What single level adds the most?

[dspeyer]

What existing build plus single class level has the greatest increase in power? I was thinking something like ex-paladin 10 + blackguard 1 picks up a whole lot of class features, or druid 17 with persist spell + sacred exorcist 1 and dmm(persist spell), but I'm guessing there are posters here who can do better.

[eggynack]

Before considering prestige classes, I'd have to say wizard 17. 9th level spells are just that good. The third level of incantrix changes the game in a big way, so that might be a contender as well.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Before considering prestige classes, I'd have to say wizard 17. 9th level spells are just that good.

Nah a 15th level wizard, you get access to 8th level spells, your fort and reflex saves go up by 1 and you get two feats.

[inuyasha]

Human fighter 1!

3 feats, a D10 HD (which means 10HP if you have max hit points at first level, 14 if its optimised) +2 fort and +1 bab :)

[Drachasor]

Nah a 15th level wizard, you get access to 8th level spells, your fort and reflex saves go up by 1 and you get two feats.

You get one feat. You can't count automatic ups based on CHARACTER level, as it isn't guaranteed a 15th level wizard will get them. Unless they happen every level, of course (like skills).

Are we keeping this pre-epic?

[Vaz]

Archivist 1: just for UMD breakage.

Cloistered Cleric 1; Turn Undead, 3 domains, all knowledges as class skills.

[eggynack]

Nah a 15th level wizard, you get access to 8th level spells, your fort and reflex saves go up by 1 and you get two feats.
I can't tell if this is sarcasm. Is this sarcasm? It seems like sarcasm. If it's not, you are incorrect. Seriously, even if that second feat counted, 9th's are obviously better than two feats.

[Ceaon]

Commoner 1 to Commoner 1/Druid 1 might be a huge leap in power as well, although 9th level spells are very hard to beat.

[eggynack]

Realistically, the best shot at getting the most out of a single level is to line things up a little. Thus, you'd really want something like a wizard 14/incantrix 3. In a single level, you go from casting 8th level spells to persisting 9th level spells. If there are any wizard abilities or class features that scale with level, rather than level in that specific class, they could help out here.

[ArcturusV]

Gonna toss in the Maho classes myself.

For a Fighter type, Maho-Bujin level 1 is actually kinda sweet. Taint Suppression, become a Shadowlands creature, and get extra attacks at +3 BAB instead of +5. That last one, the Crimson Road ability, is a pretty solid ability for any Fighter type, I'd say one of the strongest features, getting upwards to 6 Attacks Per Melee without needing Flurry of Misses or the like, that they could get other than "I get magic".

Maho-Tsukai though for casters? Level 1 gets you: Taint Suppression, always good. Blood components, kind of a crippling weakness or a great strength depending on how you look at it, converts your levels in another spellcasting Class into Maho-Tsukai Spellcasting (Meaning 1 level in it could be potentially levels worth of Maho casting), and the ability to metamagic by taking temporary Con damage instead of increasing levels.

[Lord Vukodlak]

You get one feat. You can't count automatic ups based on CHARACTER level
Why not?


I can't tell if this is sarcasm. Is this sarcasm? It seems like sarcasm. If it's not, you are incorrect. Seriously, even if that second feat counted, 9th's are obviously better than two feats.
I don't think its better then TWO feats and 8th level spells.

[CRtwenty]

Why not?

Because it's something obtained from Character Level, not that actual class level. If you took a few levels in something else and than obtained that same level you wouldn't get the feats. So we can't consider the feats a perk of that level.

[Zombimode]

Human fighter 1!

3 feats, a D10 HD (which means 10HP if you have max hit points at first level, 14 if its optimised) +2 fort and +1 bab :)

Human Warblade 1
2 feats, D12 HD, 4 Skill Points, 3 Maneuvers, 1 Stance, your Int bonus on Reflex saves, ability to swap your weapon specific feats around with an hour of meditation, +2 fort, +1 bab.
I win :smallamused:

[eggynack]

I don't think its better then TWO feats and 8th level spells.
So it wasn't sarcasm. That's weird. How, exactly, can you justify that? Which two feats are better than shapechange, wish, and gate? One of them has to be a wizard bonus feat, too. 9th level wizardry gets you absolutely gamebreaking power, while two feats does not do that. 8th level wizardry is great, but it's not even on the same level as 9th's.

Edit: Also, the second feat does not count, because if it did, I'd just change the build to commoner 1/wizard 17. It's an utterly ridiculous thing to do, but it works for this.

Double edit: I also forgot genesis and astral projection. Those spells are crazy buns in combination.

[Drachasor]

Hmm, here's a wrinkle. Does Wizard 17 give 9th level spells?

Eh, depends on the PrCs you have taken.

The OPs question is not nearly as well-defined for casters as one would like. Not unless we consider the most powerful level in any build -- though we run into Pun-Pun that way.

Hmm.

Ignoring cheese, it would seem that some sort of caster level that gives you 9th level spells is the clear victor here for absolute power addition -- arguably divine caster since you get ALL THE SPELLS. But you could break things down into most powerful at 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc.

Amusingly you could break it down by tier and level and tier. Which is the most powerful 5th level of Tier 3? Get too powerful and you go to Tier 2 and lose.

[eggynack]

Hmm, here's a wrinkle. Does Wizard 17 give 9th level spells?

Eh, depends on the PrCs you have taken.

Straight wizard 17 does, which is what I was proposing. Adding prestige classes that lose caster levels would obviously be taken into account, and just extend the build out till he hits 9th's. Actually, is there any wizard PrC that would be crazy powerful if it didn't lose caster levels? I'm not entirely sure that there's anything that would be better than incantrix 3. Alternatively, there's always planar shepherd. When do they get the crazy 10:1 dilation? It looks like 5th, with the planar bubble ability. If you line that level up with 9th's, crazy power ensues.

[JaronK]

By RAW, Factotum 19. Because yes, spells in 3.5 (as opposed to 3.0) are Ex Special Attacks. So yeah, suddenly gaining Sorcerer powers does a lot.

Other mentions include Truenamer 20 (spam Gate!) and Healer 17 (cast Gate!). The Binder level when you get Zceryll can be a fun one too.

JaronK

[eggynack]

By RAW, Factotum 19. Because yes, spells in 3.5 (as opposed to 3.0) are Ex Special Attacks. So yeah, suddenly gaining Sorcerer powers does a lot.

Other mentions include Truenamer 20 (spam Gate!) and Healer 17 (cast Gate!). The Binder level when you get Zceryll can be a fun one too.

JaronK
You have a good point on that one. A wizard going from greater planar binding to gate isn't going to be nearly as big a change as a truenamer going from crap in a crater to gate. I hadn't really considered some of these ridiculous power jumps.

[NeoPhoenix0]

A level 16 Sorcerer with Versatile Spellcaster who takes one level of Wizard. You spend all you wealth on adding spells to your spellbook and cast them all spontaneously because versatile spellcaster lets you cast any spell you know with two lower level spell slots and a wizard knows any spell in his spellbook.

Edit: on second thought Beguiler 16 with versatile spellcaster taking one level of wizard is a bigger power jump.

[Zombimode]

By RAW, Factotum 19. Because yes, spells in 3.5 (as opposed to 3.0) are Ex Special Attacks. So yeah, suddenly gaining Sorcerer powers does a lot.

Hm, can you point me to the rule detailing this?
Because just from looking at the SRD, the (Ex) designator doesn't appear anywhere near the Spells class feature (it is in fact undesignated).

[Drachasor]

Hm, can you point me to the rule detailing this?
Because just from looking at the SRD, the (Ex) designator doesn't appear anywhere near the Spells class feature (it is in fact undesignated).

Maybe he just meant the Factotum ability? I don't see how Spells are (Ex), as they don't have the most notable feature of (Ex) abilities -- being immune to anti-magic fields and the like.

[Zombimode]

Maybe he just meant the Factotum ability? I don't see how Spells are (Ex), as they don't have the most notable feature of (Ex) abilities -- being immune to anti-magic fields and the like.

No, the text of Cunning Brilliance states that you can pick three "extraordinary class abilities".

The fact that anti-magic fields suppress spellcasting may not be contrary to Spells being an (Ex) ability: an argument could be made that the field does not suppress your ability to cast spells, just the spellcasting process.
For example: someone with the Shadow Weave feat could cast shadow weave spells within an not-shadow weave anti-magic field. If the field would suppress the ability to cast spells, this would likely not work.

The reason why I'm skeptical about Cunning Brilliance being able to grant Spellcasting is that those features are not designated as Ex.

[Norin]

Beguiler or warmage or whatever into Rainbow servant:

The level where you get spontaneous access to the cleric spell list.

Silly as hell, but a nice jump in power.

[Chronos]

Remember, Cunning Brilliance only gets you abilities that are in the class's description or table. So even if "Spellcasting" counts as an (ex) ability, you'd only be able to cast those spells that are listed in the class itself. Which is to say, none of them. Picking the Fighter's "Bonus Feats" ability, or the Warblade's "Maneuvers" ability, has the same problem.

