a revisit to Nar Demonbind-UR shenanigans

[Kahlendrrari]

I have been looking around the interwebs at threads pertaining to a Nar Demonbinder that bases it's caster level off of the Ur-Priest and I can't seem to find a dead set answer for how the Nar's caster level is calculated. Reading the description of the way to calculate the caster level, it states "The character’s caster level is equal to his Nar demonbinder level plus his levels in one other spellcasting class of his choice." Is it refering to just levels in the chosen class? or is it referring to caster level?

If I had an obligitory Warlock 4 || Binder 1 || Ur-Priest 2 || Eldritch Disciple 3 || Nar Demonbinder 1;
What would the Nar's caster level be? half the stuff I read calculates it as Nar Demonbinder level + caster level one other spellcasting class. But as I read it, it seems to be based off just the levels in the other class. If it is the latter of the two, it seems like the Nar Demonbinder's caster level is going to be really weak.

I give http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=6739.0 as a reference to what im talking about.

[Ger. Bessa]

Prestige classes were not meant to be the open buffet that we use them as on this site. Each and any PrC can be vetoed by the DM, and should even be approved beforehand. They should remain an exception.

So as RAI, in the Forgotten Realms, only a few wizards should ever become wizard/red wizard or wizard/Nar demonbinder. And none should become wizard 5/red wizard 5/Nar demonbinder 7.

Wizard 10/Nar demonbinder 7: Nar demonbinder has a CL of 17.
Wizard 5/red wizard 5/Nar demonbinder 7: Nar demonbinder has a CL of 12 (without Circle magic)

Your build, if you base Nar demonbinder on Warlock would have Nar demonbinder CL of 7, and 5 if you base it on Ur priest.

With the same argument, your caster level with Ur priest would be 2 (class) +2 (Eldritch disciple) +(4 war + 3 nar)/2 = 7.

Edit : Very few classes/feats/acfs refer to caster levels, and not levels or, even more undefined, spellcasting level(s). Of those using CL I know :
#Mystic Fire Knight/Shooting Star Ranger (CoV) class variants/acf
#Knight of the Weave (CoV)


And that's all I can think of. Most "classics of TO" use the "spellcasting level(s)" or "spellcaster (or maybe even spell caster) level(s)", including Sword of the Arcane Order, Sublime Chord, Master Spellthief, Ur-priest and Nar demonbinder. And some of those (Master Spellthief I'm looking at you) only set the CL when you're casting a spell, so they can't even be used in CL loops.

[Crake]

You're right, it's level, not caster level. The reason Ur-Priest is good is because it gets half of ALL other casting classes.

[Kahlendrrari]

Your build, if you base Nar demonbinder on Warlock would have Nar demonbinder CL of 7, and 5 if you base it on Ur priest.

With the same argument, your caster level with Ur priest would be 2 (class) +2 (Eldritch disciple) +(4 war + 3 nar)/2 = 7.

Nar Demonbinder and Ur-priest state "Spellcasting classes" so you can't base their caster level off of warlock, as it is not a spellcasting class.

[Urpriest]

I have been looking around the interwebs at threads pertaining to a Nar Demonbinder that bases it's caster level off of the Ur-Priest and I can't seem to find a dead set answer for how the Nar's caster level is calculated. Reading the description of the way to calculate the caster level, it states "The character’s caster level is equal to his Nar demonbinder level plus his levels in one other spellcasting class of his choice." Is it refering to just levels in the chosen class? or is it referring to caster level?

If I had an obligitory Warlock 4 || Binder 1 || Ur-Priest 2 || Eldritch Disciple 3 || Nar Demonbinder 1;
What would the Nar's caster level be? half the stuff I read calculates it as Nar Demonbinder level + caster level one other spellcasting class. But as I read it, it seems to be based off just the levels in the other class. If it is the latter of the two, it seems like the Nar Demonbinder's caster level is going to be really weak.

I give http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=6739.0 as a reference to what im talking about.

It's just based on your level in the class, but keep in mind that most PrCs increase your caster level "as if you had gained a level in a previous spellcasting class".

So Eldritch Disciples don't increase your level in Ur-priest, but they count as levels in Ur-priest for all calculations of caster level, including Nar Demonbinder's calculation.

Also, || is for gestalt, you're looking for /.

