What is an arcane/divine spellcasting class?

[barna10]

To the best of my knowledge, what constitutes an "arcane spellcasting class" or a "divine spellcasting class" is never defined. Common sense would say "a class the provides that type of spells!" But what about a class that advances casting like Archamge? Is it an arcane spellcasting class? If not, what is it?

Are only standard classes considered arcane or divine spellcasting classes?

What's your opinion?

[umbergod]

A caster (whether arcane or divine) has been defined as any class or prestige class with its own spell progression.

[AWiz_Abroad]

An arcane or divine spellcasting class is one that gives those spells. Some crazy hi jinks can be done by putting arcane casters into divine prestige classes and vis versa.

It's normally moderately annoying to cross qualify, but sometimes it's awesome

[Story]

Don't classes normally say what type they are in the description?

Anyway, PRC requirements are usually "able to cast 3rd level divine spells" or similar, so the important question is whether your spells are arcane or divine. The actual class doesn't matter.

[umbergod]

Don't classes normally say what type they are in the description?

Anyway, PRC requirements are usually "able to cast 3rd level divine spells" or similar, so the important question is whether your spells are arcane or divine. The actual class doesn't matter.

He is asking this because he is choosing to interpret that by using another prestige class to advance ur priest casting, he can add 1.5 caster level each time he advances ur priest casting, stating that the urpriest CL is urpriest level+1/2 of all other spellcasting classes.

[barna10]

A caster (whether arcane or divine) has been defined as any class or prestige class with its own spell progression.

Where has this been defined. Source please?

[umbergod]

Where has this been defined. Source please?
{Scrubbed}

[Piggy Knowles]

Here is how I look at it:

1. Does the class have its own caster level?

For example, if I am a Wizard 5/Master Specialist 1, do I have a Wizard CL of 5 and a Master Specialist CL of 1? Can I take Practiced Spellcaster (Master Specialist)?

2. Do I gain the ability to cast spells with my class, or do I progress the ability?

For example, the Earth Dreamer prestige class progresses spellcasting at each level. However, because it has no inherent spellcasting on its own, if I enter it as a non-spellcaster, I don't gain any spells, nor do I gain a caster level, or any of the other benefits of being a spellcaster.

On the other hand, if I take levels in the Assassin class, regardless of whether I am a spellcaster prior to taking it or not, I gain spells, with a spells per day table, caster level and all.

EDIT: And, since you asked for a rules quote, the term "spellcaster class" is only really referred to in the section under prestige classes. Here is the relevant SRD link (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/prestigeClasses.htm):



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.


(Emphasis mine.)

So, are you a spellcasting class that has its own spellcasting? Or are you a prestige class that merely adds caster levels to an existing class? That's the big distinction.

[KhaineGB]

To the best of my knowledge, what constitutes an "arcane spellcasting class" or a "divine spellcasting class" is never defined. Common sense would say "a class the provides that type of spells!" But what about a class that advances casting like Archamge? Is it an arcane spellcasting class? If not, what is it?

Are only standard classes considered arcane or divine spellcasting classes?

What's your opinion?

The thing with D&D and Pathfinder... is some common sense is required.

Does the class have a spells per day table? Does it have it's own list of spells at the back of the Players Handbook/Core Rulebook?

Bard, Cleric, Druid, Paladin, Ranger, Sorcerer and Wizard all do, and they're all spellcasting classes. The Assassin prestige class does too, and is thus considered a spellcasting class.

It really is that simple. There's no rule saying "Hey, this is exactly what we mean by a spellcasting class" because the developers actually expect their users to have some common sense.

[Story]

AFAIK, there aren't any PRCs that both have their own progression and also advance another class.

However, if you really want the +1.5 thing, you can enter another spellcasting class and then go to a dual progressing PRC. Note that this will usually put you behind what you would have gotten otherwise, though early entry shenanigans can reduce the cost.

[barna10]

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote}

Dude, what exactly did you find the PHB glossary? I've been researching this all day and haven't found squat, that's why I'm asking for help. If you have a source that defines what an "arcane spellcasting class" is, please share. That is my only opinion on this matter, that there is no definition. Thanks for your input.

[barna10]

Here is how I look at it:

1. Does the class have its own caster level?

For example, if I am a Wizard 5/Master Specialist 1, do I have a Wizard CL of 5 and a Master Specialist CL of 1? Can I take Practiced Spellcaster (Master Specialist)?

