3.0 to 3.5 rules citation?

[tzar1990]

A friend of mine is attempting to play a level 5 dread necromancer. He claims that he may take the spell Wizard Limb with his Advanced Learning class feature at level 4, since it's listed in the Book of Vile Darkness as a level 2 wizard spell. I argue that he can't, as the Spell Compendium and the Libris Mortis both list it as a level 4 spell which isn't even on the wizard list. He counter-argues that since the version in the Book of Vile Darkness is a wizard spell, but the SC/LM versions are not, he may (and, in fact, must) take the BoVD version.

Could I get a citation one way or the other with regards to who's right?

[torrasque666]

I believe the standard around here is "most recent printing" so since there is 3.5 material that lists it as a non-wizard spell, then it isn't.

[tzar1990]

I believe the standard around here is "most recent printing" so since there is 3.5 material that lists it as a non-wizard spell, then it isn't.

Yes, I know, but is the "most recent printing" actually in any of the books, and which book would it be in?

[torrasque666]

Well the Rules Compendium does have this:
When a preexisting core book or supplement differs with the rules herein, Rules Compendium is meant to take precedence. If you have a question on how to play D&D at the table, this book is meant to answer that question.

So it can be inferred that newer printings override previous ones.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Yes, I know, but is the "most recent printing" actually in any of the books, and which book would it be in?

The official errata (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20040125a) for each of the core rulebooks contains the following paragraph:


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 PC
races, and the 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.

If you're playing in a 3.5 game, then any 3.5 version will take precedence over a 3.0 version according to the primary source rules.

[PaucaTerrorem]

I'm assuming you mean Wither Limb here and just to play devil's advocate: he could still argue that they are different spells. SC listing it as a domain only spell and BoVD listing it as multiple.

I would say yes because Dread Necromancers can learn Cleric or Wizard spell of the necromancy school. All depends on if domain spells count as Cleric spells.

[Werephilosopher]

I'm assuming you mean Wither Limb here and just to play devil's advocate: he could still argue that they are different spells. SC listing it as a domain only spell and BoVD listing it as multiple.

I would say yes because Dread Necromancers can learn Cleric or Wizard spell of the necromancy school. All depends on if domain spells count as Cleric spells.

Just remember, even if you count domain spells as cleric spells he still can't take it until he already knows other 4th-level spells.