Versatile Spellcaster Early Entry

[EdRed]

I've often been reading that Wotc once ruled (not the sage, but an actual ruling) that both Versatile Spellcaster and Heighten Spell are legit ways for early entry while Prec. Apprentice is not.

Is the source of this ruling still available or has it been lost with the Wotc forums?


Bonus question: If i cast a spell with versatile spellcaster, the caster level is not being adjusted upwards, right? For example, if i cast a heightened Glitterdust with versatile spellcaster, my CL would be 3 (Assuming i am level 3)?

[Kelb_Panthera]

Versatile spellcaster has no effect on your caster level, even if you're casting beyond your normal cacpacity (versatilie + heighten).

Ignore the sage on this one. If you have to be able to cast more than one spell of a given level to qualify for "able to cast spells of <X> level" then you're hosing spontaneous casters that lack heighten spell out of qualifying before their prepared counterparts have already qualified for two levels. It was a decision based in one of the designers poor understanding of how the game is balanced (poorly, btw). With Prec. Apprentice you've got a 2nd level slot and can cast a second level spell. It's not reliable but it's there. What else could reasonably be required?

[Snowbluff]

Yeah, the FAQ rulings are generally conflicting and not useful or fun.

Also, there really isn't a minimum Caster Level (as in the one used for spells, as opposed to levels in a casting class) for casting a spell of a certain level. Your CL wouldn't be adjusted to fit that, even if the feat had such a stipend.

[Troacctid]

There actually is a minimum CL, and the Versatile Spellcaster trick essentially assumes it isn't a problem because it's not very well-defined, but it would be fairly easy for a DM to shut you down by saying you can't cast a 2nd level spell at CL 1.

The reason Precocious Apprentice doesn't work is because if it did, the whole first half of the feat would do nothing, because the spell it gives you is lost once you become able to cast 2nd level spells. If it itself counts as being able to cast 2nd level spells, then as soon as you take the feat, you've disqualified yourself from its primary benefit. That's obviously nonsense, of course, so the only reasonable ruling is that it doesn't actually give you the ability to cast 2nd level spells any more than, say, a wand or scroll would. (Most people wouldn't say that a Wand of Scorching Ray and a Wand of Cure Moderate Wounds will qualify you for Mystic Theurge, even though they allow you to cast a 2nd level arcane spell and a 2nd level divine spell.)

[Beheld]

1) Precocious Apprentice does in fact allow you to cast 2nd level spells. But some people like to argue by appeal to consequences that rules don't allow that. Other people argue weird things that make no sense like "Being able to cast only one spell isn't spells, so level 4 Sorcerers and level 3 Wizards can't qualify" or "It's not whether you can cast spells, it's whether hypothetically, at any specific moment in time you are capable of casting different spell slots and choosing between them." Such that for example, a character with at will spells who could cast 46 different second level spells still wouldn't qualify because they don't have slots. Ultimately, it all comes down to people who really really really really really wish that you couldn't qualify for PrCs early.

2) Versatile Spellcaster requires heighten as well for Sorcerers. Arguably Beguilers and Dread Necros can still use it, they may or may not need CL boosters, depending. Spontaneous Wizards are a little harder to figure out. That comes down to the old "Spells Known for Wizards" argument.

3) I'm not sure what you mean by "a ruling not the Sage." Customer Service is even less official than the Sage, the FAQ is officially a liar (they just straight up admit they don't have the authority to change rules, then change them anyway, and regularly prove they have no idea what the actual rules say, just look at Freedom of Movement). If you expect clarification on any point in errata, fat chance, at least during all of 3.5 they had an unofficial policy to never use errata to correct rules mistakes.

4) Ultimately, the answer to all these questions shouldn't matter to you at all. If entering the PrC early is balanced, you should just let them do it, and if it isn't, you shouldn't, and whether they can or can't loophole into it with Illumian + Heighten Spell should never come up.

