Level 1 Wizard casting from his level 9 spell slot?

[Endarire]

Greetings, all!

I heard of an optimization trick that lets a Wizard (possibly a Domain Wizard and possibly an Elf Wizard1 substitute level character) be able to learn and cast at least 1 level 9 spell per day at character level 1. Is this true? If so, how?

[A_S]

Here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=10197586&postcount=9) is dextercorvia describing the trick, and here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?322848-well-known-cheese) is a thread in which it's explained and argued about in a bit more detail.

I believe that the trick works by RAW, but there's a fair amount of disagreement on this among rules lawyer types.

If it does work, you need the Elven Generalist substitution level, the Domain Wizard variant from Unearthed Arcana, the Versatile Spellcaster feat, and a way of casting spells spontaneously (like the Alacritous Cogitation feat). In order to get all of that at level 1, you need flaws or some other way of getting extra feats.

[Endarire]

Thankee!

Be a Gray Elf Wizard (+2 INT, baby!) and, with the right domain, you can power a reserve feat at level 1! I like me my Summon Elemental (Large Elemental!), but Fiery Burst (9d6 fire damage) may also work!

[Troacctid]

You also need a minimum caster level of 17, which takes a bit of work to get.

[A_S]

You also need a minimum caster level of 17, which takes a bit of work to get.
This is the part that people disagree on; it's argued about a bit in the thread I linked above.

Basically, you can't cast a spell unless you have the minimum caster level required to cast that spell. But the minimum caster level required to cast a spell is never specified anywhere in the rules. It's probably supposed to be "the level at which your spellcasting class normally gains spell slots of this level," in which case Troacctid is correct that you need CL17 to cast 9th level Wizard spells. But that's not clearly stated anywhere; the RAW is just (paraphrasing) "you can't cast a spell unless your CL is high enough to do so," without any clear indication of what "high enough to do so" means.

The rule in question is on p. 171 of the PHB, for anybody who wants to read it and come to their own conclusions.

[Endarire]

As the previous (linked) thread specified, there was debate over if this is needed and what the minimum CL is. (If we're assuming standard Wizard progression, that's CL17 for L9 spells.)

At least we could use Spellgifted to get access to L2 domain spells from the start! (Wiz1 + Spellgifted + 1CL for domain spells.)

I'm curious if I actually need to be able to cast the spell I have in a slot for it to power reserve feats. Any definitive verdicts?

[A_S]

I'm curious if I actually need to be able to cast the spell I have in a slot for it to power reserve feats. Any definitive verdicts?
The reserve feats don't just require you to have a spell prepared, they require you to have it "available to cast," so I'd say if you can't actually cast your 9th level spell, it's not "available to cast," and therefore can't power your reserve feat.

[Endarire]

I just reread Complete Mage 37 (left column) and found this:

"A spellcaster who prepares spells each day (such as a wizard) must have an appropriate spell prepared and not yet cast that day. If the character has more than one appropriate spell prepared and uncast, she gains the benefit only from the highest-level spell; she can't gain multiple benefits, or stack benefits, by preparing more than one appropriate spell."

This is after this text:

"The primary benefit can only be activated if the caster has a spell of an appropriate variety (of a particular school, subschool, or descriptor) available to cast. The definition of 'available to cast' depends on whether the character prepares spells or casts spontaneously from a list of spells known."

Summon Elemental [Reserve], on page 47-48, says:

"Prerequisite: Ability to cast 4th-level spells.
Benefit: As long as you have a summoning spell of 4th level or higher available to cast, you can summon a Small elemental (air, earth, fire, or water; your choice) within a range of 30 feet. The elemental acts as if summoned by a summon monster spell (PH 285). The duration of the summoning is equal to 1 round per level of the highest-level conjuration (summoning) spell you have available to cast.

You can have only one summoned elemental from this feat at a time; if you use the ability a second time, the first elemental disappears. Also, you must remain close to the elemental you summon. If at the end of your turn you are more than 30 feet from the elemental, it disappears.

If you have a conjuration (summoning) spell of 6th level or higher available to cast, you can summon a Medium elemental instead. If you have a conjuration (summoning) spell of 8th level or higher available to cast, you can summon a Large elemental instead.

As a secondary benefit, you gain a +1 competence bonus to your caster level when casting conjuration (summoning) spells."

SUMMARY: We're Wizards. This counts.

[Troacctid]

This is the part that people disagree on; it's argued about a bit in the thread I linked above.

Basically, you can't cast a spell unless you have the minimum caster level required to cast that spell. But the minimum caster level required to cast a spell is never specified anywhere in the rules. It's probably supposed to be "the level at which your spellcasting class normally gains spell slots of this level," in which case Troacctid is correct that you need CL17 to cast 9th level Wizard spells. But that's not clearly stated anywhere; the RAW is just (paraphrasing) "you can't cast a spell unless your CL is high enough to do so," without any clear indication of what "high enough to do so" means.

The rule in question is on p. 171 of the PHB, for anybody who wants to read it and come to their own conclusions.
The minimum caster level required to cast a spell is usually twice the spell's level minus 1, per DMG 238. And DMG 287 has the minimum caster levels for all core spellcasting classes, which clears up the ones that don't use that formula. For non-core classes, DMG 6 instructs you to extrapolate; luckily, the pattern is pretty easy to figure out.

[A_S]

Hey, cool; I was only reading the text of the feats themselves. Yeah, if the section on reserve feats explicitly defines "available to cast" as "prepared and not yet cast," that's pretty definitive.

Guess you can power your reserve feats with this trick even if it doesn't work for actual spellcasting.

*edit*
The minimum caster level required to cast a spell is usually twice the spell's level minus 1, per DMG 238. And DMG 287 has the minimum caster levels for all core spellcasting classes, which clears up the ones that don't use that formula. For non-core classes, the pattern is pretty easy to figure out.
This is actually far more definitive than anything I've heard on this before, and has convinced me that the domain generalist trick doesn't actually work.

I have two questions:
Why haven't I read about this the last, like, six times I had this discussion? I've been reading that terrible PHB rule trying to figure out what it was supposed to mean, instead.
WHY IS THIS RULE ONLY STATED IN THE DMG'S SECTION ON CRAFTING SCROLLS?
*shakes head at 3.5*

[Gemini476]

There's also the slight issue of the Domain Wizard not being the Wizard class but rather a variant of it, and the Elven Generalist Wizard racial substitution levels thus not working with it.

But that's a really tricky and contentious argument.

[Andezzar]

WHY IS THIS RULE ONLY STATED IN THE DMG'S SECTION ON CRAFTING SCROLLS?Since this rule is only stated in the scrolls section, it only applies to scrolls. On top of that it only says that the minimum CL is usually 2*spell level -1. That leaves the option for other minima. If you gain abilities that give you spells known and spell slots earlier, and there is no restriction that you cannot use them at that CL your minimum CL must be less than 2*spell level -1.

[DarkSoul]

Since this rule is only stated in the scrolls section, it only applies to scrolls. On top of that it only says that the minimum CL is usually 2*spell level -1. That leaves the option for other minima. If you gain abilities that give you spells known and spell slots earlier, and there is no restriction that you cannot use them at that CL your minimum CL must be less than 2*spell level -1.Just because a rule is in a strange place doesn't mean it only applies to the section of the rules where it's listed. You have to look in the description of the Deck of Many Things to finally convince someone they can't take actions when they're dead, after all.

