Anima Mage: Legal Adaptation Limit.

[Xuldarinar]

Anima mage, the Arcane/Binding PrC from Tome of magic, is one of a handful of classes that possess something I like to refer to as a legal adaptation. To my thinking a legal adaptation is as follows: When an entry within a D&D book grants permission/makes a suggestion to adapt a class in a particular way. RaW and/or RaI supporting an adaptation.

That having been said, I've taken a look at it's adaptation entry which to my thinking is unusually broad.

It says, essentially, you could "Relax the prerequisites to open this prestige class to any spellcaster - or even a psionic character". How far can we take this? What magic types, by this entry, would be permissible and which would not be permissible?

[peacenlove]

Basically any character class that heavily traffics in spells or spell like abilities could be a "spellcaster". Truenamers, shadowcasters, factotums would be in, initiators, meldshapers out.

[Jeff the Green]

Factotums might be iffy; one of the more important abilities is to allow free metamagic, and while the factotum text implies they can use metamagic feats, they really can't. Warlocks would be even harder, since not only can they not use metamagic they also don't have limited-use abilities, which is the other main class ability.

From a more strictly RAW standpoint (assuming you buy that the adaptation section is RAW), spellcaster is exactly that, though: someone who casts spells. Utterances, mysteries, and SLAs (other than powers) don't count.

[Psyren]

Why wouldn't it be RAW? It's a rule, and it's written (in a 1st-party source.)

If we throw out adaptations, we may as well throw out variants, and all the cloistered clerics and abrupt jaunt wizards will cry.

Aside from that, I agree that spellcasters means just that - spellcasters, and so invokers and meldshapers probably don't pass muster. (Though you can, of course, qualify with a true spellcaster and then simply advance your invoking class.)

[Xuldarinar]

For the sake of simplicity, lets just approach it like this:

Without Adaptation
Spellcasting: Ability to cast 2nd-level arcane spells
+1 level of existing arcane spellcasting class


With Adaptation
Special: Ability to cast 2nd-level spells or manifest 2nd level powers.
+1 level of existing spellcasting class (or +1 level of existing manifesting class)


Thus, making arcane, divine, infusions (if I'm not mistaken), powers, and mysteries all valid for entry, and all of the above + invocations being valid for being advanced. If we wanted to overstep bounds slightly:

Special: Caster level 3rd or Manifester level 3rd.

This would deals with a few shenanigans, though I think then it permits Practiced Spellcaster/Manifester to be used to make earlier entry, but it also opens up Warlock and Dragonfire Adept entry.

[Gemini476]

This would deals with a few shenanigans, though I think then it permits Practiced Spellcaster/Manifester to be used to make earlier entry, but it also opens up Warlock and Dragonfire Adept entry.
Anima Mage is the poster child for Early Entry, though. You can get in with Wizard 1 if you have flaws, with Wiz 2/Bind 1 being standard entry.

Practiced Spellcaster would only give you CL 3 by level three, so that isn't any faster.

Remember, you can fulfill the Binding requirements with two feats.

[Craft (Cheese)]

If we throw out adaptations, we may as well throw out variants, and all the cloistered clerics and abrupt jaunt wizards will cry.

I think there's a significant difference between "Here's a set of clearly defined rules defining what's been changed and what hasn't" and "Hey, here's some vague ideas for how you could homebrew a variant of this class yourself." Homebrew is awesome, but claiming "This piece of homebrew is RAW because it was inspired by something one of the rulebooks said" is preposterous.

[Xuldarinar]

Anima Mage is the poster child for Early Entry, though. You can get in with Wizard 1 if you have flaws, with Wiz 2/Bind 1 being standard entry.

Practiced Spellcaster would only give you CL 3 by level three, so that isn't any faster.

Remember, you can fulfill the Binding requirements with two feats.

Yes, but its not the best route.

Binding via Bind Vestige is strictly inferior and arguably is lost the moment you enter the class, which then makes it so you no longer qualify. Why? You cannot have the Soul binding class feature and Bind Vestige feat at the same time. Even if you just make it so the class advances what you have instead, you'd be advancing a strictly inferior form of the feature, limited to 1 vestige from a list of 13 vestiges (as opposed to 32+) and 1 pre-selected ability (2 if you have practiced binder) from said vestige.

Assuming I am not delusional.

[Psyren]

I think there's a significant difference between "Here's a set of clearly defined rules defining what's been changed and what hasn't" and "Hey, here's some vague ideas for how you could homebrew a variant of this class yourself." Homebrew is awesome, but claiming "This piece of homebrew is RAW because it was inspired by something one of the rulebooks said" is preposterous.

But where do you draw that line? Some of the adaptations are very specific on what you need to do, such as Mindbender and Magical Trickster. I don't think it would be fair to call those homebrew. Others are more vague, like this and Chameleon, but it's still pretty obvious what you need to do. And then there are some that make sweeping changes with no help at all, like Arcane Swordsage. I agree that those should be looked at more as guidelines. But it's that gray area in the middle that is difficult.