Meanwhile, another contender for biggest power jump at a single level would be a shadowcraft mage. Set up your build right, and you can gain the ability to emulate 9th-level spells at the same level you get Miracle added to your list, and you might even be able to make this jump from a lower spell level than 8th.

[Drachasor]

Hmm, 1st level of anything: you exist. (For character level 1 only)

[Sylthia]

I'd say getting level 1 wizard is the biggest jump in power. You can use any wand, scroll, etc.

[mattie_p]

I'd say getting level 1 wizard is the biggest jump in power. You can use any wand, scroll, etc.

Nah, that's just wizard items.


Cloistered Cleric 1; Turn Undead, 3 domains, all knowledges as class skills.

This right here. If you need to use items, take the magic domain, get all the wizard and cleric items. Then the knowledge domain for all knowledges, or trade for knowledge devotion. That leaves one more domain. Highly recommended are travel, planning, and undeath.

[Snowbluff]

This right here. If you need to use items, take the magic domain, get all the wizard and cleric items. Then the knowledge domain for all knowledges, or trade for knowledge devotion. That leaves one more domain. Highly recommended are travel, planning, and undeath.

I third this. I was going to post it as well,

[Vedhin]

Maho-Tsukai though for casters? Level 1 gets you: Taint Suppression, always good. Blood components, kind of a crippling weakness or a great strength depending on how you look at it, converts your levels in another spellcasting Class into Maho-Tsukai Spellcasting (Meaning 1 level in it could be potentially levels worth of Maho casting), and the ability to metamagic by taking temporary Con damage instead of increasing levels.

Time to dip Binder for Naebrius. Then metamagic everything, and Naebrius eats the cost.
Actually, I'd say Binder 1, because it offers so many things to many different builds.

[Emmerask]

Hmm, 1st level of anything: you exist. (For character level 1 only)

If the existing build is null (nothing) then yes^^
The 1st level no matter what you take adds an infinite amount of power to your build :smallbiggrin:

[Chronos]

Also don't forget that the one-level cleric dip also gets you access to Turn Undead. You won't be able to use it to actually, you know, turn undead, but it can fuel all sorts of other things, and you get your full complement of number of daily uses immediately.

[Invader]

Druid 5 - Wildshape
Druid 6 - Natural Spell (Because who doesn't take Natural Spell at 6th)

Wizard 5 - Everyone knows 3rd level spells are where wizards start winning the game.

[Thiyr]

I'll have to further go with (Cloistered) Cleric. I can't think of any other class that has a handbook dedicated to dipping a single level (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=2773)

[dspeyer]

It occurs to me that Tome of Battle can be pretty good for this because of the multiclassing rules. A 16th level warrior is pretty silly, but add one level of warblade and he's using 5th level maneuvers pretty effectively. Or the monstrous version -- a cloud giant is CR 11 and wields a mean morningstar, but isn't much of a threat to a well-built level 11 party, but give him a level in swordsage for 5th level maneuvers, which he certainly has the attack bonus to use...

[Psyren]

Hmm, here's a wrinkle. Does Wizard 17 give 9th level spells?

Eh, depends on the PrCs you have taken.

Actually, Wizard 17 will always give 9ths no matter what multiclassing you've been doing. A Fighter 35/Wizard 17 will get 9ths.

Personally I rank Sha'ir 17 or Archivist 17 over Wizard 17 though. Not to mention StP Erudite 17...

[kulosle]

Any arcane caster and Mindbender 1. Mind sight is just too good. Especially because you can get it as your 6th level feat.

[ericgrau]

I dunno about caster 16 => caster 17. 9th level spells are great, but the jump from 1st-8ths to 9ths isn't that tremendous unless you're chain gating solars. And even then why didn't you bind an efreeti at a few levels lower?

The jump from a handful of ok spells to 3rd level spells and having plenty to cast is pretty big at level 5 or 6. And at that point wizards also get a feat and druids begin their first wildshape. Just saying for the sake of comparison. Actually I think mindsight from 1 post up is bigger.

[Curmudgeon]

Actually, Wizard 17 will always give 9ths no matter what multiclassing you've been doing.
There are at least two ways that you can be a level 17 Wizard and fail to get 9th level spells.
To learn, prepare, or cast a spell, the wizard must have an Intelligence score equal to at least 10 + the spell level. Any INT score below 19 keeps you from getting those 9ths.

The second way is to have your caster level diminished (for example, by feats such as Mage Slayer) below the minimum required for a 9th level spell.
Caster Level

A spell’s power often depends on its caster level, which for most spellcasting characters is equal to your class level in the class you’re using to cast the spell.

You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question, and all level-dependent features must be based on the same caster level.

In the event that a class feature, domain granted power, or other special ability provides an adjustment to your caster level, that adjustment applies not only to effects based on caster level (such as range, duration, and damage dealt) but also to your caster level check to overcome your target’s spell resistance and to the caster level used in dispel checks (both the dispel check and the DC of the check). A standard level 17 Wizard with Mage Slayer, Pierce Magical Concealment, and Pierce Magical Protection can't cast spells higher than level 3 because their caster level would only be 5.

[danzibr]

Totemist 2! We all know why.

[Harrow]

Cleric 9. You get Raise Dead, which is just incredible. Death is now just an inconvenience. Better yet, this level you get Revivify, so death is barely even an inconvenience, it's a thousand gold and a day's use of one spell slot. Both of which continue to decrease in value as you level, but the jump from permanent death to death that costs a thousand gold is pretty huge.

[Mr.Bookworm]

I'm not certain about power. There's a bunch of builds that are powerful, but don't work until you reach a certain level. It also depends on how far-up the power curve you want to reach; I mean, Paladin 1 is theoretically the best level ever, given that you can use it to reach Pun-Pun. The 21st level of any spellcasting class also might be a contender, given how broken epic stuff is.

In terms of sheer amount of stuff gained, though, Sandshaper is hard to beat. A Sorcerer 19 taking his first level of Sandshaper will literally double the number of spells he knows.

[Psyren]

There are at least two ways that you can be a level 17 Wizard and fail to get 9th level spells. Any INT score below 19 keeps you from getting those 9ths.

The second way is to have your caster level diminished (for example, by feats such as Mage Slayer) below the minimum required for a 9th level spell. A standard level 17 Wizard with Mage Slayer, Pierce Magical Concealment, and Pierce Magical Protection can't cast spells higher than level 3 because their caster level would only be 5.

Those only prevent you from accessing the 9ths - you still gained the progression already. For example, if the wizard in your first example raises his Int to 19 (e.g. with a Headband of Intellect and/or some Wishes), he will be able to learn and prepare 9ths without needing to first gain another level. Similarly, if your second wizard raises his caster level to 17 after the fact, he will be able to prepare and cast the 9ths he has already earned without first gaining another level.


I dunno about caster 16 => caster 17. 9th level spells are great, but the jump from 1st-8ths to 9ths isn't that tremendous unless you're chain gating solars. And even then why didn't you bind an efreeti at a few levels lower?

Gate is a part of the big jump, but the main one is Shapechange, which gets you supernatural abilities. For instance, a lot of Tippy's recommendations include the word Zodar.

[lsfreak]

Hm, can you point me to the rule detailing this?
Because just from looking at the SRD, the (Ex) designator doesn't appear anywhere near the Spells class feature (it is in fact undesignated).

Iirc, it's a one-line thing somewhere (MM?) that they really didn't think through, that says all abilities are (Sp) (Su) or (Ex). I don't remember whether spells being (Ex) is an inference based on the definitions or if it actually says something like anything that's not marked is (Ex).

[Psyren]

Except Rules Compendium overrides that with the fourth class of ability, Natural Abilities, which are neither Ex, Sp nor Su. Spellcasting would fall into that category.

[tonberrian]

For fighter types, it's hard to beat Barbarian 1. A d12 hit dice, two very good class features (Rage and what you can trade it for, and Pounce Fast Movement and what you can trade it for).

[Curmudgeon]

Iirc, it's a one-line thing somewhere (MM?) that they really didn't think through, that says all abilities are (Sp) (Su) or (Ex).
It is indeed in Monster Manual (buried in the Glossary on page 315):
Special Abilities: A special ability is either extraordinary (Ex), spell-like (Sp), or supernatural (Su). Of course, given the scope of the book, that's only a definition for monster special abilities. Because Cunning Brilliance refers strictly to class abilities, monster rules don't apply at all. Instead we're ruled by the Player's Handbook when it comes to base class descriptions, and that disagrees with the Monster Manual on page 180:
Natural abilities are those not otherwise designated as extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like.
JaronK has exhibited a somewhat myopic view of the rules where the Factotum is concerned. If it makes the Factotum stronger, his general pattern has been to cite a D&D source as relevant (regardless of RAW applicability). If a rule makes the Factotum weaker, his pattern has been to state some reason to ignore it (regardless of RAW hierarchy).