[Troacctid]

Since this rule is only stated in the scrolls section, it only applies to scrolls. On top of that it only says that the minimum CL is usually 2*spell level -1. That leaves the option for other minima. If you gain abilities that give you spells known and spell slots earlier, and there is no restriction that you cannot use them at that CL your minimum CL must be less than 2*spell level -1.
I'll point again to DMG 6—the rules are very explicit that you should extrapolate from other rules when a rule is unclear. The minimum CL rules are found in the general spellcasting section, so they do apply to spells in general, not just scrolls, and there are examples of minimum caster levels in multiple other places as well that support the 2x - 1 figure. Saying "Well, we don't know what the minimum caster levels are!" isn't RAW, it's just selectively ignoring parts of the rules that you find inconvenient.

[Barstro]

it's just selectively ignoring parts of the rules that you find inconvenient.

Which appears to be Rule-0. :smallwink:

[Andezzar]

Just because a rule is in a strange place doesn't mean it only applies to the section of the rules where it's listed. You have to look in the description of the Deck of Many Things to finally convince someone they can't take actions when they're dead, after all.It is not a question of where the rule is written, but what the rule says. The aforementioned rules talk about making and using scrolls. They do not say anything about casting a spell from a spell slot.


I'll point again to DMG 6—the rules are very explicit that you should extrapolate from other rules when a rule is unclear. The minimum CL rules are found in the general spellcasting section, so they do apply to spells in general, not just scrolls, and there are examples of minimum caster levels in multiple other places as well that support the 2x - 1 figure. Saying "Well, we don't know what the minimum caster levels are!" isn't RAW, it's just selectively ignoring parts of the rules that you find inconvenient.So what is the minimum CL for Gate? 17? If that were the case, a Monk2/Human Paragon 3/Ur-Priest 10 (CL 10) could not cast 9th level spells, despite having 9th level spell slots and access to 9th level spells.

Is that intentional? How is that different from other casters that use feats or other abilities to gain spell slots (and known spells if necessary)? To me both are just unusual minimum caster levels.

[gooddragon1]

I'll point again to DMG 6—the rules are very explicit that you should extrapolate from other rules when a rule is unclear.

I think that might be crossing into RAI territory. DM guidelines (especially where you have to extrapolate) are RAI. RAW is what you see there. If there isn't sufficient info to prohibit it, then it probably works (imo anyways). This is why I'm careful when homebrewing to try and stave off ambiguities like that.

[Troacctid]

So what is the minimum CL for Gate? 17? If that were the case, a Monk2/Human Paragon 3/Ur-Priest 10 (CL 10) could not cast 9th level spells, despite having 9th level spell slots and access to 9th level spells.

Is that intentional? How is that different from other casters that use feats or other abilities to gain spell slots (and known spells if necessary)? To me both are just unusual minimum caster levels.
The minimum caster level differs between classes. AFB, but I believe the book has the examples of CL 5 minimum for a wizard casting a 3rd level spell, and CL 6 minimum for a sorcerer? An entry of "—" in the class's spells per day table indicates that the character is unable to cast spells of that level.

[Quertus]

I'm glad the reserve fear bit is cleared up. As to the rest...


Here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=10197586&postcount=9) is dextercorvia describing the trick, and here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?322848-well-known-cheese) is a thread in which it's explained and argued about in a bit more detail.

I believe that the trick works by RAW, but there's a fair amount of disagreement on this among rules lawyer types.

No, rules lawyers say it works... then other rules lawyers say it doesn't. Non rules lawyers by definition don't say anything. :smalltongue:


This is the part that people disagree on; it's argued about a bit in the thread I linked above.

Basically, you can't cast a spell unless you have the minimum caster level required to cast that spell. But the minimum caster level required to cast a spell is never specified anywhere in the rules.


The minimum caster level required to cast a spell is usually twice the spell's level minus 1, per DMG 238. And DMG 287 has the minimum caster levels for all core spellcasting classes, which clears up the ones that don't use that formula. For non-core classes, DMG 6 instructs you to extrapolate; luckily, the pattern is pretty easy to figure out.


Since this rule is only stated in the scrolls section, it only applies to scrolls. On top of that it only says that the minimum CL is usually 2*spell level -1. That leaves the option for other minima. If you gain abilities that give you spells known and spell slots earlier, and there is no restriction that you cannot use them at that CL your minimum CL must be less than 2*spell level -1.


Just because a rule is in a strange place doesn't mean it only applies to the section of the rules where it's listed. You have to look in the description of the Deck of Many Things to finally convince someone they can't take actions when they're dead, after all.

AFB, but IIRC, level loss affects spells... but not the way indicated above. Suffering from 5 negative levels results in -5 caster level, and the loss of 5 memorized spells, starting with your highest level spell slots.

So, a TO Tainted Sorcerer, with 18 9th level spell slots at level 17, should be able to, by taking 16 negative levels, still cast 9th level spells... as a 1st level caster / with a caster level of 1.

AFAIK, the section on scrolls simply says that you cannot craft items with spells at levels you usually cannot cast them (no scroll of gate at caster level 1 to reduce the cost, for example), and should NOT be extrapolated beyond item creation.

[Andezzar]

The minimum caster level differs between classes. AFB, but I believe the book has the examples of CL 5 minimum for a wizard casting a 3rd level spell, and CL 6 minimum for a sorcerer? An entry of "—" in the class's spells per day table indicates that the character is unable to cast spells of that level.That is true, but some feats or abilities explicitly give spell slots, or use lower level spell slots to generate a higher level one. There is no rule saying the minimum CL is in some form fixed. Other rules at least imply that the minimum CL is defined by the CL you have when you get a spell slot (and known spell) of that level.

@Quertus: Having the Energy Drained (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#energyDrained) condition (i.e. having negative levels) is not the same as having lost levels (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#levelLoss). Otherwise I agree with you.

[Quertus]

@Quertus: Having the Energy Drained (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#energyDrained) condition (i.e. having negative levels) is not the same as having lost levels (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#levelLoss). Otherwise I agree with you.

Thank you for the clarification. Yes, Energy Drain is exactly what I was referring to. 9th level spells, at caster level 1.

EDIT: technically, if you have more HD than CL, such as by taking fighter levels, being a dragon, etc, you can theoretically end up with a negative caster level.

[DarkSoul]

Keep in mind that this "trick" is absolutely at the discretion of the DM, and they'll have every right to (and would likely be insane to not) simply say it doesn't work. The rules as written aren't explicit enough to say it works one way or another.

Personally, I'm in the "it doesn't work" camp.

@Andezzar: Is there another feat or ability that works like Versatile Spellcaster? The reason I ask is because of your "use lower level spell slots to generate a higher level one" comment. Versatile Spellcaster doesn't do that, so I'm curious if you know of another one that might. I know a few that break up higher level slots into lower level ones, but not vice versa. EDIT: Just looked at Ur-Priest, and Siphon Spell Power almost works, but limits the level to one the Ur-Priest can already cast.