2. Do I gain the ability to cast spells with my class, or do I progress the ability?

For example, the Earth Dreamer prestige class progresses spellcasting at each level. However, because it has no inherent spellcasting on its own, if I enter it as a non-spellcaster, I don't gain any spells, nor do I gain a caster level, or any of the other benefits of being a spellcaster.

On the other hand, if I take levels in the Assassin class, regardless of whether I am a spellcaster prior to taking it or not, I gain spells, with a spells per day table, caster level and all.

EDIT: And, since you asked for a rules quote, the term "spellcaster class" is only really referred to in the section under prestige classes. Here is the relevant SRD link (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/prestigeClasses.htm):



(Emphasis mine.)

So, are you a spellcasting class that has its own spellcasting? Or are you a prestige class that merely adds caster levels to an existing class? That's the big distinction.

Thanks. You have a well defined opinion, but I am looking for an official source.

Regarding the link: There are many mentions besides this to a "spellcasting class", but "spellcasting class" is never defined.

[barna10]

He is asking this because he is choosing to interpret that by using another prestige class to advance ur priest casting, he can add 1.5 caster level each time he advances ur priest casting, stating that the urpriest CL is urpriest level+1/2 of all other spellcasting classes.

Other thread, this is a new topic. Thank You

[umbergod]

Other thread, this is a new topic. Thank You

{scrubbed}

[barna10]

AFAIK, there aren't any PRCs that both have their own progression and also advance another class.

However, if you really want the +1.5 thing, you can enter another spellcasting class and then go to a dual progressing PRC. Note that this will usually put you behind what you would have gotten otherwise, though early entry shenanigans can reduce the cost.

This is being discussed here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=14399608#post14399608)

[barna10]

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote}

Please tell me where in the PHB you found a definition for "spellcasting class" or "arcane spellcasting class". As you have so elegantly stated, my reading comprehension is awful and I am unable to find it.

[mattie_p]

However, if you really want the +1.5 thing, you can enter another spellcasting class and then go to a dual progressing PRC. Note that this will usually put you behind what you would have gotten otherwise, though early entry shenanigans can reduce the cost.

You can probably savage bard 5/ur-priest 2 / mt X / sublime chord 1 / mt 10-x / sublime chord without any shenanigans and still be capable of shenanigans.

[umbergod]

PHB glossary starts on page 304. Pretty straight forward to find the terms "spellcaster" "arcane spell" and "divine spell" pretty cut and dry.

In addition, if you were to take any of the prestige classes that advance spellcasting, as a base (ignoring all pre-reqs) then would you be a spellcaster? No, because those classes in and of themselves do not provide spellcasting, they merely boost your base caster class(es) by giving them effective level ups for purposes of spellcasting.

[barna10]

I'm not worried about Shenanigans. All I really want is a definition for "spellcasting class" or "arcane spellcasting class" or "divine spellcasting class". Many people seem to be able to tell what one isn't or what they think on is, but no one has been able to quote a source.

I read a post, somewhere, by one of the designers that a spellcasting class was any class that advanced spellcasting. Not only was it not official, but I can't find for the life of me.

Anyway, all I want is a source.

[umbergod]

Does a fighter have his own spell progression and spell list?

The answer to that question is the same for any class/prestige class that doesn't have it's own spell progression and spell list.

[barna10]

PHB glossary starts on page 304. Pretty straight forward to find the terms "spellcaster" "arcane spell" and "divine spell" pretty cut and dry.

In addition, if you were to take any of the prestige classes that advance spellcasting, as a base (ignoring all pre-reqs) then would you be a spellcaster? No, because those classes in and of themselves do not provide spellcasting, they merely boost your base caster class(es) by giving them effective level ups for purposes of spellcasting.

Yes:

"Spellcaster - A character capable of casting spells."

"Arcane Spells - Arcane spells involve the direct manipulation of mystic energies. Bards, sorcerers, and wizards cast arcane spells."

"Divine Spells - Spells of religious origin powered by faith or by a deity. Clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers cast divine spells."

This get no closer to a definition of a "spellcasting class", "arcane spellcasting class", or "divine spellcasting class" is. I thought you said "its called the player's handbook glossary dude." as if I was missing something there.

[mattie_p]

PHB glossary starts on page 304. Pretty straight forward to find the terms "spellcaster" "arcane spell" and "divine spell" pretty cut and dry.