[ericgrau]

Gate is a part of the big jump, but the main one is Shapechange, which gets you supernatural abilities. For instance, a lot of Tippy's recommendations include the word Zodar.
Seems like more wish, except terribly obscure, never heard of it before now. May depend on the interpretation of "powerful" I suppose. And there is major abuse at much lower spell levels too, even greater depending on how much the DM arbitrarily allows. Without arbitrary levels of abuse that somehow apply to 9ths and not a hundred other lower level spells, what you get in reasonable play are spells that are a little better. I'm not saying 9ths aren't great. I'm saying wizards can already do a lot without the 9ths and the change isn't all that spectacular.

[Curmudgeon]

Seems like more wish, except terribly obscure, never heard of it before now.
Zodar is in Fiend Folio on page 199: Wish as a Supernatural ability — once per year.

[JaronK]

Hm, can you point me to the rule detailing this?
Because just from looking at the SRD, the (Ex) designator doesn't appear anywhere near the Spells class feature (it is in fact undesignated).

A lot of abilities weren't defined initially (sneak attack, for example), and were later (MMV lists the ability to cast as a Sorcerer as an Ex ability). I think one of the Fiend Folio/Fiendish Codex books lists the ability to cast spells as a Cleric as Ex as well. But there are other weird ways to figure it out... Su and Sp abilities are defined by how they're not spells, Na abilities are only those granted by the physical form of the creature (such as flight via your wings), which leaves on Ex as the catch all for class abilities not defined elsewhere (because all abilities must be Ex, Sp, Su, or Na... no exceptions).

It seems weird at first, but remember that you can cast spells in an Antimagic Field... they're just suppressed (this matters if you cast a buff in an Antimagic Field, then exit the field... the buff is up when you leave). If the ability to cast spells were Su or Sp, you couldn't even cast them at all. This is why a Factotum can't cast spells in an Antimagic Field (their ability to cast is explicitly Sp) but a Wizard can.

Note that in 3.0, spells were Natural, but that was changed when the definition of Natural Ability changed in 3.5.

For references, see Rules of the Game: All About Polymorph (which gives more in depth discussion on ability types), as well as the Monster Manual (which is the primary source for ability types, NOT the PHB). Curmudgeon believes that the Monster Manual isn't the primary source for all such abilities, but he's explicitly wrong (the primary source rules directly state as much). This is actually covered by a number of books which basically all agree, but the Monster Manual is the most important. And note that if spells weren't Ex, they'd be Na... which means Alter Self would grant them. That would be far stronger, especially for a Factotum.

See here:


Errata Rule: Primary Sources
When you find a disagreement between two D&D® rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct. One example of a primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a table entry. An individual spell description takes precedence when the short description in the beginning of the spells chapter disagrees.

Another example of primary vs. secondary sources involves book and topic precedence. The Player's Handbook, for example, gives all the rules for playing the game, for playing PC races, and for using base class descriptions. If you find something on one of those topics from the DUNGEON MASTER's Guide or the Monster Manual that disagrees with the Player's Handbook, you should assume the Player's Handbook is the primary source. The DUNGEON MASTER's Guide is the primary source for topics such as magic item descriptions, special material construction rules, and so on. The Monster Manual is the primary source for monster descriptions, templates, and supernatural, extraordinary, and spell-like abilities. Note: The most recent updates are shaded like this.

JaronK

[Psyren]

Sorry JaronK, I'm going with Curmudgeon on this one. Factotum is not a monster, it's a class. What's more, Rules Compendium overrides both books in establishing Natural Abilities' place in the hierarchy.

Primary Source must take a backseat to Specific Trumps General in all cases. Asserting otherwise results in chaos, e.g. there only being 11 base classes in 3.5, an absurdity you yourself have called attention to in the past.

[Chronos]

One could just as well argue that, since spellcasting isn't listed as (ex) or (sp), it must be a supernatural ability. Or that since it's not listed as (ex) or (su), it must be a spell-like ability. Or that the existence of spellcasting is evidence that the statement that those are the only kinds of abilities is wrong, and that spellcasting is its own kind of ability.

And even if, by some bizarre reach of logic, spellcasting is an (ex) ability, that still doesn't do anything for the Factotum's Cunning Brilliance, since one minute isn't enough time to prepare spells or to refresh spell slots.

[Drachasor]

Eh, I can see gaining the ability. However, since you have no wizard or sorcerer levels, it really just acts as a crappy UMD (since it can't replicate caster level).

Let's keep in mind that a 17th level Wizard has the same (Ex) Spellcasting ability as a 1st. Namely, take your wizard spellcasting levels and go look at the chart.

Chronos, I'm sure that's why JaronK mentioned Sorcerer. No prep needed -- though this assumes a great deal.

Edit: Though if there are monsters that have Spellcasting as Class X of Level Y, then that's more of a problem for the polymorphing spells.

[Chronos]

Chronos, I'm sure that's why JaronK mentioned Sorcerer. No prep needed -- though this assumes a great deal.

You still need to refresh your slots, though.
The SRD: (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/arcaneSpells.htm#sorcerersAndBards)

Daily Readying of Spells

Each day, sorcerers and bards must focus their minds on the task of casting their spells. A sorcerer or bard needs 8 hours of rest (just like a wizard), after which he spends 15 minutes concentrating. (A bard must sing, recite, or play an instrument of some kind while concentrating.) During this period, the sorcerer or bard readies his mind to cast his daily allotment of spells. Without such a period to refresh himself, the character does not regain the spell slots he used up the day before.

[JaronK]

Chronos: the reason we can be sure is because there are actually creatures that have "casts as a Wizard" or similar... and it's Ex. So the full reason is because spellcasting is actually listed as Ex. The fact that Wizards are a class not a monster is not a problem here... since the ability to cast as one is Ex. All that other stuff was just showing how you could figure it out *before* spellcasting started just being outright listed as Ex. Note that there's a lot of abilities we can figure out this way... there are a bunch of Ranger abilities that get defined due to some monsters having Ranger levels.

Page 86 of MMV has the Hobgoblin Warcaster, who has the ability "Arcane Talent (Ex) A warcaster casts spells as 4th level wizard." And that's not the only one. There's other Hobgoblin entries like this, and there's the Lilitu in a different book which has the ability to cast as a Cleric but with Charisma, and that's also explicitly Ex.

And note that the 15 minute refresh period for Sorcerers is only required to refresh spell slots you've used in the past. The first time out (which this is) it's not required.

Factotum being a class not a monster is irrelevant, really.

JaronK

[TheGeckoKing]

.....and if we get back to the main topic at hand.....

The Efreet Monster Class (Savage Species) is a good example of the devs thinking "Suffer now, break the game later" is a valid design policy.
Level 17 - Utter dreck, devoid of even the luxury of a full set of hit dice.
Level 18 - Wish SLA 1/day, lacking the clause that bars you from granting yourself your own wishes. You sick of failing all your saves? Wish for some wacky magic item, then.

On the plus side, the Efreet in question has had access to Mindsight since level 1, which I guess is something.

[Psyren]

Page 86 of MMV has the Hobgoblin Warcaster, who has the ability "Arcane Talent (Ex) A warcaster casts spells as 4th level wizard." And that's not the only one. There's other Hobgoblin entries like this, and there's the Lilitu in a different book which has the ability to cast as a Cleric but with Charisma, and that's also explicitly Ex.

Neither of those abilities free the Factotum from needing to prepare/refresh slots. So you're right, those Ex abilities exist, but the Factotum won't ever have them long enough for it to matter.



And note that the 15 minute refresh period for Sorcerers is only required to refresh spell slots you've used in the past. The first time out (which this is) it's not required.

It's always required by RAW. It just doesn't matter when you're starting a game, since the Sorcerer PC typically didn't get their powers less than 15 minutes ago.

[Urpriest]

Chronos: the reason we can be sure is because there are actually creatures that have "casts as a Wizard" or similar... and it's Ex. So the full reason is because spellcasting is actually listed as Ex. The fact that Wizards are a class not a monster is not a problem here... since the ability to cast as one is Ex. All that other stuff was just showing how you could figure it out *before* spellcasting started just being outright listed as Ex. Note that there's a lot of abilities we can figure out this way... there are a bunch of Ranger abilities that get defined due to some monsters having Ranger levels.

Page 86 of MMV has the Hobgoblin Warcaster, who has the ability "Arcane Talent (Ex) A warcaster casts spells as 4th level wizard." And that's not the only one. There's other Hobgoblin entries like this, and there's the Lilitu in a different book which has the ability to cast as a Cleric but with Charisma, and that's also explicitly Ex.

And note that the 15 minute refresh period for Sorcerers is only required to refresh spell slots you've used in the past. The first time out (which this is) it's not required.

Factotum being a class not a monster is irrelevant, really.

JaronK

Point out a class that has Arcane Talent, then. Those are Ex abilities that grant the monster in question the ability to cast as an Xth level character, not the casting itself.