[Quertus]

Keep in mind that this "trick" is absolutely at the discretion of the DM, and they'll have every right to (and would likely be insane to not) simply say it doesn't work. The rules as written aren't explicit enough to say it works one way or another.

Personally, I'm in the "it doesn't work" camp.

If I had a dog in this fight, it would be that I don't want it to work. But what we want is irrelevant to a discussion of RAW.

[RedMage125]

If I had a dog in this fight, it would be that I don't want it to work. But what we want is irrelevant to a discussion of RAW.

It doesn't work by RAW, either.

You don't get the 2nd level spell slot "available" until you actually burn 2 1st level spell slots. So you don't get an extra 2nd level spell slot from high INT, and you certainly don't get your bonus one from EGW, because that one was used as a 1st level slot, because when you were preparing your spells that morning, all you had were first level spells.

And since the 2nd level slot only EXISTS when 2 1st level ones are used, you certainly cannot then spend 2 "2nd level slots" that YOU DO NOT HAVE to get a 3rd level slot and so on.

The theory that dextercovia postulates requires constant spending and re-spending of the EGW slot. EVEN IF a DM was lenient (or naive) enough to allow this trick for the lower level slots like dexter says, his explanation falls WOEFULLY short when it comes to 6th level and up spells.

An INT of 20 grants no bonus 6th level spell, and even by dexter's generous interpretation, he only has one 6th level spell slot, how does he get a 7th? And if he's already expended his EGW bonus slot to get a 7th level spell slot, where does he get a second 7th level slot to versatile out an 8th?

By RAW, this theory falls woefully short, and should never be taken seriously by anyone.

Anyone trying to convince you that this is RAW-legal is either not very good at the RAW themselves, or is messing with you.

And ALL OF THIS is still assuming you can take Elven Generalist and Domain Wizard at the same time. Which, RAW seems pretty clear that you cannot, as both substitute the normal wizard's ability to specialize.

[Andezzar]

@Andezzar: Is there another feat or ability that works like Versatile Spellcaster? The reason I ask is because of your "use lower level spell slots to generate a higher level one" comment. Versatile Spellcaster doesn't do that, so I'm curious if you know of another one that might. I know a few that break up higher level slots into lower level ones, but not vice versa.I was thinking about Versatile Spellcaster. It does not let you go beyond the spell level you can normally cast, because you do not know any spells beyond the level you could normally cast, but with heighten spell you could do it, since a heightened spell actually becomes a higher level spell.

[Endarire]

Domain Wizard (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#wizardVariantDomainWiz ard):

A wizard who uses the arcane domain system (called a domain wizard) selects a specific arcane domain of spells, much like a cleric selects a pair of domains associated with his deity. A domain wizard cannot also be a specialist wizard; in exchange for the versatility given up by specializing in a domain instead of an entire school, the domain wizard casts her chosen spells with increased power.

Arcane Domain

At 1st level, a domain wizard selects an arcane domain from those listed below. (At the game master's discretion, the player might create an alternatively themed domain instead.) Once selected, the domain may never be changed.

A domain wizard automatically adds each new domain spell to her list of known spells as soon as she becomes able to cast it. These spells do not count against her two new spells known per wizard level.

A domain wizard casts spells from her chosen domain (regardless of whether the spell was prepared as a domain spell or a normal spell) as a caster one level higher than her normal level. This bonus applies only to the spells listed for the domain, not all spells of the school or subtype whose name matches the domain name.

In some cases, an arcane domain includes spells not normally on the wizard's class spell list. These spells are treated as being on the character's class spell list (and thus she can use wands or arcane scrolls that hold those spells, or even prepare those spells in her normal wizard spell slots).

Spellcasting

A domain wizard prepares and casts spells like a normal wizard. However, a domain wizard gains one bonus spell per spell level, which must be filled with the spell from that level of the domain spell list (or with a lower-level domain spell that has been altered with a metamagic feat).


Elven Generalist Wizard (Races of the Wild 157)
Elven Generalist Wizardry: A 1st-level elf wizard begins play with one extra 1st-level spell in her spellbook. At each new wizard level, she gains one extra spell of any spell level that she can cast. This represents the additional elven insight and experience with arcane magic.

The elf wizard may also prepare one additional spell of her highest spell level each day. Unlike the specialist wizard ability, this spell may be of any school.

This substitution feature replaces the standard wizard’s ability to specialize in a school of magic.

A Domain Wizard must be a generalist. (He cannot specialize.) An Elven Generalist Wizard replaces his ability to specialize. These are separate but compatible things, even if they're phrased similarly.


Versatile Spellcaster (Races of the Dragon 101)
Prerequisite: Ability to spontaneously cast spells.
Benefit: You can use two spell slots of the same level to cast a spell you know that is one level higher. For example, a sorcerer with this feat can expend two 2nd-level spell slots to cast any 3rd-level spell he knows.

Versatile Spellcaster doesn't seem to 'store' spells nor 'stack.' It doesn't say you can spend 8 level 1 spell slots to cast a level 4 spell you know. However, it also doesn't say you can't. This is finicky.

VERDICT
At present, I'm not sure it works because of Versatile Spellcaster's wording. I'd like it to work and be RAW, but VS makes it fuzzy, leaning toward unlikely.

[Aldrakan]

the RAW is just (paraphrasing) "you can't cast a spell unless your CL is high enough to do so," without any clear indication of what "high enough to do so" means.


This is the part that confuses me. How can you say something does work when by RAW it is restricted by the CL, but you can't actually define what CL is?

Shouldn't that lead to a RAW reading of "has no RAW definition, because a chunk of it cannot be defined"? If you're translating a sentence and hit a word you can't translate, you can't just assume that word isn't important and pretend it's not there.

[Quertus]

It doesn't work by RAW, either.

You don't get the 2nd level spell slot "available" until you actually burn 2 1st level spell slots. So you don't get an extra 2nd level spell slot from high INT, and you certainly don't get your bonus one from EGW, because that one was used as a 1st level slot, because when you were preparing your spells that morning, all you had were first level spells.

And since the 2nd level slot only EXISTS when 2 1st level ones are used, you certainly cannot then spend 2 "2nd level slots" that YOU DO NOT HAVE to get a 3rd level slot and so on.

The theory that dextercovia postulates requires constant spending and re-spending of the EGW slot. EVEN IF a DM was lenient (or naive) enough to allow this trick for the lower level slots like dexter says, his explanation falls WOEFULLY short when it comes to 6th level and up spells.

An INT of 20 grants no bonus 6th level spell, and even by dexter's generous interpretation, he only has one 6th level spell slot, how does he get a 7th? And if he's already expended his EGW bonus slot to get a 7th level spell slot, where does he get a second 7th level slot to versatile out an 8th?

By RAW, this theory falls woefully short, and should never be taken seriously by anyone.

Anyone trying to convince you that this is RAW-legal is either not very good at the RAW themselves, or is messing with you.

And ALL OF THIS is still assuming you can take Elven Generalist and Domain Wizard at the same time. Which, RAW seems pretty clear that you cannot, as both substitute the normal wizard's ability to specialize.

Thanks for debunking this. :smallwink: I've never researched this, but the bolded part seems the most obvious breaking point.