In addition, if you were to take any of the prestige classes that advance spellcasting, as a base (ignoring all pre-reqs) then would you be a spellcaster? No, because those classes in and of themselves do not provide spellcasting, they merely boost your base caster class(es) by giving them effective level ups for purposes of spellcasting.

spellcaster: A character capable of casting spells.

That is all you get. Now, your 2nd part is very interesting because you kind of get to the heart of the matter. For example: is an Elf Paragon 3, with no other class levels, a spellcaster? The class description specifically says no - it only has effect if the PC has levels in wizard. While not definitive, it is indicative of the thought process.

[umbergod]

Yes:

"Spellcaster - A character capable of casting spells."

"Arcane Spells - Arcane spells involve the direct manipulation of mystic energies. Bards, sorcerers, and wizards cast arcane spells."

"Divine Spells - Spells of religious origin powered by faith or by a deity. Clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers cast divine spells."

This get no closer to a definition of a "spellcasting class", "arcane spellcasting class", or "divine spellcasting class" is. I thought you said "its called the player's handbook glossary dude." as if I was missing something there.

Bolded for emphasis.....if you can't figure what an arcane or divine casting class is from this, then I'm done here before I say something to earn me a ban.

Good luck OP, nobody is going to agree with you or tell you that you're right, because you're utilizing absolutely zero logic, common sense, or deductive reasoning

[barna10]

Does a fighter have his own spell progression and spell list?

The answer to that question is the same for any class/prestige class that doesn't have it's own spell progression and spell list.

Yes, this is a common sense answer, but not a definition.

[umbergod]

spellcaster: A character capable of casting spells.

That is all you get. Now, your 2nd part is very interesting because you kind of get to the heart of the matter. For example: is an Elf Paragon 3, with no other class levels, a spellcaster? The class description specifically says no - it only has effect if the PC has levels in wizard. While not definitive, it is indicative of the thought process.

It is definitive, however, trying to pin down the source, then convince OP of it, are 2 mountainous challenges, especially the latter. Like your example, Elf paragon 3. If that was your first 3 levels, not a spellcaster. If you start as a wiz1 then elf 3, youre effectively a 3rd lvl wiz, but that doesnt mean the paragon class is a casting class, merely that it can boost casting if you already have it.

not having spell progression and a spell list means its not a caster. A rogue isn't a caster, a fighter isn't a caster. Nor is someone who ignores pre-reqs and starts off as a 5th lvl archmage, since archmage only improves pre-existing casting, and has no casting abilities of its own.

[umbergod]

Yes, this is a common sense answer, but not a definition.

prove it. if the class doesnt have casting abilities of its own, it isnt a caster. prove that statement wrong

[barna10]

prove it. if the class doesnt have casting abilities of its own, it isnt a caster. prove that statement wrong

I'm asking for a definition. Do you have one? Me proving or disproving your statement is not a definition.

[umbergod]

I'm asking for a definition. Do you have one? Me proving or disproving your statement is not a definition.

sure it is. giving sources is a definitive answer. see, definition is in the keywords

[Story]

There's no real point in continuing this. Literally every person here has told the OP that he's wrong with no effect. In the absence of a literal definition somewhere, there's no way to resolve this.

[umbergod]

{Scrubbed}

[Piggy Knowles]

There's no greater definition, but the FAQ, while not defining it further, gives some interesting points.

(All of these quotes come from the main D&D 3.5 FAQ, http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20070731a)



If an ultimate magus (CM) with the ability to cast 9thlevel
spells as both a wizard and a sorcerer takes the
Improved Spell Capacity feat (EL), does he gain a 10thlevel
spell slot as a wizard, as a sorcerer, or in both classes?

The Improved Spell Capacity feat applies to only a single
class. You’d choose to improve either your wizard spellcasting
or your sorcerer spellcasting with each selection of the feat.


If a spellcasting class included classes that progressed spellcasting, then one could use the Improved Spell Capacity feat to apply to your Ultimate Magus class.



Does a 1st-level wizard/4th-level rogue with Practiced
Spellcaster qualify for a prestige class that requires
“Spellcaster level 5th”?

No. This prestige class requirement doesn’t refer to your
caster level (a value which can be modified by many feats,
class features, and even temporary effects) but to your actual
level in a spellcasting class. (If it helps, you can think of this
requirement as “Spellcaster, 5th level.”)
The same applies for characters whose caster level is less
than their class level. A 5th-level paladin meets the “Spellcaster
level 5th) requirement, even though her actual caster level is
only 2nd.