[Wings of Peace]

If all materials are available then my vote is for the third level of elven generalist. The reason for this is that when I build a wizard I like to spend the first level picking up Collegiate Wizard, Aerenal Arcanist, and Otherwordly (via flaws). So level 3 is the level at which not only does my hummingbird becomes a +8 to initiative (bringing my total to +14 once bonus feats and traits come into play) but it's also the level I grab skincaster at (thus relieving the need to guard my spellbook from then on).

[Zombimode]

And note that if spells weren't Ex, they'd be Na... which means Alter Self would grant them. That would be far stronger, especially for a Factotum.

Alter Self would indeed grant spellcasting if it were a natural ability... if you could find a base creature that would have this ability. There aren't any, to my knowledge.

[Harrow]

Alter Self would indeed grant spellcasting if it were a natural ability... if you could find a base creature that would have this ability. There aren't any, to my knowledge.

Spell-like and Supernatural abilities are defined as not being spells. This means Spellcasting has to be either a Natural ability, meaning Alter Self grants it, or an Extraordinary ability, meaning a Factotum can copy it. The argument being made is that the former the Factotum can do anyway and the latter is less damaging to gameplay.

[Psyren]

Spell-like and Supernatural abilities are defined as not being spells. This means Spellcasting has to be either a Natural ability, meaning Alter Self grants it, or an Extraordinary ability, meaning a Factotum can copy it. The argument being made is that the former the Factotum can do anyway and the latter is less damaging to gameplay.

1) Alter Self can't grant it, because spellcasting is not a natural ability of any creature.

2) Even if it were Ex and a Factotum could copy it, they don't have enough time to prepare spells or refresh their slots.

There, problem solved by RAW without exploits.

[Harrow]

1) Alter Self can't grant it, because spellcasting is not a natural ability of any creature.

2) Even if it were Ex and a Factotum could copy it, they don't have enough time to prepare spells or refresh their slots.

There, problem solved by RAW without exploits.

1) It doesn't need to be. It could just not be a Su, Sp, or Ex ability. However, all times it's labeled, it's labeled as Ex, so I would assume that's what it is the rest of the time, based on this precedence.

2) Actually, RAW just says "Without such a period to refresh himself, the character does not regain the spell slots he used up the day before.". So, going by RAW, you can only get full use of this ability every other day, but doesn't need this to gain the spell slots in the first place.

[NeoPhoenix0]

1) Alter Self can't grant it, because spellcasting is not a natural ability of any creature.

2) Even if it were Ex and a Factotum could copy it, they don't have enough time to prepare spells or refresh their slots.

There, problem solved by RAW without exploits.

Re2): First, i want it clear that i am not on the factotum can gain spellcasting side. By RAW a sorcerer only need to focus 15 min. to regain used spell slots.


Daily Readying of Spells

Each day, sorcerers and bards must focus their minds on the task of casting their spells. A sorcerer or bard needs 8 hours of rest (just like a wizard), after which he spends 15 minutes concentrating. (A bard must sing, recite, or play an instrument of some kind while concentrating.) During this period, the sorcerer or bard readies his mind to cast his daily allotment of spells. Without such a period to refresh himself, the character does not regain the spell slots he used up the day before.

[Karnith]

1) It doesn't need to be. It could just not be a Su, Sp, or Ex ability.
If an ability is not Supernatural, Spell-like, or Extraordinary, then it is a natural ability. In fact, that is what defines natural abilities. Per the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#naturalAbilities):

This category includes abilities a creature has because of its physical nature. Natural abilities are those not otherwise designated as extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like.
(Emphasis mine)

[NeoPhoenix0]

Read Alter Self (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/alterSelf.htm) again. Tell me where it says they gain all a creatures natural abilities. I don't see it, what i see is a list of physical qualities that doesn't include spellcasting or the term natural abilities. I think natural ability will work.

[ArcturusV]

Karnith, if I were to point towards the other part of the SRD entry you quoted however, it would suggest Spellcasting is not a Natural Ability, as it doesn't really have anything to do with the physical nature of the beasts. Except perhaps in the case of Outsiders. But I mean usually spellcasting is a learned behavior, so it should probably fall more in the category of something like skills that cannot be used untrained. Least that's the closest parallel I can think of.

But Cleric Casting, outside of say Archons, isn't really part of their physical nature.

But since it is part of the nature for Archons I suppose you could make the case for that, and similar things. But a random Hobgobbo Warcaster casts as a Wizard, sure. But I don't think it's described as something like a Wizard Gland near their pituitary that shoots off Fireball Power. So it's gotta be something else.

[Karnith]

Karnith, if I were to point towards the other part of the SRD entry you quoted however, it would suggest Spellcasting is not a Natural Ability, as it doesn't really have anything to do with the physical nature of the beasts.
I am aware, and I am not arguing one way or another whether spellcasting is a natural ability. I am merely pointing out that, per RAW, an ability that is not Extraordinary, Spell-like, or Supernatural is defined as a natural ability, and therefore if spellcasting is not an (Ex), (Sp), or (Su) ability, then it must be a natural ability.

Whether or not any of that makes actual sense is, naturally, far divorced from the RAW of the situation.

[ArcturusV]

Makes sense I suppose. Just... weird... as is often the case in such discussions.

[Psyren]

Read Alter Self (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/alterSelf.htm) again. Tell me where it says they gain all a creatures natural abilities. I don't see it, what i see is a list of physical qualities that doesn't include spellcasting or the term natural abilities. I think natural ability will work.

Thank you. Alter Self tells you exactly what you get, and spellcasting is not on the list by any stretch of the imagination.

[Bogardan_Mage]

Actually, Wizard 17 will always give 9ths no matter what multiclassing you've been doing. A Fighter 35/Wizard 17 will get 9ths.

Personally I rank Sha'ir 17 or Archivist 17 over Wizard 17 though. Not to mention StP Erudite 17...
I think the idea was more along the lines of a Wizard 16/Loremaster 1/Wizard 1 doesn't get 9ths from his 17th level of Wizard (because he got them from Loremaster). Do caster level advancing PrCs count?

[eggynack]

I think the idea was more along the lines of a Wizard 16/Loremaster 1/Wizard 1 doesn't get 9ths from his 17th level of Wizard (because he got them from Loremaster). Do caster level advancing PrCs count?
I suppose his statement could have meant that. Still, that post literally just said "wizard 17", and that's the description of the build in its entirety. If there are prestige classes, just mentally revise the build to, "The single level that adds the most is whatever gives you wizard 9th's." Granted, I think that build has since been surpassed by ones that go from less than wizard 8th's to having stuff like gate, like the truenamer or healer, but that doesn't change the intent of my post. In any case, I think that even better results could be achieved by adding a prestige class onto the healer. Is there a prestige class that fits onto a healer, and can give crazy power? Lining things up like that could create an even crazier jump in power than the one that already exists.

[Curmudgeon]

Karnith, if I were to point towards the other part of the SRD entry you quoted however, it would suggest Spellcasting is not a Natural Ability, as it doesn't really have anything to do with the physical nature of the beasts. Natural abilities aren't restricted to just the physical nature of a creature; those physical abilities are merely included in the category. From Player's Handbook, page 180:

Natural Abilities: This category includes abilities a creature has because of its physical nature, such as a bird’s ability to fly. Natural abilities are those not otherwise designated as extraordinary,
supernatural, or spell-like. Also from the PH Glossary, page 310:

natural ability: A nonmagical capability, such as walking, swimming (for aquatic creatures), and flight (for winged creatures).

[Glimbur]

Totemist 2! We all know why.

Throwing a single level of Incarnate allows for a variety of skill boosts, defenses, and even attacks. Immunity to dominate, for example, is kind of nice in the right situation. And you can change the abilities each day, picking from a pretty broad list. It does hurt your BAB, but it's a nice dip.

[Kalaska'Agathas]

Regarding the whole "Spellcasting as Ex: ability" thing - if you're using the Rules Compendium, then Spellcasting (except where explicitly marked as Ex:) is a Natural Ability (since unmarked abilities default to Natural). If you're not using it, then Spellcasting (where unmarked) would necessarily default to Ex: (since anything that wasn't marked as Su: or SLA: did).

This doesn't really matter for your Factotum, as they would not have time to prepare/ready spells acquired by their minute-long Cunning Brilliance. It does matter for Planar Shepherds, however, since they get their Outsider forms' Supernatural, Spell-like, and Extraordinary abilities.

As far as the level which adds the most, I'm definitely in the "whichever level gives access to ninth level spells" camp. Or the "whichever level gives access to Epic Spellcasting (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/feats.htm#epicSpellcasting)" camp, if there is one.

[Psyren]

Regarding the whole "Spellcasting as Ex: ability" thing - if you're using the Rules Compendium, then Spellcasting (except where explicitly marked as Ex:) is a Natural Ability (since unmarked abilities default to Natural). If you're not using it, then Spellcasting (where unmarked) would necessarily default to Ex: (since anything that wasn't marked as Su: or SLA: did).

