would this be legal?

[morkendi]

If I did spell to power erudite with magic mantle, it causes his powers to count as spells. Go 6 levels and enter shadowcraft mage? Should be able to get in with flaws to get required feats and choosing the right spells to convert.

What I am thinking is they give a table that tells you how many points to spend to augment powers. Tied in with the shadow evocation and conjuration, it should let me just spend points to do the shadowcraft stuff. Seems like it would be pretty versatile.

[AMFV]

Rules as written it would be an absolute nightmare, you could ask your DM for a conversion though that might be workable. It would certainly be something that might be easy to do with power points and augmentation, certainly less complex than the standard shadowcrafter.

[morkendi]

I have to sit down with paper to work through it, but I can't think of anything that would stop it from happening. Just manner of the rite feats and converting a shadow spell and silent image to powers unless I am missing something. Of course it would be whisper gnome.

[AMFV]

Well technically you don't qualify because your powers are still powers. The Magic Mantle granted power only creates Psionics-Magic Transparency if there is none. Spell to Power converts spells to powers. It wouldn't be too terrible to adapt, but it would be an adaptation.

[morkendi]

I think the wording is that magic and psionics are identical. In theory, wouldn't that be better than transparent? If they are identical, that means spells are powers and powers are spells to a StP erudite?

[Emperor Tippy]

Well technically you don't qualify because your powers are still powers. The Magic Mantle granted power only creates Psionics-Magic Transparency if there is none. Spell to Power converts spells to powers. It wouldn't be too terrible to adapt, but it would be an adaptation.

Nah, an Ardent with Magic Mantle and a Spell to Power Erudite to give him the powers would be able to count them as spells for any purpose. For a Magic Mantle Ardent there is no difference between magic and psionics (which can actually be a disadvantage in a some instances).

RAW the OP's idea would be legal.

---
People really should actually read just what Magic/Psionic Transparency actually is and what it actually does. Lots of people seem to houserule significantly greater transparency into the game without even realizing that they are doing it.

[Big Fau]

Nah, an Ardent with Magic Mantle and a Spell to Power Erudite to give him the powers would be able to count them as spells for any purpose. For a Magic Mantle Ardent there is no difference between magic and psionics (which can actually be a disadvantage in a some instances).

RAW the OP's idea would be legal.

---
People really should actually read just what Magic/Psionic Transparency actually is and what it actually does. Lots of people seem to houserule significantly greater transparency into the game without even realizing that they are doing it.

RAW yes, but the RAI on the Magic Mantle is fairly cut-and-dry:


In addition, you always treat magic and psionics as identical. Therefore, powers such as dispel psionics work for both magic and psionics. Most campaigns already treat them in this manner, so this mantle is most useful in campaigns where they are considered different systems.

CP may well be WotC's zenith of bad editing.

[TuggyNE]

CP may well be WotC's zenith of bad editing.

I think you mean nadir, but yes; its only competition for the spot is ToM, I think.

[AMFV]

Nah, an Ardent with Magic Mantle and a Spell to Power Erudite to give him the powers would be able to count them as spells for any purpose. For a Magic Mantle Ardent there is no difference between magic and psionics (which can actually be a disadvantage in a some instances).

RAW the OP's idea would be legal.

---
People really should actually read just what Magic/Psionic Transparency actually is and what it actually does. Lots of people seem to houserule significantly greater transparency into the game without even realizing that they are doing it.

It states you treat magic and psionics as identical, but that does not mean that spells automatically become powers and vis versa. It still doesn't grant you the ability to count your powers as spells for the prerequisite.

Secondly, it isn't technically an Arcane class for advancement, but a manifesting one, even with the transparency your powers don't become arcane or divine, meaning that you can't quite qualify for most classes.

There certainly is room for interpretation, I would argue that RAW isn't on his side, simply because you can use psionics as magic effect does not translate the powers into spells, unless it is explicitly stated that it does, and that is not stated in this particular case.

It is at the very best an extremely tenuous rules argument.

[Emperor Tippy]

I think you mean nadir, but yes; its only competition for the spot is ToM, I think.

It's the only 3.5 book I returned to the store. The only reason that I have a physical copy at all is because a friend who stopped gaming gave it to me.

CPsi is what I believe to be the worst official rule book that WotC published for 3.5.

The Soulbow is about the only thing in that entire book that I actually am ok with.

The powers split into three categories; hideously broken, worthless (or an unnecessary and stupid nerf), or a spell that has had ", Psionic" tagged onto the end. The feats likewise consist of a handful that are way too powerful and the rest that utterly suck.

At least ToM had the binder section to make up for the Truenamer (and even then at least the Truenamer has better fluff than pretty much anything in CPsi).


It states you treat magic and psionics as identical, but that does not mean that spells automatically become powers and vis versa. It still doesn't grant you the ability to count your powers as spells for the prerequisite.
Yes, it does.
It's full and total transparency. It's why an Ardent can use items that boost CL to boost ML.


Secondly, it isn't technically an Arcane class for advancement, but a manifesting one, even with the transparency your powers don't become arcane or divine, meaning that you can't quite qualify for most classes.
It's not an arcane of divine spellcasting class but a magic mantle ardent still counts as a spellcrafting class and as Shadowcraft Mage states that it advances spellcasting (and not just arcane or divine), it would work.


There certainly is room for interpretation, I would argue that RAW isn't on his side, simply because you can use psionics as magic effect does not translate the powers into spells, unless it is explicitly stated that it does, and that is not stated in this particular case.

It is at the very best an extremely tenuous rules argument.

Complete Psionics: "In addition, you always treat magic and psionics as identical."

RAW is clear.

[AMFV]

It's the only 3.5 book I returned to the store. The only reason that I have a physical copy at all is because a friend who stopped gaming gave it to me.

CPsi is what I believe to be the worst official rule book that WotC published for 3.5.

The Soulbow is about the only thing in that entire book that I actually am ok with.

The powers split into three categories; hideously broken, worthless (or an unnecessary and stupid nerf), or a spell that has had ", Psionic" tagged onto the end. The feats likewise consist of a handful that are way too powerful and the rest that utterly suck.

At least ToM had the binder section to make up for the Truenamer (and even then at least the Truenamer has better fluff than pretty much anything in CPsi).


Yes, it does.
It's full and total transparency. It's why an Ardent can use items that boost CL to boost ML.


It's not an arcane of divine spellcasting class but a magic mantle ardent still counts as a spellcrafting class and as Shadowcraft Mage states that it advances spellcasting (and not just arcane or divine), it would work.



Complete Psionics: "In addition, you always treat magic and psionics as identical."

RAW is clear.

But it doesn't state you treat Psionics as spells. Technically they are defined as spell like abilities. Hence the spiffy cheating involving using feats for SLAs. As such they don't qualify you for the classes even if they operate as magic. Since they are technically SLAs

At the very least announcing that it's a clear reading when it is clearly not is spurious.