Another reference to the term "spellcasting class." It again fails to define the initial term, but it does help to expand the rubric for determining what they mean by the term. Here when they refer to what a spellcaster is, they include the actual class itself that grants spells, but not things that boost their spells or caster level.

It's unfortunately NOT a clearly defined term. I've been active on one D&D board or another since 2004, and it comes up fairly frequently that someone hops on the boards with a great new insight that hinges on this lack of definition. (The most common one is that people try to advance the class "Mystic Theurge" with other casting classes.) And there's always an incredibly long and convoluted debate where the end result is that, eh, WotC never bothered to actually fully define the term. The best you can do is intimate what they meant from various references, such as the section in the DMG/SRD regarding prestige classes that I quoted above, where they separate the idea behind a spellcasting class and a class that merely advances a spellcasting class.

In general, I subscribe to Caelic's Rules of (Practical) Optimization (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19860738/The_Ten_Commandments_of_Practical_Optimization). If there are two ways to interpret something ill-defined, and one way makes sense and remains consistent throughout the game, while the other leads to craziness (such as a Mystic Theurge's levels being advanced by an Incantatrix to have a dual-caster with 10 levels in Incantatrix, or an Ultimate Magus using the Improved Spell Capacity feat to add 10th level spell slots to two classes at once), I pretty much always lean toward the saner interpretation.

But as there ARE gray areas, I'm not going to stop you from going to the other extreme. I'll just caution you that neither position is particularly well supported. The lack of a rule saying that, say, Loremaster is a spellcasting class does not mean that it IS, anymore than a fighter with the Magical Training feat is.

[barna10]

sure it is. giving sources is a definitive answer. see, definition is in the keywords

What source did you provide? The PHB glossary said nothing on the issue.

[barna10]

There's no greater definition, but the FAQ, while not defining it further, gives some interesting points.

(All of these quotes come from the main D&D 3.5 FAQ, http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20070731a)



If a spellcasting class included classes that progressed spellcasting, then one could use the Improved Spell Capacity feat to apply to your Ultimate Magus class.



Another reference to the term "spellcasting class." It again fails to define the initial term, but it does help to expand the rubric for determining what they mean by the term. Here when they refer to what a spellcaster is, they include the actual class itself that grants spells, but not things that boost their spells or caster level.

It's unfortunately NOT a clearly defined term. I've been active on one D&D board or another since 2004, and it comes up fairly frequently that someone hops on the boards with a great new insight that hinges on this lack of definition. (The most common one is that people try to advance the class "Mystic Theurge" with other casting classes.) And there's always an incredibly long and convoluted debate where the end result is that, eh, WotC never bothered to actually fully define the term. The best you can do is intimate what they meant from various references, such as the section in the DMG/SRD regarding prestige classes that I quoted above, where they separate the idea behind a spellcasting class and a class that merely advances a spellcasting class.

In general, I subscribe to Caelic's Rules of (Practical) Optimization (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19860738/The_Ten_Commandments_of_Practical_Optimization). If there are two ways to interpret something ill-defined, and one way makes sense and remains consistent throughout the game, while the other leads to craziness (such as a Mystic Theurge's levels being advanced by an Incantatrix to have a dual-caster with 10 levels in Incantatrix, or an Ultimate Magus using the Improved Spell Capacity feat to add 10th level spell slots to two classes at once), I pretty much always lean toward the saner interpretation.

But as there ARE gray areas, I'm not going to stop you from going to the other extreme. I'll just caution you that neither position is particularly well supported. The lack of a rule saying that, say, Loremaster is a spellcasting class does not mean that it IS, anymore than a fighter with the Magical Training feat is.

Thanks. I read those earlier today and was frustrated by the lack of definition.

The main issue is with Ur Priest. If classes like Mystic Theurge or Dweomerkeeper are NOT seen as "spellcasting classes" then RAW the Ur Priest caster level is going to be VERY low compared to how people normally play it since it is figured off of 1/2 "spellcaster class level" not "caster level".

[Wyntonian]

{scrubbed}

[mattie_p]

Classes that advance spellcasting of other classes:


Spells per Day/Spells Known: At each even-numbered level, an acolyte of the skin gains new spells per day (and spells known, if applicable) as if he had also gained a level in a spellcasting class to which he belonged before adding the prestige class level.


Spells per Day/Spells Known: When a new level of dweomerkeeper is gained, the character gains new spells per day (and spells known, if applicable) as if she had also gained a level in a spellcasting class to which she belonged before she added the prestige class.