Edit: Working out this example because I'm bored:

Let's say you chose Ur-Priest for Nar Demonbinder. We'll calculate Nar Demonbinder CL first. Since Eldritch Disciple counts for Ur-Priest, you calculate all caster levels as if you were Ur-Priest 4. So your Nar Demonbinder CL is 1+4=5.

Ur-Priest CL is simpler. At this level, you just have Ur-Priest 4, unless Warlock CL counts for this purpose which I don't think it does.

Not a very high CL for your level, indeed. This sort of build works a lot better when theurging an arcane caster with Nar Demonbinder via Ultimate Magus.


Prestige classes were not meant to be the open buffet that we use them as on this site. Each and any PrC can be vetoed by the DM, and should even be approved beforehand. They should remain an exception.

Remember, this is 2015. If a DM chooses to run a 3.5 game, they do so because they enjoy the depth of build resources. Otherwise they choose an alternative that fulfills their preferences better.

[atemu1234]

It's just based on your level in the class, but keep in mind that most PrCs increase your caster level "as if you had gained a level in a previous spellcasting class".

So Eldritch Disciples don't increase your level in Ur-priest, but they count as levels in Ur-priest for all calculations of caster level, including Nar Demonbinder's calculation.

Also, || is for gestalt, you're looking for /.

Edit: Working out this example because I'm bored:

Let's say you chose Ur-Priest for Nar Demonbinder. We'll calculate Nar Demonbinder CL first. Since Eldritch Disciple counts for Ur-Priest, you calculate all caster levels as if you were Ur-Priest 4. So your Nar Demonbinder CL is 1+4=5.

Ur-Priest CL is simpler. At this level, you just have Ur-Priest 4, unless Warlock CL counts for this purpose which I don't think it does.

Not a very high CL for your level, indeed. This sort of build works a lot better when theurging an arcane caster with Nar Demonbinder via Ultimate Magus.



Remember, this is 2015. If a DM chooses to run a 3.5 game, they do so because they enjoy the depth of build resources. Otherwise they choose an alternative that fulfills their preferences better.

As DM, I allow about everything. With little alteration. But, I'm crazy.

[ZamielVanWeber]

As DM, I allow about everything. With little alteration. But, I'm crazy.

I only ban stuff that is hard to use without being egregious or if it does not interact with the fluff of the campaign.

[Ger. Bessa]

Nar Demonbinder and Ur-priest state "Spellcasting classes" so you can't base their caster level off of warlock, as it is not a spellcasting class.

I don't know, and you're probably right. What I always think when I put a warlock in a build is "This thing has a CL that's neither arcane nor divine", but strangely enough it's not a 'spellcasting' caster level.

And while I usually love Urpriest's point of view, the "spellcasting levels" was never cleared.

More troubling, the nitpicking over a writing convention that comes from the internets. It shows that the question is seen through the Character Optimisation Googles, and these COG make everyone wearing them blatantly ignore RAW and enjoy the murky vagueness of ill-defined rules if they can make characters more powerful, for poop and laugh.

(In UA, class combination suggestions are made with slashes)

If you read the classes entries, none should ever get higher CL than their hd through class levels.

And my part on RAI about PrCs isn't to say that stacking PrCs is heresy. It's to sooth your pain when you find out that your awesome idea doesn't work by RAW, and to say "It's not your fault, you did nothing wrong. It's just the class that wasn't made that way. Don't take it too hard on yourself."


Yeah, I'm into empathy and all that.

[Grooke]

Let's say you chose Ur-Priest for Nar Demonbinder. We'll calculate Nar Demonbinder CL first. Since Eldritch Disciple counts for Ur-Priest, you calculate all caster levels as if you were Ur-Priest 4. So your Nar Demonbinder CL is 1+4=5.

Ur-Priest CL is simpler. At this level, you just have Ur-Priest 4, unless Warlock CL counts for this purpose which I don't think it does.

Also, since Demonbinder is a caster class, Demonbinder levels would count toward Ur-Priest caster level. At this point 1/2 = 0, but further down the road it kicks in. Ur 2/ED3/ND2 would have CL = 5(Ur-Priest)/6(Demonbinder).