[Lorddenorstrus]

I actually made an entire character based around the concept for my own amusement awhile back. It was quite fun, anyway on whether it works or not? Those that argue against use RAI as their argument. (Apply a rule specifically for scrolls to generic spells, while probably intended, that's still RAI.) You use Versatile spellcaster to trade up available spells to reach 9th, as you're granted an available Domain spell per spell level when ever you CAN cast a spell of that level, you effectively trade 2 1sts, into a 2nd, get a bonus second for having that 2nd. And continue the ramp train up. There isn't anything actually by RAW that stops this funny little combo. All the arguments against are people that don't want it to work. Characters based around this concept are obviously going to be slightly ridiculous so if anything I would suggest one of two things. A, you're the DM, "It works." That was easy. B, talking to the DM and asking them their opinion then their response yes or no decides whether the character becomes playable or not. Nothing else will change that.

[Zanos]

A wizard does not know a spell they cannot prepare. Since verstaile spell caster only lets you cast spells you know, this doesn't work.

known spell: A spell that an arcane spellcaster has learned and can prepare. For wizards, knowing a spell means having it in their spellbooks. For sorcerers and bards, knowing a spell means having selected it when acquiring new spells as a benefit of level advancement.

[Lorddenorstrus]

A wizard does not know a spell they cannot prepare. Since verstaile spell caster only lets you cast spells you know, this doesn't work.

Domain Wizards know all spells from their domain list automatically and can cast them whenever they have an available Spell slot of that level.

[Zanos]

Domain Wizards know all spells from their domain list automatically and can cast them whenever they have an available Spell slot of that level.
https://i.gyazo.com/1c294503d212df1559bf027b7a78e943.png
Really, the whole idea of a "spell" is an abstract concept anyway, clearly the rules actually are referring to high level language constructs.

[Lorddenorstrus]

https://i.gyazo.com/1c294503d212df1559bf027b7a78e943.png
Really, the whole idea of a "spell" is an abstract concept anyway, clearly the rules actually are referring to high level language constructs.

Domain Wizards - Unearthed Arcana pg 57.

'A domain wizard automatically adds each new domain spell to her list of known spells as soon as she becomes able to cast it. These spells do not count against her two new spells known per wizard level.'

Alacritous Cogitation (The Feat most commonly used to get into Versatile spellcaster for this) - Complete Mage pg 37

If you leave an arcane spell slot open when preparing spells, you can use that open slot to cast any arcane spell you know of the same level or lower and of casting time no longer than 1 round. Casting the spell requires a full-round action. You can use this feat only once per day, regardless of the number of slots you leave open.

So, they know Domain Spells automatically when able to cast them. Alac allows them to spontaneously cast any spell they know with an available spell slot... Wow that was so hard. One should familiarize themselves with a subject before debating it. Lest they look the fool.

[Zanos]

The post you quoted is literally admitting I was wrong and joking about it, no reason to be rude.

[Lorddenorstrus]

The post you quoted is literally admitting I was wrong and joking about it, no reason to be rude.

I misread it then. I read it more so as suggesting I had it wrong but was 'ignoring' what went against said opinion. I couldn't tell who you were making the subject of the picture, me or you.

[Ruethgar]

It should be noted that only Heighten, Sanctum, and Whispering Way spells modify spell level. So even if you can't cast a 9th level spell, you could still Persist a 3rd level spell or Twin Repeat a 2nd because they only change the spell slot, not spell level.

[Ualaa]

RAW is debatable... but RAI:

Out of curiosity, how many DMs out there have allowed this for a player in an ongoing/longer term campaign?

[RedMage125]

A Domain Wizard must be a generalist. (He cannot specialize.) An Elven Generalist Wizard replaces his ability to specialize. These are separate but compatible things, even if they're phrased similarly.
An Elven Generalist has given up the ability to specialize in a school of magic. He LITERALLY no longer even has that class feature.

A Domain Wizard is specializing in a domain INSTEAD of a school. This is a variant of the specialization option class feature of the core wizard.

Which the EGW does not have, as he traded it away.


Versatile Spellcaster doesn't seem to 'store' spells nor 'stack.' It doesn't say you can spend 8 level 1 spell slots to cast a level 4 spell you know. However, it also doesn't say you can't. This is finicky.
It's not finicky. It's quite clear. Absence of rules saying you CANNOT do something does NOT equal "rules saying you CAN".

To say otherwise is Munchkin Fallacy.

Next part is directed at you and Lorddenorstrus.


You use Versatile spellcaster to trade up available spells to reach 9th, as you're granted an available Domain spell per spell level when ever you CAN cast a spell of that level, you effectively trade 2 1sts, into a 2nd, get a bonus second for having that 2nd. And continue the ramp train up. There isn't anything actually by RAW that stops this funny little combo. All the arguments against are people that don't want it to work.

Provably false.

Versatile Spellcaster (Races of the Dragon 101)
Prerequisite: Ability to spontaneously cast spells.
Benefit: You can use two spell slots of the same level to cast a spell you know that is one level higher. For example, a sorcerer with this feat can expend two 2nd-level spell slots to cast any 3rd-level spell he knows.

Nothing in the text there about allowing any kind of chain. Nothing at all all. Therefore ZERO RULES SUPPORT.

Munchkin Fallacy is when a person assumes (and indeed insists) that RAW "supports" their claim solely based on a LACK of RAW that says they cannot do said thing.

You say "there's nothing in the RAW that stops this little combo". I say "there's nothing in the RAW that says you CAN do this little combo".

Does no one read the f*****g rules? Versatile Spellcaster doesn't give you a "slot". At NO POINT does it do that. It lets you CAST a spell. You trade 2 1st level spells to CAST a 2nd level spell. Not "gain a second level spell slot, which you can then use to cascade the same trick up to 9th". No. You CAST the 2nd level spell IMMEDIATELY when you spend the 2 1st level slots.

And you don't gain bonus 2nd level spell slots for high INT with this trick, either. The Player's Handbook EXPLICITLY says that a Wizard does not get a bonus 2nd level spell until Wizard level 3. Even uses that class as the example. Even more to the point, spell slots are refreshed at the end of a wizard's 8 hours of rest. At which point, she prepares her spells. At the time she is preparing, she only has 1st level spell slots, yes? Okay, so she only gets bonus 1st level slots.

I will concede that using Alarcitous Cogitation, with Versatile Spellcaster, with a Domain Wizard can spend 2 1st level spell slots to cast their 2nd level domain spell, yes. RAW are very clear on that much. But they didn't "gain a 2nd level spell slot", which is where so much of this confusion comes into play. They spent TWO first level spells, and a 2nd level spell was cast. As in, the spell effect took place. As in, if the domain was Abjuration, Resist Energy was just cast. And the wizard, at no point, had a 2nd level spell slot. A 1st level Wizard, as per the PHB, does not have 2nd level spell slots when she prepares her spells, ergo, she has no bonus spell slot from high INT, and if she was a EGW, her bonus from that is a 1st level slot, as that was the "highest level of spell that she could cast" at the moment she finished her 8 hours of rest and replenished her spell slots.

This entire theory is bogus and preposterous. RAW contradicts it SEVERAL TIMES. So the argument of "well, it's OP, but technically RAW-legal..."...shut up. It is not. Versatile Spellcaster does not support it, the RAW for bonus spell slots do not support it. EGW ceretainly doesn't.