Spellcasting: At each level beyond 1st, 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 a spellcasting class to which you belonged before adding the prestige class level.

Classes that provide their own spellcasting:


Spells per Day: A sublime chord has the ability to cast a small number of arcane spells, all of 4th level or higher. To cast a sublime chord spell, a character must have a Charisma score of at least 10 + the spell’s level...


Spells per Day: A Suel Arcanamach has the ability to cast a small number of arcane spells. To cast a Suel arcanamach spell, he must have a Charisma score of at least 10 + the spell’s level,


Spellcasting: As a death delver, you have the ability to cast a small number of divine spells. To cast a spell, you must have a Wisdom score of at least 10 + the spell’s leve

I can't even say there is consistency in the RAW regarding the class ability, for pete's sake.

[barna10]

{Scrubbed}

Ok, cut and paste the definition of "spellcasting class" for me then.

[Larkas]

I can't tell if you're ignoring this, being deliberately obtruse, or, Heironious forbid, actively trying to continue a meaningless debate that hinges on you deliberately misinterpreting the rules in an situation where the goddamn definition is spelled out for you.

I'm going to play the devil's attorney here and say that, in and off itself, that part of the glossary doesn't say anything relevant. It defines "spellcaster", not "spellcasting class". "Spellcaster" refers to a character, not a class. There is some overlap, but one thing is not the same as the other: a character is defined by his classes, but his classes are not defined by the character. Otherwise, we'd come to the conclusion that the fighter is a spellcaster, if we analyse a fighter/wizard.


The main issue is with Ur Priest. If classes like Mystic Theurge or Dweomerkeeper are NOT seen as "spellcasting classes" then RAW the Ur Priest caster level is going to be VERY low compared to how people normally play it since it is figured off of 1/2 "spellcaster class level" not "caster level".

Hmmm, I don't see this issue. People usually use Ur Priest to power MT builds, right? Well, MT will advance both Ur Priest and the other spellcasting class "as if you had gained a level in that class", right? Then you'd get 1 CL (from the advancement in Ur Priest's spellcasting) + 1/2 CL (from the advancement in the other spellcasting class). Hence, a Wizard 10/ Ur Priest 1/ MT 9 would have CL = 19.5. ...Right? I'm playing by ear here, and might've gotten everything wrong.

[barna10]

I'm going to play the devil's attorney here and say that, in and off itself, that part of the glossary doesn't say anything relevant. It defines "spellcaster", not "spellcasting class". "Spellcaster" refers to a character, not a class. There is some overlap, but one thing is not the same as the other: a character is defined by his classes, but his classes are not defined by the character. Otherwise, we'd come to the conclusion that the fighter is a spellcaster, if we analyse a fighter/wizard.

Well said.

[barna10]

Hmmm, I don't see this issue. People usually use Ur Priest to power MT builds, right? Well, MT will advance both Ur Priest and the other spellcasting class "as if you had gained a level in that class", right? Then you'd get 1 CL (from the advancement in Ur Priest's spellcasting) + 1/2 CL (from the advancement in the other spellcasting class). Hence, a Wizard 10/ Ur Priest 1/ MT 9 would have CL = 19.5. ...Right? I'm playing by ear here, and might've gotten everything wrong.

No. Ur Priest WOULD get the +1CL from MT advancing the divine side, but WOULD NOT get the +1/2 CL from the arcane side because the +1/2 CL bonus is based on actual class levels in "spellcaster classes" not "caster levels".

[Larkas]

No. Ur Priest WOULD get the +1CL from MT advancing the divine side, but WOULD NOT get the +1/2 CL from the arcane side because the +1/2 CL bonus is based on actual class levels in "spellcaster classes" not "caster levels".

Ooooh, got it. Still, 15 is bad but not terrible. You still have full dual progression, and things like Practiced Spellcaster can remedy that just as well, right? With just that single feat, you'd have Clr CL = 19 and Wiz CL = 19. Not so bad, IMHO.

[Piggy Knowles]

I don't really see a problem. Pretty much every PrC that grants casting only gives you a CL equal to your class level, and they don't have the added bonus of granting 9th level spells in 10 levels. And Ur-Priest is better off than most, since it also gives you a bonus for other casting classes.

In any case, there are a lot of nice CL boosting tricks for UrPriests, including Practiced Spellcaster, Karma beads, Divine Spell Power, Consumptive Field, and more.