[Urpriest]

Also, since Demonbinder is a caster class, Demonbinder levels would count toward Ur-Priest caster level. At this point 1/2 = 0, but further down the road it kicks in. Ur 2/ED3/ND2 would have CL = 5(Ur-Priest)/6(Demonbinder).

Yeah, I left it out precisely because at this point 1/2=0, but indeed it does contribute.


I don't know, and you're probably right. What I always think when I put a warlock in a build is "This thing has a CL that's neither arcane nor divine", but strangely enough it's not a 'spellcasting' caster level.

And while I usually love Urpriest's point of view, the "spellcasting levels" was never cleared.

More troubling, the nitpicking over a writing convention that comes from the internets. It shows that the question is seen through the Character Optimisation Googles, and these COG make everyone wearing them blatantly ignore RAW and enjoy the murky vagueness of ill-defined rules if they can make characters more powerful, for poop and laugh.

(In UA, class combination suggestions are made with slashes)

If you read the classes entries, none should ever get higher CL than their hd through class levels.


Except for Archmage, and every PrC that boosts CL that was published after that...

Seriously, in this case there is no RAI, unless you actually think people at WotC tried building a character like this. The most we have is the general indication that levels in a PrC that advances casting should, y'know, advance casting. There really isn't anything to support your side of the discussion being RAI.

Edit: Took out the ad hominem. But seriously, forum discourse norms exist for a reason.

[Kahlendrrari]

I don't know, and you're probably right. What I always think when I put a warlock in a build is "This thing has a CL that's neither arcane nor divine", but strangely enough it's not a 'spellcasting' caster level.

And while I usually love Urpriest's point of view, the "spellcasting levels" was never cleared.

More troubling, the nitpicking over a writing convention that comes from the internets. It shows that the question is seen through the Character Optimisation Googles, and these COG make everyone wearing them blatantly ignore RAW and enjoy the murky vagueness of ill-defined rules if they can make characters more powerful, for poop and laugh.

(In UA, class combination suggestions are made with slashes)

If you read the classes entries, none should ever get higher CL than their hd through class levels.

And my part on RAI about PrCs isn't to say that stacking PrCs is heresy. It's to sooth your pain when you find out that your awesome idea doesn't work by RAW, and to say "It's not your fault, you did nothing wrong. It's just the class that wasn't made that way. Don't take it too hard on yourself."


Yeah, I'm into empathy and all that.


I believe Ultimate Magus would like to have a word with you, as that class advances two spellcasting classes, and grants an additional +4 caster levels throughout the progression of the PrC.

And for fluff's sake! Why wouldn't (or shouldn't) PrC's be layered on top of each other? Using the above PrC, the next logical step would be into Archmage, and lo and behold, that class has the ability to increase caster level above HD as well.

[darksolitaire]

And for fluff's sake! Why wouldn't (or shouldn't) PrC's be layered on top of each other? Using the above PrC, the next logical step would be into Archmage, and lo and behold, that class has the ability to increase caster level above HD as well.

As to the first question, I think that's just how the 3.5 DMG labeled the PrC's. When 3.5 got more material, designers forgot or let go of the original intent. There are some triple-PrC NPC's about, and for example Zulkirs from Forgotten Realms tend to be Red Wizard/Archmages.

[Andezzar]

And for fluff's sake! Why wouldn't (or shouldn't) PrC's be layered on top of each other? Using the above PrC, the next logical step would be into Archmage, and lo and behold, that class has the ability to increase caster level above HD as well.While it is probably not intentional, Archmage cannot increase the caster level above your HD.
Spells per Day/Spells Known

When a new archmage level is gained, the character gains new spells per day (and spells known, if applicable) as if he had also gained a level in whatever arcane spellcasting class in which he could cast 7th-level spells before he added the prestige class level. He does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained.An increase in CL is not mentioned as being granted and thus falls under other benefits that the character does not get.

High Arcana can only increase the CL by one per HD, so that does not produce an advancement beyond HD either.

Yes, by RAW taking Archmage with Spell Power is worse than taking another level in Wizard.

[Urpriest]

As to the first question, I think that's just how the 3.5 DMG labeled the PrC's. When 3.5 got more material, designers forgot or let go of the original intent. There are some triple-PrC NPC's about, and for example Zulkirs from Forgotten Realms tend to be Red Wizard/Archmages.

Triple-PrC characters are baked into the fluff of Dragonlance, too.