I originally continued to rant a bit, but realized that I was just re-hashing the same points, so I deleted it. Lol.

Point Made, and hopefully this stupid, stupid idea dies out soon.

[Asrrin]

Does no one read the f*****g rules? Versatile Spellcaster doesn't give you a "slot". At NO POINT does it do that. It lets you CAST a spell. You trade 2 1st level spells to CAST a 2nd level spell. Not "gain a second level spell slot, which you can then use to cascade the same trick up to 9th". No. You CAST the 2nd level spell IMMEDIATELY when you spend the 2 1st level slots.


Just pointing out that the trick doesn't rely on Versatile Spellcasting granting a spell slot, only that it counts as "your highest level spell" which triggers the floating spell slot of Elven Generalist.

[Andezzar]

This is the part that confuses me. How can you say something does work when by RAW it is restricted by the CL, but you can't actually define what CL is?

Shouldn't that lead to a RAW reading of "has no RAW definition, because a chunk of it cannot be defined"? If you're translating a sentence and hit a word you can't translate, you can't just assume that word isn't important and pretend it's not there.If you do not know what the minimum CL for any given spell is how can you prove that CL 20 is enough to cast a level 0 spell? And since Asrrin called using the absence of a rule as permission a fllacy you cannot do that. So no caster can cast any spell.


A wizard does not know a spell they cannot prepare. Since verstaile spell caster only lets you cast spells you know, this doesn't work.That is where the domain wizard ACF and/or Heighten Spell come in. they give the wizard a spell of the higher level.

[Troacctid]

Don't domain wizards only gain their known spells when they are able to cast spells of that level? You don't get your 2nd level domain spell until Wizard 3.

[Lorddenorstrus]

Don't domain wizards only gain their known spells when they are able to cast spells of that level? You don't get your 2nd level domain spell until Wizard 3.

All it says is "As soon as you're able to cast it." It doesn't say at lvl 3 you gain 2nd lvl domain spells. So if one gains access to a 2nd level spell pre 3, they're able to cast it, and therefore know the spell.

[Endarire]

RedMage125: Elven Generalist and Domain Wizard are not mutually exclusive. Support (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=12337.0).

From the linked thread:





Elf Generalist and Domain Wizard are technically at odds with each other. The reason being is that both depend on your ability to specialize. Since either one locks you out of the choice of specializing, that means the other one can't be used.


Not quite true, as the wording of Domain Wizard only states that:


A wizard who uses the arcane domain system (called a domain wizard) selects a specific arcane domain of spells, much like a cleric selects a pair of domains associated with his deity. A domain wizard cannot also be a specialist wizard; in exchange for the versatility given up by specializing in a domain instead of an entire school, the domain wizard casts her chosen spells with increased power.

Is an Elven Generalist a specialist wizard? No, thus he can be a Domain Wizard.


Let us please return to the thread's main topic, the RAW legality of the OP's trick.

Regarding minimum caster level, there is one more as-of-yet undiscussed precedent, Precocious Apprentice (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20041114a). (Thread (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=5089.0))

[Troacctid]

All it says is "As soon as you're able to cast it." It doesn't say at lvl 3 you gain 2nd lvl domain spells. So if one gains access to a 2nd level spell pre 3, they're able to cast it, and therefore know the spell.
But you'd still need some way to be able to cast 2nd level spells before you get the extra known spell. How are you working that into the build? It's already a pretty feat-intensive trick.


Regarding minimum caster level, there is one more as-of-yet undiscussed precedent, Precocious Apprentice (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20041114a). (Thread (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=5089.0))
Precocious Apprentice is dysfunctional six ways to next Tuesday. It flat-out doesn't work at all unless you interpret it as not counting as being able to cast 2nd level spells. I wouldn't give it much consideration.

[Aldrakan]

If you do not know what the minimum CL for any given spell is how can you prove that CL 20 is enough to cast a level 0 spell? And since Asrrin called using the absence of a rule as permission a fllacy you cannot do that. So no caster can cast any spell.

Well in that case, "can I cast spells?" has no actual RAW answer It doesn't say you can't, it doesn't say you can (or at least, it does not fully explain the process for doing so). It is is undefined by RAW.

I appreciate that doesn't make for a remotely functional rules system, but I really don't think the game was intended to be read with RAW standing alone like this. It has a judge built into it.

[Quertus]

Domain Wizards - Unearthed Arcana pg 57.

'A domain wizard automatically adds each new domain spell to her list of known spells as soon as she becomes able to cast it. These spells do not count against her two new spells known per wizard level.'

This bit is irrelevant to spell slots available.

Ok, baby-step me through this.

I'm a wizard. Level 1. Grey elf, int 20.

My bonus slots from int look like this: 2 1 1 1 1

My spell slots look like this: 1+2 --- ---...

I'm taking 2 things that nerf my ability to specialize (Domain Wizard being one), which is pretty clearly not Rules as Intended, but, due to poor wording (Domain Wizard doesn't specify you have to have/trade specialization to take it), it is at least as RAW as drown-healing.

My bonus slots from Domain Wizard look like this: 1 1 1...

Now my spell slots look like this: 1+2+1 --- ---...

For the sake of notation, let's say I had an item or dwoemer that let me absorb incoming spell energy, and cast it back out immediately with a return spell of my own (drawing a blank at the moment on ways to do that).

Suppose I absorbed a 1st level spell. My spell slots would, for a moment, be 1+2+1(1) --- ---...

If, instead, I absorbed a 2nd level spell, my slots would be 1+2+1 ---(1) ---...

Similarly, let's say a cleric (or, better yet, an Arcane Spellcaster) used Imbue with Spell Ability to grant me a spell.

If they gave me a 1st level spell, my spell slots would be 1+2+1[1] --- ---...

If, instead, they gave me a 2nd level spell, my slots would be 1+2+1 ---[1] ---...

So... What, exactly, takes me to having "1+1" for my second level slot? "+1" comes from Domain Wizard (along with, presumably, another "+1" for my int), but where's the first 1 coming from?

[Andezzar]

Well in that case, "can I cast spells?" has no actual RAW answer It doesn't say you can't, it doesn't say you can (or at least, it does not fully explain the process for doing so). It is is undefined by RAW.

I appreciate that doesn't make for a remotely functional rules system, but I really don't think the game was intended to be read with RAW standing alone like this. It has a judge built into it.If spellcasting works because no rules says that it does not, then casting with "too low" a caster level works as well. If no rule says that CL16* is too low for 9th level spells, then it is high enough.

---
* or any other number below 17

[Aldrakan]

If spellcasting works because no rules says that it does not, then casting with "too low" a caster level works as well. If no rule says that CL16* is too low for 9th level spells, then it is high enough

That's a correct extension, but that's not what I said. I'm suggesting that if RAW introduces a requirement, then does not define that requirement, it has no valid RAW reading. Not that it says it's legal or illegal, but that it's not there. The RAI may be immensely obvious here, because of all those charts showing spells known, but it's technically RAI.

[Barstro]

If spellcasting works because no rules says that it does not, then casting with "too low" a caster level works as well. If no rule says that CL16* is too low for 9th level spells, then it is high enough.