You can't really choose not to use Rules Compendium - it contains the rules for Dungeons & Dragons 3.5. If you're ignoring it, then you're playing a visually similar game that runs on your houserules.

[Drachasor]

Doesn't matter if a Factotum can prepare spells. He can only get the (Ex) from CLASSES. All Classes with Spellcasting have it tied to their class level, so a Factotum now proudly can cast as a 0th level Sorcerer.

If he could grab it from monsters then that would be a different story.

[Amidus Drexel]

1) Alter Self can't grant it, because spellcasting is not a natural ability of any creature.


Er... Angels, Rakshasas, (most) True Dragons... there are others that I can't think of off the top of my head. Not listed as Ex, Su, or Sp, so it defaults to natural.

I don't think Cunning Brilliance or Alter Self should pick up spellcasting, though.

[Kalaska'Agathas]

You can't really choose not to use Rules Compendium - it contains the rules for Dungeons & Dragons 3.5. If you're ignoring it, then you're playing a visually similar game that runs on your houserules.

Sure you can - the system is laid out in Core and expanded on with the various splats. Rules Compendium is just a splat that modifies and clarifies those rules. It is hardly necessary for play, and play without it can't really be called 'visually similar [but running] on houserules.' After all, people were playing 3.5 just fine before its publication.

[NeoPhoenix0]

Doesn't matter if a Factotum can prepare spells. He can only get the (Ex) from CLASSES. All Classes with Spellcasting have it tied to their class level, so a Factotum now proudly can cast as a 0th level Sorcerer.

If he could grab it from monsters then that would be a different story.

Actually they count as having their factotum level in the class they are getting their Ex ability from.

[Mr.Bookworm]

Sure you can - the system is laid out in Core and expanded on with the various splats. Rules Compendium is just a splat that modifies and clarifies those rules. It is hardly necessary for play, and play without it can't really be called 'visually similar [but running] on houserules.' After all, people were playing 3.5 just fine before its publication.


When a preexisting core book or supplement differs with the rules herein, Rules Compendium is meant to take precedence.

When discussing RAW, RC is the final word.

So, no, you really can't ignore it when the discussion entirely consists of RAW minutiae.

[Kalaska'Agathas]

When discussing RAW, RC is the final word.

So, no, you really can't ignore it when the discussion entirely consists of RAW minutiae.

When discussing RAW, you're absolutely right. I intended my example to comment on the implications for actual play in which the Rules Compendium is not available (not everyone has the book, after all). I'm sorry if that was unclear.

[Curmudgeon]

When discussing RAW, RC is the final word.
Sorry, but you overlooked the important word there: preexisting. All of the Premium versions of the D&D books (mostly a compilation of the original books plus their errata) were published after Rules Compendium. They now take precedence, as per that limitation in RC. It's not the final word at all.

[Psyren]

Sure you can - the system is laid out in Core and expanded on with the various splats. Rules Compendium is just a splat that modifies and clarifies those rules. It is hardly necessary for play, and play without it can't really be called 'visually similar [but running] on houserules.' After all, people were playing 3.5 just fine before its publication.

People were playing 3.5 just fine before errata too. That doesn't mean errata isn't official, nor does it mean that ignoring errata means you are still following RAW.

[Rubik]

The first level of the ghost savage progression class (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sp/20040117a) grants some seriously good stuff. Incorporeality alone makes you invulnerable to anything not using magic, and it grants you a 50% miss chance to almost everything that does. It also grants a huge number of immunities, the near-equivalent of (albeit superior to) a 7th level spell, (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/etherealJaunt.htm) a fly speed (similar to a 13,000 gp magic item), and some decent skill bonuses.

And it can be taken at level 2.

[Kalaska'Agathas]

People were playing 3.5 just fine before errata too. That doesn't mean errata isn't official, nor does it mean that ignoring errata means you are still following RAW.

Again, I'm sorry that I was unclear with what I said. I meant it to be understood that yes, when discussing RAW, the Rules Compendium must be taken into account (barring any date of publishing rules lawyering). Indeed, I meant to emphasize that fact, as it seemed the point hadn't been made explicit in the discussion so far. I thought that would be clear enough when I wrote:

Regarding the whole "Spellcasting as Ex: ability" thing - if you're using the Rules Compendium, then Spellcasting (except where explicitly marked as Ex:) is a Natural Ability (since unmarked abilities default to Natural).

I never meant to advocate ignoring the Rules Compendium, just to point out that there are implications on how the game is played if, as is the case with some (perhaps even many) groups, the Rules Compendium is not in play. I'm sorry that wasn't clear.

[TuggyNE]

Sorry, but you overlooked the important word there: preexisting. All of the Premium versions of the D&D books (mostly a compilation of the original books plus their errata) were published after Rules Compendium. They now take precedence, as per that limitation in RC. It's not the final word at all.

I appreciate that you're updating your position, but I'm a little puzzled about an apparent inconsistency here: previously, you've stated RC can't override Core because it's not a primary source (even though it comes after, and explicitly says that it's supposed to), but now you're saying that it's only the publishing date of the new Core books that makes them override RC (implicitly accepting its authority to override the older books, which you previously denied), despite older sources generally being considered authoritative?

[Psyren]

@ KA: No need to apologize :smallsmile:

But even at tables where RC isn't owned by anyone, if the question is asked online anywhere (as was the case in this thread) then the correct answer will be given by someone who owns it, i.e. Typeless abilities are natural.


@ tuggyne: Indeed, these are the kind of inconsistencies that arise through slavish dedication to the Primary Source Rule; it causes even more RAW problems than exist without it, and there are more than enough of those to go around.

I'm sure even this latest premium what-have-you version of the PHB states there are 11 base classes in 3.5, just as I'm sure statements like that will be ignored by Primary-Source adherents.

[Curmudgeon]

I appreciate that you're updating your position, but I'm a little puzzled about an apparent inconsistency here: previously, you've stated RC can't override Core ...
I haven't changed my position at all; RC's authority is entirely self-declared, and at odds with other WotC sources. I was just pointing out that, if you decide to use Rules Compendium, even by its own claim it's not "the final word" as Mr.Bookworm stated.

[Kalaska'Agathas]

@ KA: No need to apologize :smallsmile:

But even at tables where RC isn't owned by anyone, if the question is asked online anywhere (as was the case in this thread) then the correct answer will be given by someone who owns it, i.e. Typeless abilities are natural.

Correct if all books are open. However, in games where that is not the case (Core Only, Core + Completes, Faerun, Eberron, etc.) then it's best to ask the DM if they wish to add RC to the book list, because its presence or absence may effect play.

But again, the level that gets you Nines, from a non-crap list, or the level that gets you Epic Spellcasting. Those are the levels which add the most.

[Rubik]

I don't suppose we could go back to the original purpose of the thread and move Rules Compendium discussions to separate thread, could we?

[Nettlekid]

A question about Factotum 19 before we get back on topic, if I may? Because I've really liked this ability, but have yet to see a lot of good use for it. Personally I'm on the side of "it doesn't grant spellcasting," although then again, Sneak Attack is also not listed as Ex, Su, or Sp, and I'm quite sure Sneak Attack is something you could get through Cunning Brilliance, right? What about an Initiator's maneuvers? If you had Adaptive Style to prepare them as a full-round action, could you get the maneuvers known of a 19th level initiator?

But one of the coolest and probably most spurious, yet those who allow spellcasting (and Sneak Attack?) might argue for it, are Fighter Bonus Feats. They're listed as class features with no label. Might those count? Because I love the visual image of a Factotum who, for 1 minute a day, turns into a super-specialized martial master. A guy who makes himself into a Gatling Gun Tripper, or Jack B. Quick, or some super sniper, for a minute.

[NeoPhoenix0]

I apologize for continuing to derail the thread but i must say one thing.


I haven't changed my position at all; RC's authority is entirely self-declared, and at odds with other WotC sources. I was just pointing out that, if you decide to use Rules Compendium, even by its own claim it's not "the final word" as Mr.Bookworm stated.

Forgive me if i'm wrong but errata is entirely self-declared. It never says in the books errata takes precedence and yet it has the power to impose itself.

Edit: @nettlekid: i believe all of those features depend on the same ruling as spell casting.

[Drachasor]

Actually they count as having their factotum level in the class they are getting their Ex ability from.

Ahh, that's what I get for not having the books on me.

Well, we'd have to go back to the classes not having (Ex) next to their spell-casting. RAW has it as an untyped ability on classes. Sure, some monsters might have it as (Ex), but that doesn't mean it is (Ex) for classes. There are quite a few abilities that vary in their status.

While any "special ability" is Ex, Sp, or Su, that doesn't mean ALL abilities are. The rules never state any class ability must be one of the three. Since they aren't marked, they aren't any of them. Anything else is wishful thinking.

[JaronK]

The fact of the matter is that many class abilities were never labeled in earlier printings (including sneak attack, spellcasting, etc) but were labeled later (sometimes you'd even get a monster with, for example, Ranger class levels and it would list his Ranger abilities as Ex). In these cases, it's obvious that the original ability was always supposed to be Ex.