[Troacctid]

1) Precocious Apprentice does in fact allow you to cast 2nd level spells.
By itself, the best it can do is allow you to cast 2nd level spells for a very brief moment, and then instantly take that ability away again and leave you with an extra 2nd level spell slot (which you can use to cast 1st level spells, but that doesn't help you much).


2) Versatile Spellcaster requires heighten as well for Sorcerers. Arguably Beguilers and Dread Necros can still use it, they may or may not need CL boosters, depending.
Beguilers and Dread Necromancers definitely need Heighten Spell as well (or something similar), due to the way their spellcasting ability is worded. (A level 1 Beguiler has no 2nd level spells known.)

[EdRed]

First off, Thanks for your answers so far!

I want to clarify something.


3) I'm not sure what you mean by "a ruling not the Sage." Customer Service is even less official than the Sage, the FAQ is officially a liar (they just straight up admit they don't have the authority to change rules, then change them anyway, and regularly prove they have no idea what the actual rules say, just look at Freedom of Movement). If you expect clarification on any point in errata, fat chance, at least during all of 3.5 they had an unofficial policy to never use errata to correct rules mistakes.

I've only heard it second hand as well. It's usually said that "wotc ruled it" which may have been in the forums? I'm pretty sure that it wasn't the Sage because people don't really quote his answers as proof for their arguments and if they do he's called as such. I guess that it could've been another author working with the particular book?


There actually is a minimum CL, and the Versatile Spellcaster trick essentially assumes it isn't a problem because it's not very well-defined, but it would be fairly easy for a DM to shut you down by saying you can't cast a 2nd level spell at CL 1

Are you taking this from the rules about voluntarily lowering your casterlevel or is there another bit about this particular Thing?

[Troacctid]

Are you taking this from the rules about voluntarily lowering your casterlevel or is there another bit about this particular Thing?

No, that's the one. Something something must be high enough to cast the spell in question etc. It might be referenced in other places too, though—I know it's mentioned in the Dragonblood Spell-Pact spell, for instance.

[Beheld]

By itself, the best it can do is allow you to cast 2nd level spells for a very brief moment, and then instantly take that ability away again and leave you with an extra 2nd level spell slot (which you can use to cast 1st level spells, but that doesn't help you much).

Or you know... Heightened First level spells, which are second level spells.


Beguilers and Dread Necromancers definitely need Heighten Spell as well (or something similar), due to the way their spellcasting ability is worded. (A level 1 Beguiler has no 2nd level spells known.)

"When you gain access to a new level of spells, you automatically know all the spells for that level on the beguiler's spell list."

What counts as gaining access to a new level of spells is arguable, but to claim that they have zero spells known as some authoritative rule is basically completely wrong.

[Grim Reader]

It was the thread about heavily discussed issues on the original WOTC boards. Towards the end of 3.5, there was a thread summarizing a lot of heavily debated issues, and the designers spent some time answering them. With... varying degrees of success. As far as I remember I think the answer to the "Arcane Thesis" question was even more borked than the original text.

Anyway, the answer to Versatile + Heighten was that yes, this counts as a spell one level above your normal max, and qualifies for PrC entry as such. Because "Heighten" specifies that the spell counts as the adjusted level for all purposes.

On Precocious Apprentice, the answer was that it does not work because the feat gives you a chance of casting a second level spell, not the ability to. In my opinion, a dubious answer rules-wise.

It looked to me like they were trying to throw a bone to spontaneous spell casters by letting them qualify for PrCs one level before prepared casters.

[Troacctid]

Or you know... Heightened First level spells, which are second level spells.
In which case it's not by itself. You need a second feat in order to heighten spells.


"When you gain access to a new level of spells, you automatically know all the spells for that level on the beguiler's spell list."

What counts as gaining access to a new level of spells is arguable, but to claim that they have zero spells known as some authoritative rule is basically completely wrong.
Of course they don't have zero spells known at level 1. They have plenty of spells known at level 1. They're just all cantrips and 1st level spells. Versatile Spellcaster might maybe give them access to 2nd level spells if they knew any, except since they don't know any, they can't use it to cast them.