---
* or any other number below 17

I'm unaware of any rule that says I cannot turn my body into poisoned lightning and flow into people to destroy them internally. My next session should prove quite fun.

[Andezzar]

I'm unaware of any rule that says I cannot turn my body into poisoned lightning and flow into people to destroy them internally. My next session should prove quite fun.Unless you are playing some kind of monster, you indeed cannot, because there is a rule that stuff works like in the real world unless the rules say otherwise.

[tsj]

Domain wizard is in itself very overpowered.

[Extra Anchovies]

Domain wizard is in itself very overpowered.

Fixed that for ya. Domain wizard is about on par with normal specialists, or slightly better; they have the same spells per day, and the "lost" versatility of the specialist is largely an only-on-paper sort of thing (http://secretsofthearchmages.net/Threads/WOTC/2008/Classes_and_Prestige_Classes/952899.html).

[RedMage125]

Just pointing out that the trick doesn't rely on Versatile Spellcasting granting a spell slot, only that it counts as "your highest level spell" which triggers the floating spell slot of Elven Generalist.
It does NOT. EGW says you may PREPARE one extra spell of your highest spell level each day. Since a 2nd level spell may only be CAST by spending 2 1st level slots, the EGW only has 1st level slots available at the time when she is preparing spells. Ergo, the EGW bonus slot for a 1st level wizard is 1st level ONLY.


RedMage125: Elven Generalist and Domain Wizard are not mutually exclusive. Support (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=12337.0).

From the linked thread:
Incorrect. EGW is an Alternate Class Feature that REPLACES (i.e. completely removes from that character) the ability to specialize in a school of magic.

Domain Wizard is specializing in a domain INSTEAD of a school. The RAW even uses the words "specializing in a domain instead of an entire school". If you no longer have the ability to specialize in a school, you may not specialize in a domain as an additional option of specializing.



Let us please return to the thread's main topic, the RAW legality of the OP's trick.

It is not legal, I have debunked it on a number of counts, numerous times. The fact that the EGW bonus slot does not "float" ALONE makes the trick not work.


Fixed that for ya. Domain wizard is about on par with normal specialists, or slightly better; they have the same spells per day, and the "lost" versatility of the specialist is largely an only-on-paper sort of thing (http://secretsofthearchmages.net/Threads/WOTC/2008/Classes_and_Prestige_Classes/952899.html).
I couldn't agree more. It hinges on a factor I call "Red Mage Fallacy" Not named after me, exactly, but after the 8-Bit Theatre character after which my handle is also named for (I coined this fallacy back on the WotC boards, where I had a different handle).

Red Mage Fallacy is basically summed up as: Versatility In Choice is not an Advantage when that choice cannot be changed. Like how 4e humans got +2 to only one stat, but couls pick which, and all other races got +2 to two stats, but they were fixed (or, later, one fixed, and the other a choice between 2). This meant that once a human decided to choose, say, DEX, he was now 2 points in stats BEHIND every other DEX bonus race.

Where it applies to this instance (and why I agree with you) is: Wizard ACFs that make a wizard give up "ability to specialize" when said wizard was not going to specialize ANYWAY, isn't really a trade-off. You're literally getting something for nothing. Compare to the other ACFs of Elven Wizard, which actually give up something (ability for familiar to deliver touch spells, bonus metamagic feat, etc).

[Endarire]

Let's read the Domain Wizard and Elven Generalist Wizard abilities more closely.

Domain Wizard says:

A wizard who uses the arcane domain system (called a domain wizard) selects a specific arcane domain of spells, much like a cleric selects a pair of domains associated with his deity. A domain wizard cannot also be a specialist wizard; in exchange for the versatility given up by specializing in a domain instead of an entire school, the domain wizard casts her chosen spells with increased power.

Note that the Domain Wizard is a [specialist] in a domain instead of an entire school.

Elven Generalist Wizard says:

This substitution feature replaces the standard wizard’s ability to specialize in a school of magic.

If I'm an EGW, I'm not specializing in a school of magic, but a domain. Completely different things!

The Wizard base class says this regarding School Specialization:

A school is one of eight groupings of spells, each defined by a common theme. If desired, a wizard may specialize in one school of magic (see below). Specialization allows a wizard to cast extra spells from her chosen school, but she then never learns to cast spells from some other schools.

A specialist wizard can prepare one additional spell of her specialty school per spell level each day. She also gains a +2 bonus on Spellcraft checks to learn the spells of her chosen school.

The wizard must choose whether to specialize and, if she does so, choose her specialty at 1st level. At this time, she must also give up two other schools of magic (unless she chooses to specialize in divination; see below), which become her prohibited schools.

VERDICT
EGW and Domain Wizard work together.

BACK TO THE TRICK!
Now as for reproducing the original trick, I suspect the original author used Versatile Spellcaster to convert 2 L1 spells into a L2 spell and thereby gain an extra slot from EGW and the domain spell known and spell slot from Domain Wizard. Then he rested and used Versatile Spellcaster to convert his two level 2s to a L3. Then he rested. And so on.

I'm also assuming that minimum caster level is no obstacle because, as people have posted so far in this thread, a comprehensive definition of minimum caster level for spells cast from spell slots for Wizards has not been established by RAW except for fireball. (Just don't pick the Fire Domain and this trick will work under these assumptions.)

What shall we call this?
I vote "Step Up Wizard" or "Leapfrog Wizard" or "I Dream of Level 9s Wizard" or "Rest Up Wizard" or, simply, "Rincewind." (Discworld reference)

[RedMage125]

Let's read the Domain Wizard and Elven Generalist Wizard abilities more closely.

Domain Wizard says:

A
domain wizard cannot also be a specialist wizard; in exchange
for the versatility given up by specializing in a domain instead
of an entire school, the domain wizard casts her chosen spells
with increased power.

Note that the Domain Wizard is a [specialist] in a domain instead of an entire school.

Elven Generalist Wizard says:

This substitution feature replaces the standard wizard’s
ability to specialize in a school of magic.

If I'm an EGW, I'm not specializing in a school of magic, but a domain. Completely different things!

The Wizard base class says this regarding School Specialization:


VERDICT
EGW and Domain Wizard work together.
You quoted the very words that prove you wrong. I added new bolding to emphasize this. Elven Generalist REPLACES the wizards ABILTY TO SPECIALIZE in a school of magic.
Domain Wizard is SPECIALIZING in a domain INSTEAD of specializing in a school of magic.

VERDICT
If you no longer have the ability to specialize in a school, you may not choose to give it up again to engage in an alternate form of specializing.

It's like selling the same couch to two different people, giving it to one guy, and expecting to keep the money from both.


BACK TO THE TRICK!
Now as for reproducing the original trick, I suspect the original author used Versatile Spellcaster to convert 2 L1 spells into a L2 spell and thereby gain an extra slot from EGW and the domain spell known and spell slot from Domain Wizard. Then he rested and used Versatile Spellcaster to convert his two level 2s to a L3. Then he rested. And so on.
I bolded where you went wrong. He doesn't gain "a L2 spell slot" from using VS. He burned TWO L1 spell slots and he CAST a L2 spell. After each time he rests and goes to prepare his spells, he only has L1 spells available, and therefore the EGW spell slot MUST be L1.

