which is the basis for this argument.

[SirFredgar]

It does not say that the benefit ever ends either, which is the basis for this argument.

My argument is that in the in the absence of a duration listed, as you agree there is no such qualifier, one cannot assume a duration. So, with the absence of a duration, when you cast the spell you have the increase. When you are not casting the spell, you do not ahve said increase. Simple, finite, and RAW.

[Flickerdart]

My argument is that in the in the absence of a duration listed, as you agree there is no such qualifier, one cannot assume a duration. So, with the absence of a duration, when you cast the spell you have the increase. When you are not casting the spell, you do not ahve said increase. Simple, finite, and RAW.
There is a difference between "when you are casting" and "when you cast". One is a duration (the casting time of the spell), the other is not (an instant).

[SirFredgar]

There is a difference between "when you are casting" and "when you cast". One is a duration (the casting time of the spell), the other is not (an instant).

Hmmm, you bring up a good point. I never even considered the actual order of operations. If I were to apply my logic to the ability now, it does seem somewhat odd. You cast a necromancy spell (as in, you've already completed it and are no longer 'casting') you increase your caster level by one. Since the triggering condition has already come and gone before you even receive the benefit, yeah....I could see the interprtation that is permenent.

However, this does get wonky. I cast chill touch... does that increase that happens after I cast the spell count for Chill Touch's duration and effect... or is it then, because I have already cast that spell before obtaining my increase, only going to apply to future spells?

I still think, RAI, it's "You cast necromancy spells at +1 CL", but I see the silliness in it to be ruled the other way as well, now.

[Devronq]

Ya i still dont think you guys know what i was trying to say still but nvm I'm done talking about it i concede if thats the general consensus. I still think that they should have spelled it out. I started playing this game the year 3.0 came out and i own real copies of almost all the books so im not new to the game or anything and I had never even hear the term arcane spellcaster level until a few days ago. I dont think im going to allow the stack in my games and it looks more like an unintentional game flaw, i dont think the designers intended it to work that way, but as far as RAW is i concede.