It's possible to get 2nd level spells early as a fixed-list caster, but it takes more than just Versatile Spellcaster to do so.

[Beheld]

They're just all cantrips and 1st level spells. Versatile Spellcaster might maybe give them access to 2nd level spells if they knew any, except since they don't know any, they can't use it to cast them.

Except the rules don't say that, you are making it up. You may personally believe that "being level 4" is the magic trigger, but according to the actual rules, it is just as likely that having the ability to use a 2nd level spell slot counts.

[Crake]

That comes down to the old "Spells Known for Wizards" argument.

Spells know for a wizard is actually very clearly defined in the back of the player's handbook under "known spells" or in the online glossary for those using the SRD and says "For wizards, knowing a spell means having it in their spellbooks." Pretty cut and dry, getting versatile spellcaster on a wizard means they can spontaneously cast any of the spells in their spellbook using 2 slots of a lower level.

[Troacctid]

Except the rules don't say that, you are making it up. You may personally believe that "being level 4" is the magic trigger, but according to the actual rules, it is just as likely that having the ability to use a 2nd level spell slot counts.
If you need the ability to use a 2nd level spell slot, then Versatile Spellcaster won't help you, since it doesn't give you any higher-level spell slots--it just lets you use the ones you have to cast spells that you know that are higher level. Which you can't do if you don't know any higher-level spells.

The text is quite clear that in order to cast a spell via Versatile Spellcaster, you must know that spell. I'm not making that up.


Pretty cut and dry, getting versatile spellcaster on a wizard means they can spontaneously cast any of the spells in their spellbook using 2 slots of a lower level.
I don't know about "spontaneously". Versatile Spellcaster lets you use two spell slots to cast a spell you know that is one level higher. It doesn't include any language letting you do so spontaneously. By default, it would follow the normal rules for your class's spellcasting, except as noted.

[FocusWolf413]

Just don't do it.
Just.
Don't.
Don't be that guy.

[Andezzar]

No, that's the one. Something something must be high enough to cast the spell in question etc. It might be referenced in other places too, though—I know it's mentioned in the Dragonblood Spell-Pact spell, for instance.The problem is that there is no rule saying what the value of that minimum CL is. So you cannot decide whether any given CL is too low. Dragons of Faerun (the source for the Dragonblood Spell-Pact spell) only applies to games set in the Forgotten Realms.

[Troacctid]

The Player's Handbook tells us that for Wizards, a 2nd level spell requires you to be level 3, and a 3rd level spell requires you to be level 5. You can probably extrapolate pretty well from there, but if not, minimum caster levels for other classes/spell levels are given implicitly in the rules for wands and scrolls; see DMG 287.

[Andezzar]

The Player's Handbook tells us that for Wizards, a 2nd level spell requires you to be level 3, and a 3rd level spell requires you to be level 5. You can probably extrapolate pretty well from there, but if not, minimum caster levels for other classes/spell levels are given implicitly in the rules for wands and scrolls; see DMG 287.Levels in a spellcasting class are not the same as caster levels. The minimum caster levels mentioned in the DMG refer to creating scrolls and wands. There is no reason they would apply to casting spells as well. The minimum CL to achieve a certain bonus with greater magic weapon for example is different from the minimum CL to create a Magic weapon of the same bonus.

[Troacctid]

Levels in a spellcasting class are not the same as caster levels. The minimum caster levels mentioned in the DMG refer to creating scrolls and wands. There is no reason they would apply to casting spells as well. The minimum CL to achieve a certain bonus with greater magic weapon for example is different from the minimum CL to create a Magic weapon of the same bonus.

The minimum caster level on an item is the same as the minimum caster level needed to cast the spell.


A creator can create an item at a lower caster level than her own, but never lower than the minimum level needed to cast the needed spell.

