Is Rainbow servant really Full casting?

[Phaederkiel]

Okay, I have a player who plays a beguiler.
I somewhat plan to let him enter Rainbow servant, if he wants it.
We play low level, so I am sure the deadly 10th lvl will never rear its head.
But is RS a Full casting class?

I know, text trumps table. And Text says: Full casting. But is that intended?

The mad Linguist claims here:
http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5213.0;wap2

that "Later editions of the book, such as the Portuguese translation, have the table match the text."

Does anyone know if that is true? Might there even be a german version, which has text over table, too?

[Troacctid]

Other prestige classes from that book have the same issue. Clearly some wires got crossed. It's hard to say exactly what the writers intended--it looks like they changed their mind partway through, but in which direction?

In either case, the 6/10 version is clearly more balanced than the 10/10 version, so it's the one I prefer.

[darksolitaire]

There's no gain in lying in the Internet, so this should cover the question about the portuguese version. From the same thread then the guide.

http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5213.msg173936#msg173936

[Kelb_Panthera]

What was intended is unclear and it's been so long that the original author couldn't tell you with certainty what he intended anymore. The official position on such matters is, as you've said, text trumps table.

As the DM this is entirely in your court. Make a decision on whether you want to follow the official procedure or deviate with a houserule here. Given the power available from a beguiler and the relative opportunity costs and benefitst of rainbow servant, I'd probably rule in favor of full casting, especially in light of the idea that the level 10 capstone isn't likely to come into play.

In light of the fact that warmage was only in an obscure source (Mini's Handbook) when complete divine was developed and the other list casters didn't exist at all, the rainbow servant would've been balanced on traditional prepared/spontaneous caster like the wizard and sorcerer. I'd hazard that the textual, full-casting version was probably the intended one anyway but since warmage -did- exist, I can also see the table being a last minute change that didn't get backported to the text just before publishing. You're just going to have to apply your best judgement.

[Pluto!]

6/10 casting seems way less unlikely. Same with the other PrCs in that book with that disparity.

[nedz]

If you are worried about the 2nd capstone you could just delete it - or re-word it for the fixed list casters - but as you say, it's unlikely to be relevant.

What does the PrC grant otherwise

3 minor divinations - chaff
3 domains - very good for a beguiler
Wings - useful, if a little late


And the cost (assuming table)

Negligible Requirements
4 caster levels (1 per domain, and 1 more at 10th)


If we have Text trumps Table then the PrC is a lot better than the base class - domains are that good in this case.
If we stick with the Table then the PrC is very poor.

I think this PrC is badly written either way.

If we were to apply this to a Wizard or Sorcerer, well domains are useful for a Wizard but less so for a Sorcerer.

As for the 2nd capstone: well it's very good for a Wizard and useful for a Sorcerer.

I think this PrC is still badly written even assuming the designers were aiming at the core classes.

[eggynack]

Yeah, might be worth compromising. Maybe have it drop a single caster level. That should be sufficient to make there be a serious choice as to whether it's a class worth entering. You could go to two, but if you're starting low, and you are, then that's not a great move.

[Beheld]

You really shouldn't care what the "RAW" or "RAI" is.

I mean, let's be honest, 6/10 is so garbage that I wouldn't spit on it as a Beguiler, to even imagine a Wizard or Sorcerer giving up two entire spell levels for the privledge of casting spells that the guy in full plate with two good saves and d8 HD was casting 4 levels ago is silly.

On a Beguiler, it's still terrible, but there at least exists a theoretical reason for it.

On the other hand, basically no one is actually unbalanced in the slightest if you let the Beguiler get 3 domains across 7 levels or whatever, instead of having to blow feats for entry into the assorted PrCs that all grant domains at level 1 with full casting anyway. I can see some people argue that Capstone beguilers are unbalanced in some campaigns, but for the most part that isn't even true.

So decide what works for your game, and either allow it or don't at whatever way you want based on that alone. Don't be surprised if when you decide it's a 6/10 your PC just up and decides not to play that character. The people willing to play a character 4 levels lower than everyone else at the table just so they can write "Pal with some Couatls" on their character sheet are few and far between.