Seriously, RE-READn the Feat Versatile Spellcaster. AT NO POINT does the feat give you "an available spell slot" of one level higher. You IMMEDIATELY cast the L2 spell when you spend the two L1 slots, leaving you, once again, with only L1 slots. You likewise do not get your bonus L2 slots from Domain Wizard or high INT because, at the time you finish resting, you only have L1 slots (also, the PHB EXPLICITLY says you don't get bonus L2 slots from high INT until 3rd level of Wizard).

So, once again, the "trick" does not work.


I'm also assuming that minimum caster level is no obstacle because, as people have posted so far in this thread, a comprehensive definition of minimum caster level for spells cast from spell slots for Wizards has not been established by RAW except for fireball. (Just don't pick the Fire Domain and this trick will work under these assumptions.)
I can't tell if you're trolling or intentionally being obtuse. Fireball was used as the example, they don't need to spell it out for every spell. And minimum caster level depends on the class. For a Sorc, minimum caster level for Fireball is 6th. Take Flame Strike. For a Cleric, minum CL is 9th. For Druid or Warmage it's 7th. Minimum CL depends on which class the character is using, so it's not a hard-set number based on the spell.


What shall we call this?
I vote "Step Up Wizard" or "Leapfrog Wizard" or "I Dream of Level 9s Wizard" or "Rest Up Wizard" or, simply, "Rincewind." (Discworld reference)

How about we call it "nice attempt at being a Munchkin, but doesn't work RAW"?:smallwink:

But seriously, I like "Leapfrog Wizard", and I think I'll use that when I am discussing why it does not work. "Step Up Wizard" is my #2 choice.

[Andezzar]

I can't tell if you're trolling or intentionally being obtuse. Fireball was used as the example, they don't need to spell it out for every spell. And minimum caster level depends on the class. For a Sorc, minimum caster level for Fireball is 6th. Take Flame Strike. For a Cleric, minum CL is 9th. For Druid or Warmage it's 7th. Minimum CL depends on which class the character is using, so it's not a hard-set number based on the spell.The CL 5 minimum for the fireball could only be an example if a general rule about how to find the minimum CL of a spell existed. since there is no such rule, the fireball minimum is nothing but a distinct rule that applies to no spell except the fireball.

[DarkSoul]

You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question.The minimum caster level for any spell, regardless of class, is the caster level required for you to cast the spell in the first place. For wizards and level 9 spells, this is CL 17. For Sorcerers, it's CL 18. For Ur-Priests with no other caster classes, it's 9.

Don't spout some BS about how "this only applies to casting spells at lower levels!". No, it doesn't.

Versatile Spellcaster does not give you a spell slot. It lets you cast a spell you know with an alternate cost. CAST. Not prepare, not piggyback into higher level spells. You spend two level 1 slots now, and cast a level 2 spell you know now.

Also:


In addition to having a high ability score, a spellcaster must be of high enough class level to be able to cast spells of a given spell level. (See the class descriptions in Chapter 3 for details.) For instance, the wizard Mialee has an Intelligence score of 15, so she’s smart enough to get one bonus 1st-level spell and one bonus 2nd-level spell. (She will not actually get the 2nd-level spell until she is 3rd level wizard, since that’s the minimum level a wizard must be to cast 2nd-level spells.)When you try this trick to get bonus level 2 spells, you get nothing. You're casting a spell with versatile spellcaster, not gaining a spell slot. EGW doesn't magically move to level 2 because you can't cast level 2 spells. You don't get bonus 2nd-level spell slots because you're not a 3rd level wizard. Oh, and what do we have here? A direct reference to a minimum caster level. Wizard level 1= wizard caster level 1. Therefore minimum wizard level to cast level 2 spells = minimum caster level to cast level 2 spells.

Give up on the trick, it doesn't work.

As for a name, how about the "Head in the Sand" wizard? If they don't see the evidence to the contrary then they still get to be special, after all. This one came up after watching RedMage125 get summarily ignored for the last day or so, even though they're right. :smallmad:

[Troacctid]

The CL 5 minimum for the fireball could only be an example if a general rule about how to find the minimum CL of a spell existed. since there is no such rule, the fireball minimum is nothing but a distinct rule that applies to no spell except the fireball.
How about this one?

If the entry is "—" for a given level of spells, the character may not cast any spells of that level.
Or the ones that I cited earlier in the thread?

[Endarire]

My logic for Versatile Spellcaster, Domain Wizard, and Elven Generalist Wizard is below. I assume these still work together*. I also assumed minimum caster level wasn't a requirement for most spells due to a lack of SRD information on such. Originally, I disregarded Heighten Spell, but it may be needed to get this thing going.

-I have Versatile Spellcaster, meaning I can convert 2 level 1 spells into a level 2 spell and immediately cast it. (Let's say I cast a Heightened Grease which is in all ways a level 2 spell.)

-Because I just cast a level 2 spell, I automatically and immediately unlock my level 2 domain slot and level 2 domain spell. My bonus slot from EGW moves to level 2 from level 1.

-After resting and preparing spells, I still have my additional level 2 spell slots.

-I use Heighten Spell on whatever domain spell I just learned combined with Versatile Spellcaster to cast a level 3 spell. (Let's assume I picked the Conjuration domain and learned Web. Thus, I combined two Webs into a Heightened Web.) This unlocks my level 3 spell, Stinking Cloud.

-I rest again to regain spell slots and keep my expanded spell slots.

-Repeat as prudent to achieve level 9 spell slots.

*RedMage, I respectfully disagree with your analysis. Based on my interpretation of the rules as written and the evidence I have provided, I still say the Elven Generalist Domain Wizard is RAW legal, and I have allowed this combo in-game as GM. You too have stated your points. Let us agree to disagree at present on this matter.

*To Others: Assuming minimum CL is enforced, this trick probably won't work beyond level 2 or 3 slots at the very best at character level 1, and even then, it requires things such as Spellgifted, masterwork holy symbols, and other CL boosters likely unavailable.

[Jay R]

Out of idle curiosity, does anybody know of any DM that has actually allowed this in his or her game?

[RedMage125]

The CL 5 minimum for the fireball could only be an example if a general rule about how to find the minimum CL of a spell existed. since there is no such rule, the fireball minimum is nothing but a distinct rule that applies to no spell except the fireball.
There is a rule. All of you claiming there is not, or that it only applies to scrolls, are being either lazy, or intentionally obtuse (which is trolling). Take your pick.

FROM THE PLAYER'S HANDBOOK, page 171 (which was already said on post #5)
"You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the
caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell
in question, and all level-dependent features must be based on the
same caster level. For example, at 10th level, Mialee can cast a fireball
to a range of 800 feet for 10d6 points of damage. If she wishes, she
can cast a fireball that deals less damage by casting the spell at a lower
caster level, but she must reduce the range according to the selected
caster level, and she can’t cast fireball with a caster level lower than
5th (the minimum level required for a wizard to cast fireball)."

From the SRD:
"You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question, and all level-dependent features must be based on the same caster level."

Okay, so bold added for emphasis, underline for more emphasis. Also added bold to the words "for example", for the people who insist on the ridiculous claim that this rule only applies to the spell Fireball.