Wands and scrolls have no other caster level requirement beyond the ability to cast the spell in question--or if they do, I can't find it.

[Andezzar]

Then please show me where it says what cast level you need for each spell level. There is no rule defining it. Often the CL is equal to the numbers of level in a spellcasting class but not always. There are a few abilities that lower your CL for certain spells, are you no longer able to cast those spells unless you have extra caster levels from elsewhere to offset that penalty?

[Troacctid]

Then please show me where it says what cast level you need for each spell level.
DMG 287 has relevant charts and formulas. PH 171 gives CL 5 as the minimum for a 3rd level Wizard spell. PH 83 gives CL 3 as the minimum for a 2nd level spell.


There are a few abilities that lower your CL for certain spells, are you no longer able to cast those spells unless you have extra caster levels from elsewhere to offset that penalty?
Maybe. Maybe not. It's pretty unclear. Your DM probably won't call you out on it in the first place, but if they really wanted to call you out on it, the rules would give them enough rope to hang you.

[Andezzar]

DMG 287 has relevant charts and formulas.Again, this applies to creating scrolls, it does not necessarily apply to casting a spell.

PH 171 gives CL 5 as the minimum for a 3rd level Wizard spell.That is a specific example, there is no rule for the determining the minimum caster level of any given spell on any spell list. Maybe it is the intention of the writers to work that way, but there is no rule telling us that a wizard needs 2n-1 caster levels to cast n level spells, and a sorcerer needs 2n. What about bards and other classes without spell lists that go to level 9 or whose CL normally is not equal to the level in their class?
What about ur-priests? Can they never cast 9th level spells unless they have another spellcasting class and/or practiced spellcaster?
Since there are ways to get n level spells without 2n-1 caster levels, this cannot be a global minimum and without a global minimum we need a local one, but none is given.


PH 83 gives CL 3 as the minimum for a 2nd level spell.I cannot find anything about caster levels on that page. It is about skills (spellcraft, spot and survival).

[Beheld]

Spells know for a wizard is actually very clearly defined in the back of the player's handbook under "known spells" or in the online glossary for those using the SRD and says "For wizards, knowing a spell means having it in their spellbooks." Pretty cut and dry, getting versatile spellcaster on a wizard means they can spontaneously cast any of the spells in their spellbook using 2 slots of a lower level.

Except that as before, it says "A spell that an arcane spellcaster has learned and can prepare."

So a Wizard paying 50gp per spell level to copy some other guys Burning Blood at level 5 doesn't necessarily mean that as a Spontaneous Divination Wizard he can convert two level 3 slots into Burning Blood, because he can't prepare Burning Blood.

[Troacctid]

Again, this applies to creating scrolls, it does not necessarily apply to casting a spell.
Again, the rules say the minimum CL for a scroll or wand is the same as the minimum CL you need to cast the spell.


Maybe it is the intention of the writers to work that way, but there is no rule telling us that a wizard needs 2n-1 caster levels to cast n level spells, and a sorcerer needs 2n. What about bards and other classes without spell lists that go to level 9 or whose CL normally is not equal to the level in their class?
What about ur-priests? Can they never cast 9th level spells unless they have another spellcasting class and/or practiced spellcaster?
Since there are ways to get n level spells without 2n-1 caster levels, this cannot be a global minimum and without a global minimum we need a local one, but none is given.
The book provides different pricing information for minimum-CL scrolls as crafted by different classes, so it's pretty clear that the minimum CL is different depending on your class. I don't see why there would need to be a global minimum CL independent of class—I mean, spells don't even have a global spell level independent of class. If you're a spell, you're a Cleric 3 or a Sorcerer/Wizard 4, but you're never just a 3 or a 4, there's always a class associated with it. Similar thing, right?


I cannot find anything about caster levels on that page. It is about skills (spellcraft, spot and survival).
Sorry, that was a typo. It's 86, not 83.