Furthermore, even the new printings of the Monster Manual say that all Special Attacks and Special Qualities are Ex, Sp, or Su... Na isn't even an option (Na abilities are "Abilities" while Ex, Sp, and Su abilities are "Special Abilities"). This overrides everything due to being a primary source printed after the Rules Compendium.

So yes, otherwise unlabeled abilities like Rogue Sneak Attack are almost always Ex unless they're actually not Special Abilities at all. Often, they're in fact labeled as such elsewhere in later print run books (monsters with Rogue levels having Sneak Attack labeled as a Special Attack, and often as an Ex Special Attack).

JaronK

[Drachasor]

The fact of the matter is that many class abilities were never labeled in earlier printings (including sneak attack, spellcasting, etc) but were labeled later (sometimes you'd even get a monster with, for example, Ranger class levels and it would list his Ranger abilities as Ex). In these cases, it's obvious that the original ability was always supposed to be Ex.

Furthermore, even the new printings of the Monster Manual say that all Special Attacks and Special Qualities are Ex, Sp, or Su... Na isn't even an option (Na abilities are "Abilities" while Ex, Sp, and Su abilities are "Special Abilities"). This overrides everything due to being a primary source printed after the Rules Compendium.

So yes, otherwise unlabeled abilities like Rogue Sneak Attack are almost always Ex unless they're actually not Special Abilities at all. Often, they're in fact labeled as such elsewhere in later print run books (monsters with Rogue levels having Sneak Attack labeled as a Special Attack, and often as an Ex Special Attack).

JaronK

Spellcasting is not declared as something that must be a Special Ability/Attack. You can't just assume it is one. Just because some other class abilities got changes later doesn't mean all did. And don't pick and mix what later books you want to use just to bolster your argument -- especially when you leave out the book that is supposed to sort out any confusion.

[JaronK]

Actually, spellcasting is listed as a Special Attack on every single creature that has it in their stat block, even creatures that just have it gained via class levels. This is true in every single book that shows stat blocks (except I think the last few books printed that didn't show whether things were Special Abilities or not).

Seriously, all the books do this if they show any stat blocks on creatures with spellcasting and actually show if things are Special Abilities.

Is that picking and choosing?

JaronK

[Drachasor]

Actually, spellcasting is listed as a Special Attack on every single creature that has it in their stat block, even creatures that just have it gained via class levels. This is true in every single book that shows stat blocks (except I think the last few books printed that didn't show whether things were Special Abilities or not).

Seriously, all the books do this if they show any stat blocks on creatures with spellcasting and actually show if things are Special Abilities.

Is that picking and choosing?

When you ignore the primary source and then ignore the rules compendium, yes.

Because Statblocks are both unreliable and written to be easy to quickly navigate -- having a different section for spells makes things needlessly complicated. A statblock certainly doesn't define how abilities work and define their classification.

[JaronK]

When you ignore the primary source and then ignore the rules compendium, yes.

Hold up a second.

The primary source says they're Special Abilities (Special Attacks, actually). This includes the updated Monster Manual, which actually overrides the RC (and is still the primary source). And the RC actually also in one spot (page 119) leaves Natural Abilities out of the list of Special Abilities, so the override doesn't matter.

So... you mean "when you actually use the primary source and the RC" right?


Because Statblocks are both unreliable and written to be easy to quickly navigate -- having a different section for spells makes things needlessly complicated. A statblock certainly doesn't define how abilities work and define their classification.

If every single example in the game says the same thing, it's a pretty safe bet that they're not all wrong in exactly the same way, especially when there's such a massive weight of evidence. And yes, stat blocks define classifications... how else would we know what most abilities are? It's the stat block that says it! How else would we know that a Hobgoblin Warcaster casts as a Wizard and that it's Ex... the stat block says so.

But seriously, even the Monster Manual (the primary source on special abilities) has an entry that mirrors the SRD here: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/mummy.htm

Note how right from the beginning Spells are a Special Attack (and later on in the MM, which is still the primary source, they're defined as such again in the general sections). Note also that's Spells from a class, as that's a 10th level Cleric.

Seriously, the fact that all Special Abilities are Su, Ex, or Sp is found in numerous places, including the primary source on Special Abilities. The RC actually agrees with this (see page 119, which lists all special ability types). Now, they list Natural Abilities in general in the Special Abilities area, which is weird since right after that they clearly show such abilities are not, in fact, Special Abilities (which agrees with the Monster Manual reprint). The only explanation for that is that what they meant was "any ability that's not a Special Ability (which would clearly define it as Ex, Sp, or Su) is Natural." This is the only interpretation that actually remains consistent throughout the RC... anything else results in weird single page contradictions. Note that this also matches how the SRD does it... Natural Abilities are listed on the Special Abilities page, but in a different section, and then they immediately state that Special Abilities are always Ex, Sp, or Su.

In fact, the rule that Special Abilities are always Ex, Sp, or Su is one of the single most reprinted general (non class specific) rules in all of 3.5.

JaronK

[Rubik]

In fact, the rule that Special Abilities are always Ex, Sp, or Su is one of the single most reprinted general (non class specific) rules in all of 3.5.It's also not entirely true. Psi-like abilities (Ps) are completely separate and work under their own rules, and are neither Sp, Su, Ex, or Na.

However, that doesn't affect spellcasting whatsoever, so it's only an interesting aside.

[ahenobarbi]

(Elven Generalist + Domain) Wizard 1, because 9th level spells.
Paladin 1, because Pun-Pun.

[TuggyNE]

Forgive me if i'm wrong but errata is entirely self-declared. It never says in the books errata takes precedence and yet it has the power to impose itself.

None of your silly "logic", please!

Seriously, primary source rules are nigh-useless; they contradict themselves and give bizarre answers. I'm not even sure they're needed except for useless pedantry.

[Drachasor]

The primary source says they're Special Abilities (Special Attacks, actually). This includes the updated Monster Manual, which actually overrides the RC (and is still the primary source). And the RC actually also in one spot (page 119) leaves Natural Abilities out of the list of Special Abilities, so the override doesn't matter.

No, the primary source does not. The primary source for class abilities IS THE CLASS. The primary source on rules is the the Rules Compendium (that's its whole purpose). Monster Manuals are the primary source for Monsters, including building them, modifying them, etc. It is not the primary source on rules -- especially for general rules that apply to characters and monsters both.

That said, the rules compendium is not necessary at all in this, so we can drop it.


So... you mean "when you actually use the primary source and the RC" right?

I mean when you use the actual primary source, rather than whatever source suits your argument.


If every single example in the game says the same thing, it's a pretty safe bet that they're not all wrong in exactly the same way, especially when there's such a massive weight of evidence. And yes, stat blocks define classifications... how else would we know what most abilities are? It's the stat block that says it! How else would we know that a Hobgoblin Warcaster casts as a Wizard and that it's Ex... the stat block says so.

That might be true for the Warcaster, but that doesn't mean spellcasting for a Wizard is (Ex). Statblocks are not primary sources for class abilities. The classes are.

You have yet to prove that all abilities are special abilities. So the rest of your reasoning is irrelevant.

Your argument is basically "I can ignore the rules because a lot of stat-blocks [which are designed so that you can use them as a quick reference] say what I want, even if that's not what primary source says." That is why your argument fails.

Spellcasting for classes is consistently untyped. It is not defined as a "Special Ability" and it need not be Ex, Su, or Sp. It is merely an untyped ability, that is all.

Edit: I want to say that I do have a lot of respect for a lot of your work on various forums. You are wrong on this particular issue, unfortunately. :(

[Tytalus]

By RAW, Factotum 19. Because yes, spells in 3.5 (as opposed to 3.0) are Ex Special Attacks.

No, spells from class levels actually aren't (e.g., RAW on (Ex): "...These abilities cannot be disrupted in combat, as spells can", etc., etc...).

We've discussed this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=184164&page=4) at length before (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=218517).



Spellcasting for classes is consistently untyped. It is not defined as a "Special Ability" and it need not be Ex, Su, or Sp. It is merely an untyped ability, that is all.

Indeed.

[Psyren]

Seriously, primary source rules are nigh-useless; they contradict themselves and give bizarre answers. I'm not even sure they're needed except for useless pedantry.

That is literally their only purpose.

Thankfully, the source that gives them precedence is entirely self-declared :smallamused:

[Snowbluff]

Hold up a second.

The primary source says they're Special Abilities (Special Attacks, actually). This includes the updated Monster Manual, which actually overrides the RC (and is still the primary source). And the RC actually also in one spot (page 119) leaves Natural Abilities out of the list of Special Abilities, so the override doesn't matter.

So... you mean "when you actually use the primary source and the RC" right?

JaronK Since they are not Su/Ex/Sp (and Ps), they are not special abilities.

Furthermore, I would posit that Spells are not universally 'attacks' of any sort because they can be (Harmless).

Just my thoughts on the matter.