[willpell]

So, are you a spellcasting class that has its own spellcasting? Or are you a prestige class that merely adds caster levels to an existing class?

Nitpick: this is not what "caster level" means in the context. "Level of spellcasting" is distinct.


You still have full dual progression, and things like Practiced Spellcaster can remedy that just as well, right? With just that single feat, you'd have Clr CL = 19 and Wiz CL = 19. Not so bad, IMHO.

You'd need two Practiced Spellcaster feats, as each one only helps casting from a single class. I don't think you can pick "Mystic Theurge" and get them both, since that doesn't have its own set of spells, it just advances two other sets.

[barna10]

Ooooh, got it. Still, 15 is bad but not terrible. You still have full dual progression, and things like Practiced Spellcaster can remedy that just as well, right? With just that single feat, you'd have Clr CL = 19 and Wiz CL = 19. Not so bad, IMHO.

No, not bad. I'm just trying to hammer out all the nuts and bolts of the issue.

I'm probably going to houserule it uses caster level instead of class level to avoid arguments.

[barna10]

You'd need two Practiced Spellcaster feats, as each one only helps casting from a single class. I don't think you can pick "Mystic Theurge" and get them both, since that doesn't have its own set of spells, it just advances two other sets.

This all depends on what the definition of "spellcasting class" is, which is the whole point of this thread. MT could be seen as a "spellcasting class" which would allow one to pick it as the target of Practiced Spellcaster.

[willpell]

Hm. Well as is typical of Internet arguments, I don't see how anyone could possibly have come up with an interpretation other than mine, and have to fight the temptation to cast aspersions on the intelligence or sensibility of anyone who does. Obviously doing so is not proper behavior if I want to keep my user account, but still, the truth seems absurdly clear to me - if you cannot cast a "mystic theurge spell", instead of "a wizard spell" or "a cleric spell", then it should be common-sensical enough to realize that you cannot count MT as its own spellcasting class. Attempting to argue that you can appears, from my admittedly-faulty perspective, to be simple munchkinism.

(Disclaimer: I really am not being passive-aggressive or anything in saying this. I have a reflexive twitch of tending to dismiss others as various species of fools, and am trying quite hard to understand this characteristic in myself in order to learn how to control it. Please accept my academic detachment as genuine.)

[barna10]

Hm. Well as is typical of Internet arguments, I don't see how anyone could possibly have come up with an interpretation other than mine, and have to fight the temptation to cast aspersions on the intelligence or sensibility of anyone who does. Obviously doing so is not proper behavior if I want to keep my user account, but still, the truth seems absurdly clear to me - if you cannot cast a "mystic theurge spell", instead of "a wizard spell" or "a cleric spell", then it should be common-sensical enough to realize that you cannot count MT as its own spellcasting class. Attempting to argue that you can appears, from my admittedly-faulty perspective, to be simple munchkinism.

(Disclaimer: I really am not being passive-aggressive or anything in saying this. I have a reflexive twitch of tending to dismiss others as various species of fools, and am trying quite hard to understand this characteristic in myself in order to learn how to control it. Please accept my academic detachment as genuine.)

No offense taken. Prior to today, I would have agreed with you. Here is why I questioned it:

From Dweomerkeeper (web enhancement for Complete Divine)
"When a new level of dweomerkeeper is gained, the character gains new spells per day (and spells known, if applicable) as if she had also gained a level in a spellcasting class to which she belonged before she added the prestige class. She does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained (improved chance of turning or rebuking undead, metamagic or item creation feats, and so on). The level of dweomerkeeper is added to the level of whatever OTHER spellcasting class the character has, then spells per day, spells known, and caster level are determined accordingly. "

The key word is "other". It implies that the Dweomerkeeper itself is a spellcasting class which seems to turn common sense on it's head since there are no "Dweomerkeeper" spells. So, what is the definition of a "spellcasting class".

[barna10]

Hmm, I just thought of something. This could be interpreted differently.

So, let's say the Dweomerkeeper was Wizard 1/Cleric 4. When taking Dweomerkeeper level 1, we add +1 level to Cleric. Now, we continue reading and see that we are supposed to add the level of Dweomerkeeper to "whatever other spellcasting class" the character possesses. So we add Dweomerkeeper level 1 to Wizard (because we can't add it to Cleric because that would be the "other" class). The character now cast's as wizard 2/cleric 5.

Funky, but unless Dweomerkeeper is a spellcasting class, this is really the only other way I can interpret this.

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: Locked for review.