Spell Access Question

[Roguenewb]

So, in the PFSRD, in every prestige class that can advance wizard spellcasting it shows an FAQ that wizards only gain their 2 spells for their book when they gain a true wizard level not a wizard casting level. Now, this makes sense, and I appreciate the intent.

Is it also true in 3.5? Is there anything strictly in the rules that I'd have to contradict to make it a 3.5 house rule?

[qwertyu63]

Just off hand, I see nothing RAW wrong with that...

...but I have to ask, Why would you want to?

[Roguenewb]

Just off hand, I see nothing RAW wrong with that...

...but I have to ask, Why would you want to?

Cause subtle wizard nerfs are always appreciated? And it makes sense. Why does gaining levels in Dragonslayer allow you to develop new spells?

[Dusk Eclipse]

Depends on the wording of spell casting clause of the prestige class in question, it varies... a lot... even in classes in the same book, so you should have to read closely how it is written.

Having said that, if you are going to change the wording take in mind that if you "erase" the "you gain new spell slots and spell known if applicable" you are giving quite a big nerf to sorcerers and similar classes.

As for why taking a level in DragonSlayers allows you to develop new spells, it is because of the above, the designers had to give sorcerers a way to get new spells if they prestige out of sorcerer.

Edit: And if by subtle nerfs you mean "I won't tell the player of this until he is levelling up and selecting his spells", that is a dickish move, it is simply better to say "Hey Wizards are powerful enough as they are, so please take that into account when you are selecting spells" or something like that to avoid problems with the player.

[Roguenewb]

Edit: And if by subtle nerfs you mean "I won't tell the player of this until he is levelling up and selecting his spells", that is a dickish move, it is simply better to say "Hey Wizards are powerful enough as they are, so please take that into account when you are selecting spells" or something like that to avoid problems with the player.

Oh no, I'd never spring it on somebody mid-campaign, that'd be...harsh. It looks like PF makes a distinction between spells known and the free spells for your spellbook, because technically a Wizard doesn't have spells known. Sorcs and bards don't get a hit.

[Dusk Eclipse]

I don't play PF so I didn't know they had that distinction, I guess it can be done; but frankly I think it would be punishing the wizard player a bit too much, depending on the setting and campaign those freebies can be the only way a Wizard get's new spells, so limiting them if they prestige (which most wizards will do) seems needlessly harsh to me.

If you want to "nerf" that spell access perhaps you can limit the access in other ways, for example limiting them to a certain list of approved spells, perhaps within a certain theme or maybe you could make the wizard declare what kind (BFC, blasting, buff, etc) spells he wants to select at his new level and when he does level up he can only choose spells from that type (to simulate that the wizard has been spending time developing and researching the spell).

[Diarmuid]

There've actually been a few lengthy, heated discussions on the topic in 3.5 on these boards. I never saw conclusive evidence either way and it generally ended up with most people agreeing that RAI allows for wizards to add new spells to their book.

My personal opinion was that a strict RAW reading of many of the spellcasting advancing PrC's would have it working exactly like it does in PF.

What I was never able to really understand would be why there would be a distinction between the advancement of prepared casters and spontaneous casters for PrC spellcasting advancement.

[Roguenewb]

Well look over there, is there anything that says a wizard has spells known? Then look at the bonuses given by getting a caster level increase from PrCs, they mention spells known. The more I look around, it seems like a bunch of PrCs wouldn't grant the spells for book by RAW, and others look like they would :smalleek: damn WotC

[TuggyNE]

One problem is that there are PrCs that logically should grant additional spells in the book. For example, Archmage: a Wizard entry to Archmage should by no means stop learning new spells just because he's mastering new ways of using magic.

[eggs]

Well look over there, is there anything that says a wizard has spells known?
The PHB equates spells in a wizard's spellbook to spells known a couple times, which is where those Magical Training+Versatile Spellcasting combos come from.

It's a really grey area.

[HunterOfJello]

Well look over there, is there anything that says a wizard has spells known?

Yes. It's in the PHB.



known spell: A spell that an arcane spellcaster has learned and
can prepare. For wizards, knowing a spell means having it in their
spellbooks. For sorcerers and bards, knowing a spell means having
selected it when acquiring new spells as a benefit of level
advancement.



PrC progressions vary far too widely already to start trying to deal with which does and which doesn't provide new spells for wizards (or other classes for that matter). I think the general houseruling that everyone uses is Familiar Leveling = No, New WizardSpells/level = Yes.

(Note that's also why the Obtain Familiar feat is superior to the Familiar class feat.)