[NeoPhoenix0]

Sorry, but you overlooked the important word there: preexisting. All of the Premium versions of the D&D books (mostly a compilation of the original books plus their errata) were published after Rules Compendium. They now take precedence, as per that limitation in RC. It's not the final word at all.

Just noticed a flaw with this. The premium versions weren't published after the Rules Compendium. Look at the credits page at the beginning of those books. They are just the newest printing of the newest edition of books that were published in 2003. Published in 2005 in the case of the Spell Compendium.

[Curmudgeon]

Just noticed a flaw with this. The premium versions weren't published after the Rules Compendium. Look at the credits page at the beginning of those books. They are just the newest printing of the newest edition of books that were published in 2003. Published in 2005 in the case of the Spell Compendium.
Credits pages don't matter; publishing dates (2012-2013) do. Examples (with publishing dates) here (http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_2_8?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=premium%203.5%20edition%20dungeons%20%26% 20dragons&sprefix=Premium+%2Cstripbooks%2C404).

[Lapak]

I'm not sure that Wizard 17 qualifies as 'adds the most,' because 8th level wizard spells already put a Wizard 16 at a very comfortable height of power.

For adding the most, I suggest, let's say, Thrallherd 1 on a CHA-focused Wilder 18 chassis. The Wilder's already got most of the power he's going to get since he has his 9th-level power, and adding Thrallherd can potentially net him a level 17 Wizard (or some other Tier 1 caster class) as a fanatic thrall with just that one level. I'd say that's a pretty good boost.

[Doug Lampert]

Druid 5 - Wildshape
Druid 6 - Natural Spell (Because who doesn't take Natural Spell at 6th)

People who take LEADERSHIP at 6th (when they get a full strength cohort even if they dumped Cha), and then take Natural spell at 9th.


Wizard 5 - Everyone knows 3rd level spells are where wizards start winning the game.

Unless the DM let Abrupt Jaunt into his game and it's thus level 1 where wizards take over. But who would do that, something so obviously imballanced must have been an April Fool's joke or something, it COULDN'T be a real rule.

It's like someone wanted to "top" the lightning warrior for "Most absurdly overpowered thing you can trade the familiar for and then claim it's ballanced because you traded something for it."

Actually: I'll go with Truenamer 20 as the bigest jump.

[Snowbluff]

Unless the DM let Abrupt Jaunt into his game and it's thus level 1 where wizards take over. But who would do that, something so obviously imballanced must have been an April Fool's joke or something, it COULDN'T be a real rule.

It's like someone wanted to "top" the lightning warrior for "Most absurdly overpowered thing you can trade the familiar for and then claim it's ballanced because you traded something for it."
Considering how effective familiars can be, I would say it's actually a fair trade.

Think for a moment. A familiar with a Wand of Benign Transposition.

[Psyren]

Credits pages don't matter; publishing dates (2012-2013) do. Examples (with publishing dates) here (http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_2_8?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=premium%203.5%20edition%20dungeons%20%26% 20dragons&sprefix=Premium+%2Cstripbooks%2C404).

It does if the argument hinges on the term "pre-existing." The PHB was certainly a pre-existing book when RC was published, no matter how many times it's been re-released since then.

[NeoPhoenix0]

Credits pages don't matter; publishing dates (2012-2013) do. Examples (with publishing dates) here (http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_2_8?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=premium%203.5%20edition%20dungeons%20%26% 20dragons&sprefix=Premium+%2Cstripbooks%2C404).

Primary source rule. A book's credit page takes precedence over an online source for the purpose of its own publication date.

Edit: As I stated above, the books list the publication date as 2003 for the core books (even the premium ones list it) and 2005 for the Spell Compendium (again even the premium ones list this publication date).

[Doug Lampert]

Considering how effective familiars can be, I would say it's actually a fair trade.

Think for a moment. A familiar with a Wand of Benign Transposition.

If you're using familiars that effectively (at level 1? How?) then the wizards still take over at level 1.

Otherwise wizards take Abrupt Jaunt and laugh hartily at all the claims that they somehow need a meat-shield who's VASTLY easier to kill than a wizard from level 1 on.

Basically: If abrupt jaunt then wizards take over at level 1. This doesn't mean there aren't even STRONGER options for wizards, just that those options are even more broken.

[NeoPhoenix0]

If you're using familiars that effectively (at level 1? How?) then the wizards still take over at level 1.

Otherwise wizards take Abrupt Jaunt and laugh hartily at all the claims that they somehow need a meat-shield who's VASTLY easier to kill than a wizard from level 1 on.

Basically: If abrupt jaunt then wizards take over at level 1. This doesn't mean there aren't even STRONGER options for wizards, just that those options are even more broken.

I've done the benign transposition trick at level one. Since don't have enough for a wand you need to learn the spell yourself. You also need a raven familiar so you can talk to it and plan out your teleports.

[ahenobarbi]

I've done the benign transposition trick at level one. Since don't have enough for a wand you need to learn the spell yourself. You also need a raven familiar so you can talk to it and plan out your teleports.

Of course you use a mule trained to be willing. This way when you get out of trouble by casting Bering Transposition the one getting into trouble is 8gp mule, not a few hundred XP + 100gp familiar.

Familiars are pretty good later (especially when you can grant them casting (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/mnemonicEnhancer.htm)).

[NeoPhoenix0]

Of course you use a mule trained to be willing. This way when you get out of trouble by casting Bering Transposition the one getting into trouble is 8gp mule, not a few hundred XP + 100gp familiar.

Familiars are pretty good later (especially when you can grant them casting (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/mnemonicEnhancer.htm)).

Familiars only cost xp when they die.

[ahenobarbi]

Familiars only cost xp when they die.

But summoning a familiar costs 100gp.

[Rubik]

No comments on the first level of the ghost progression? Even better than everything I noted before, you can buy off the LA immediately after level 3, so it doesn't even have to count against your ECL.

[Kalaska'Agathas]

No comments on the first level of the ghost progression? Even better than everything I noted before, you can buy off the LA immediately after level 3, so it doesn't even have to count against your ECL.

The first level of the Ghost savage progression is pretty good, for sure, especially if you take Ghostly Grasp. I still think getting ninth level spells (or epic spellcasting) gives more, though. There are great spells of just about every level, but once you've gotten nines you've got the solution to just about any problem, and that is the real measure of power in 3.5. Thus that is the level that adds the most to a character.

Regarding "Spells as Special Attacks" thing; check out the sample character statblocks - when spellcasting is listed it is listed as a Special Attack (though I will be the first to admit that it isn't always listed, even for characters who should have spellcasting (from levels in casting classes)). But I must agree with Rubik - if we wish to continue the "What type of ability is it?" discussion, we should do so in its own thread, rather than dragging this one further afield.

[JaronK]

Since they are not Su/Ex/Sp (and Ps), they are not special abilities.

Furthermore, I would posit that Spells are not universally 'attacks' of any sort because they can be (Harmless).

Just my thoughts on the matter.

Please check the Monster Manual (primary source on this), near the end of the book, where Spells are explicitly listed as a form of Special Attack (in addition to all monster entries that use the old format for entries). It's in the section that defines Special Abilities, in fact. Interesting note though: some later books started listing them as Special Qualities (in the new format). Either way though, they're forced into Sp, Su, or Ex because of this.

So yes, this is actually spelled out very clearly: spells are Special Abilities (primary source says Special Attacks). This is basically irrefutable, and I suggest that anyone who thinks otherwise needs to look at what the MM1 actually says about it.

As for the real topic at hand, I think people are going to have a tough time topping Truenamer 20 and Healer 18. Both of those are generally weak classes that suddenly gate Gate (and Truenamers can actually spam it without problems, so they're the winner in this). Truenamers go straight from BMX Bandit to Angel Summoner in one level.

JaronK

[Chronos]

Quoth Nettlekid:

But one of the coolest and probably most spurious, yet those who allow spellcasting (and Sneak Attack?) might argue for it, are Fighter Bonus Feats. They're listed as class features with no label. Might those count? Because I love the visual image of a Factotum who, for 1 minute a day, turns into a super-specialized martial master. A guy who makes himself into a Gatling Gun Tripper, or Jack B. Quick, or some super sniper, for a minute.
Feats all provide extraordinary abilities, unless specified otherwise, and I'm not aware of any fighter feats that specify otherwise. Thus, a factotum using Cunning Brilliance can gain any feat that's included in the Fighter's class table or description. Likewise, he can gain any maneuver that's included in the Warblade's class table or description.

[Sith_Happens]

Truenamers go straight from BMX Bandit to Angel Summoner in one level.

BMX Bandit (presumably) doesn't get worse at riding a BMX the higher-level he gets, though.

[NeoPhoenix0]

Feats all provide extraordinary abilities, unless specified otherwise, and I'm not aware of any fighter feats that specify otherwise. Thus, a factotum using Cunning Brilliance can gain any feat that's included in the Fighter's class table or description. Likewise, he can gain any maneuver that's included in the Warblade's class table or description.

The feat itself is an Ex ability, but it is a feat not a class ability. The fighter's class ability is bonus feats. The ability to take the feat isn't labeled as an Ex ability.

[Drachasor]

Please check the Monster Manual (primary source on this), near the end of the book, where Spells are explicitly listed as a form of Special Attack (in addition to all monster entries that use the old format for entries). It's in the section that defines Special Abilities, in fact. Interesting note though: some later books started listing them as Special Qualities (in the new format). Either way though, they're forced into Sp, Su, or Ex because of this.

So yes, this is actually spelled out very clearly: spells are Special Abilities (primary source says Special Attacks). This is basically irrefutable, and I suggest that anyone who thinks otherwise needs to look at what the MM1 actually says about it.

A Special Ability must be Ex, Sp, or Su. Special attacks are something else. Indeed, when you go to the Glossary of the MM, where it says to consult regarding "Special Attacks" spells are not given the Sp, Su, or Ex tag.

Similar terms are not the same term. And heck, the "special attack" bit is just from a section giving advice on creating monsters. It also has "special qualities" and that section includes things that aren't Ex, Su, or Sp either (like aspects of creature type).

Further, the glossary section going over "Spells" talks about how it is an ability for creatures to cast magic just like a member of a spellcasting class. So that's clearly a different ability than what classes get. It is something that mimics class levels for the purposes of casting magic. It's pretty explicitly different from the spellcasting ability classes grant then, so saying they are the same is unjustified.

[JaronK]

A Special Ability must be Ex, Sp, or Su. Special attacks are something else. Indeed, when you go to the Glossary of the MM, where it says to consult regarding "Special Attacks" spells are not given the Sp, Su, or Ex tag.

Read it again. Special Attacks are a subset of Special Abilities. Special Abilities are divided into two categories... Special Attacks and Special Qualities. So yes, all Special Attacks must be Ex, Sp, or Su, because they're all Special Abilities. The same is true of all Special Qualities. By the way, page 6 of MM1 will help you on this point.

Specifically, it reads on page 6


"Special Attacks and Special Qualities: Many creatures have unusual abilities... A monster entry breaks these abilities into special attacks and special qualities... a special ability is either extraordinary (Ex), spell-like (Sp), or supernatural." Page 315 is also relevant.

If you're confused on this point, you might want to also check the Rules of the Game articles on the topic (IIRC both the Antimagic one and the Polymorph one go into relevant details on this). Also, note that many books back up the Monster Manual on this point and clarify it.

And note that spells that are granted from class levels (such as the Mummy with Cleric levels listed in the SRD and MM1) get their spells as a Special Attack too, so no, there's no difference there too. Seriously, go look at every creature ever that has a stat block and has spellcasting. See how spells are listed in all of them. The fact that Spells are a Special Attack is repeated hundreds of times.

JaronK

[Nettlekid]

I just can't believe that the Rogue's Sneak Attack isn't specifically listed as an Ex) ability, while something like Animal Companion is. How is Animal Companion an ability at all? Meanwhile, although PrCs which give Sneak Attack call it an Ex) ability, the Rogue itself does not.

Also, while I am on the side of the argument that neither Polymorph/Shapechange or Factotum 19 can grant spells, I don't think it makes a difference, because you couldn't prepare/cast them. You'd need to spend 15 minutes after 8 hours of rest readying your mind to cast spells, even for a spontaneous caster. You can't spend those 15 minutes readying before you use Cunning Brilliance to get the Sorcerer ability, because you're not actually readying for anything as long as you don't have the ability. You don't have anything to ready for. And you only have the ability for a minute, so you don't have 15 minutes of uninterrupted meditation time anyway. So a Factotum can't cast spells.

I don't have as compelling an argument for something like Persisted Shapechange, although I do think that creatures' spellcasting comes from Racial Hit Dice, which Shapechange doesn't give you. That's the same reason you don't get their feats and skills, but you do get racial feats and racial skill bonuses, because you turn into their race, but not an advanced version of their race. Otherwise, what stops you from turning into the MM-described versions of monsters with class levels, and using the Ex) and Su) abilities granted by those class levels, since it's part of the monster entry? You can't turn into a Celestial Charger instead of a Unicorn and use Turn Undead.

But honestly, guys, there's no point in fighting. There are going to be people who fight tooth and nail for something to be utterly broken because there's the chance that if they try hard enough, they can force it to be despite clear intention otherwise (I mean come on, if the writers wanted you to be able to cast spells, would they have said that you don't get the SLAs of the monsters? Come on) and there are people who will accept a totally broken spell for what it is, totally broken RAI, without having to force it to be even more so. And neither side is ever going to convince the other to change their mind.

[JaronK]

If you actually read all the entries on special abilities (and believe me, I have) you'll find that all unlabeled abilities that aren't inherent to the form of the creature (such as run speed for a creature with legs, or claw attacks for a creature with claws) are in fact Ex. Seriously, they are. Sneak Attack, Fighter Bonus Feats, Warblade Maneuvers... all of them. That's because by definition they all have to be Special Abilities (and are in fact listed as such over and over in many stat blocks) and all Su and Sp abilities are always labeled.

Only abilities which aren't actually Special Abilities are Na, which is why Na is the default for stuff that isn't listed anywhere else.

JaronK

[Nettlekid]

Hmm, actually looking at it, it seems to say that anything not designated as an Ex), Su), or Sp) ability is a Na) ability. I cannot find anything that says that through use of spells like Alter Self, Polymorph, or Shapechange you gain Na) abilities. Alter Self says you gain Natural Weapons, but that's not the same thing. Alter Self says you gain "Physical qualities include natural size, mundane movement capabilities (such as burrowing, climbing, walking, swimming, and flight with wings, to a maximum speed of 120 feet for flying or 60 feet for nonflying movement), natural armor bonus, natural weapons (such as claws, bite, and so on), racial skill bonuses, racial bonus feats, and any gross physical qualities (presence or absence of wings, number of extremities, and so forth)." Spellcasting is none of those things. Polymorph gives you Ex) special attacks, and Spellcasting is not an Ex) special attack, it's an Na) special attack. Shapechange gives you all Ex) and Su) abilities, but says nothing about Na) abilities. Now, you could argue that this is an oversight, because nearly everything that is in the umbrella Na) term was included in Alter Self's description. Except Spellcasting. I would like you to find me something that says you get an ability which Spellcasting is.

[Endarire]

A lot of classes gain so very much when taking (Cloisetered) Cleric1 due to 2-3 Domains, skills, spells, 2 good saves, and proficiencies. (And maybe more!)

[Nettlekid]

(To continue with my thought, thinking through it some more) It's true, Spellcasting is listed under Special Attacks of monsters that have it. If something said "You get all Special Attacks," then it would hold water for Spellcasting. But the best we can get is "You get all Ex) and Su) abilities" or "You get all Ex) Special Attacks." So we need to prove that Spellcasting is Ex) in order to justify getting it.

"Natural Abilities: This category includes abilities a creature has because of its physical nature. Natural abilities are those not otherwise designated as extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like."
Spells, as listed in the stat block of monsters in the MM, do not have an Ex), Su), or Sp) following them. Thus, they are Natural Abilities. Natural Abilities are not Ex), Su), or Sp). Something that grants Ex), Su), or Sp) only will not grant Spells. To get Spells, you'd need something that grants Natural Abilities.

I cannot find any clause in Alter Self, Polymorph, or Shapechange which states "You gain the Natural Abilities of the form you change into." The closest we get is "physical qualities," which is not the same thing (after all, Natural Ability is a technical term. We need those words exactly.) What's more, when "physical qualities" is described, none of the aforementioned spells list Spellcasting (or Natural Abilities at all, in that umbrella term) as being part of "physical qualities." They list many qualities which do fall into the category Natural Abilities, but they do not name the category as a whole. And as such, you do not gain the category as a whole.

Unless you can find proof for me that Natural Abilities count as Ex) abilities (unlikely, as to be a Natural Ability something must not be an Ex) ability), then I see no way at all that you can call Spellcasting an ability gained by any of these spells.

[Kalaska'Agathas]

I wager Ten Internets that JaronK's response will be:



And the RC actually also in one spot (page 119) leaves Natural Abilities out of the list of Special Abilities, so the override doesn't matter.

JaronK


Seriously, if we want to continue this, let it be continued here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=291625).

[Curmudgeon]

Read it again. Special Attacks are a subset of Special Abilities. Special Abilities are divided into two categories...
Even if you proved that some monster spellcasting is Extraordinary (and I don't think you have), that doesn't do anything to back up your claim that all spellcasting is Extraordinary, which is necessary before we can even begin to consider class abilities.
A spellcasting creature is not actually a member of a class unless its entry says so, and it does not gain any class abilities.
You need to point to a rule which either backs your claim explicitly, or find a bunch of rules that connect all the dots. So far all you've got is a bunch of ellipses ...

[Rubik]

Haven't y'all noticed that there's a thread up for this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=291625)? Please stop choking up other threads with off-topic stuff when it's obviously been moved elsewhere.

Now git.