Is everyone clear now? The minimum caster level in question varies from character to character, based on the class that allows them to cast that spell.

So a Monk 13/Ur-Priest 7 has a minimum caster level for 3rd level spells of 3.
A Wizard 10/Ur-Priest 7, even though he has a MAXIMUM (default) caster level of 12 for his divine spells (half wiz CL+Ur-Priest levels), may cast 3rd level divine spells with a minimum caster level of 3, because 3 is the lowest caster level that an Ur-Priest may cast 3rd level divine spells.

The reason this rule is also mentioned in scrolls is because it affects the price-point of scrolls. An NPC scroll creator/vendor who is a Sorceror with Scribe Scroll will have slightly different prices than what is mentioned in the DMG for the scrolls he makes. But the listed prices for scrolls based on Spell Level in the DMG assumes that the person making the scrolls was the class with the lowest caster level possible (except Flame Strike, which, oddly, is not listed as a 4th level spell, even though it's 4th level for druids).
Note the spell Glibness. It is a 3rd level spell, but the price point for the scroll is 525, instead of 375, like most other 3rd level spells. That is because the spell is ONLY a Bard spell, and minimum CL for L3 Bard spells is 7, while the other spells, which appear on the Wizard spell list, have a minimum CL of 5 for the scroll. The math for a scroll's price (assuming no expensive material component) is 25gpxSpell LevelxCaster Level. If you doubt what I am saying, go check the math for yourself.


My logic for Versatile Spellcaster, Domain Wizard, and Elven Generalist Wizard is below. I assume these still work together*. I also assumed minimum caster level wasn't a requirement for most spells due to a lack of SRD information on such. Originally, I disregarded Heighten Spell, but it may be needed to get this thing going.
For the sake of showing you why you are wrong, I will likewise assume your DM allowed you to be both EGW and Domain Wizard, even though default RAW is that you cannot.



-I have Versatile Spellcaster, meaning I can convert 2 level 1 spells into a level 2 spell and immediately cast it. (Let's say I cast a Heightened Grease which is in all ways a level 2 spell.)
This will work, but you'd have to take a full-round action to cast the Heightened spell, as per the RAW for casting spells spontaneously with metamagic feats added. Remember, Versatile Spellcaster is ONLY for spontaneous casters, which the wizard meets by taking Alarcitous Cogitation. But when using this, you must follow all the rules for spontaneous spellcasting.



-Because I just cast a level 2 spell, I automatically and immediately unlock my level 2 domain slot and level 2 domain spell. My bonus slot from EGW moves to level 2 from level 1.
This is where you went wrong. Everything about this is wrong.
From Unearthed Arcana:
"A domain wizard prepares and casts spells like a normal wizard. However, a domain wizard gains one bonus spell per spell level, which must be filled with the spell from that level of the domain spell list (or with a lower-level domain spell that has been altered with a metamagic feat)."

Nothing about that says you can get a "bonus spell slot" suddenly in the middle of the day, therefore you cannot. A normal wizard (and domain wizards prepare and cast like "normal wizards") refreshes her spell slots after 8 hours of rest, prepares spells in those slots, and may then only cast those prepared spells. When you finished resting, you only had L1 slots, so only those slots were refreshed. You can CAST a L2 spell by spending two L1 slots, which is not the same as having L2 spell slots.

Furthermore, since, at the time when you finish resting and are preparing your spells, you only have L1 slots, your EGW slot is L1. It does not "float" because no rule says that it does. In fact, the RAW for EGW say that an EGW may prepare an extra spell of the highest level she knows. Which means that, unlike the two L1 slots the "Leapfrog Wizard" is leaving blank in order to use Versatile Spellcaster for, the EGW bonus slot MUST have a prepared spell in it.

Everything you said after this falls apart because of this.



-After resting and preparing spells, I still have my additional level 2 spell slots.
No, you have only L1 spell slots, because you don't get a bonus spell slot for a level of spell you don't have regular slots for. PHB pages 7 and 8.



-I use Heighten Spell on whatever domain spell I just learned combined with Versatile Spellcaster to cast a level 3 spell. (Let's assume I picked the Conjuration domain and learned Web. Thus, I combined two Webs into a Heightened Web.) This unlocks my level 3 spell, Stinking Cloud.
EVEN IF, by some miracle, your DM allowed this farce to continue to this point, it fails here.
First off, in order to use Versatile Spellcaster, you must be spontaneously casting those spells. Which means those spell slots must be left blank, with no spell prepared in them. EGW says that an extra spell of your highest level may be prepared each day.

Which means that, even by the most generous, most broken, most munchink-y reading of this "trick", IT STILL DOES NOT WORK. Because if you only have 2 slots of a given level, and one of them is EGW slot, you cannot use it Alarcitous Cogitation and Versatile Spellcasting in combination to cast a higher level spell.



-I rest again to regain spell slots and keep my expanded spell slots.

-Repeat as prudent to achieve level 9 spell slots.

*RedMage, I respectfully disagree with your analysis. Based on my interpretation of the rules as written and the evidence I have provided, I still say the Elven Generalist Domain Wizard is RAW legal, and I have allowed this combo in-game as GM. You too have stated your points. Let us agree to disagree at present on this matter.
What you do at your table is your business. I have a handful (about 5 or so) of houserules that I use myself, and my players are made aware of them. I make a point to never tell someone they are having "badwrongfun". If you and your players enjoy playing it that way, don't let me or anyone else tell you to change it.

HOWEVER, don't go saying that it's RAW-legal to other people. When discussing whether or not something is "true" in D&D, only RAW counts (because all houserules are impossible to account for, no houserule is valid for purposes of such a discussion). And it is not RAW, it's your DM Ruling on those rules. Which, for your players, amounts to the same thing, authority-wise. But here, in this discussion, does not.

The evidence you provided is the same evidence I provided. The difference is that I have showed, using said evidence, that a domain wizard is "specializing in a domain instead of an entire school" (Unearthed Arcana, page 57). Since EGW does not HAVE the ability to specialize in a school (having given it up to take an ACF), she may not take the alternative. You have yet to address this point (that of giving up the specialization and that domain wizard IS, in fact, specializing), except to quote the redundant text taht domain wizard cannot also specialize in a school (which is redundant with the text that says "INSTEAD of an entire school"), and ignore my points. You haven't ADDRESSED what I've said, you've just repeated what you have said.

I get that we disagree. And I do not want you to think I am telling you that what you are doing in your game is "wrong". I am saying it is not RAW. Which is not the same thing. I firmly believe that D&D is a game that THRIVES on houserules, and I fully endorse the idea of customizing the game to the people playing it. So please, when you respond, do not get defensive of what YOU choose to do. This is an academic discussion point about what is, and is not RAW.


*To Others: Assuming minimum CL is enforced, this trick probably won't work beyond level 2 or 3 slots at the very best at character level 1, and even then, it requires things such as Spellgifted, masterwork holy symbols, and other CL boosters likely unavailable.
Like I said, it works in the "sacrifice 2 L1 slots to cast a L2 spell".

I'm actually skeptical about the L2 Domain spell being able to suddenly be known and cast like that, but there seems the be plenty of RAW to support it (which is different from "no RAW against it". There are actual, explicit rules that are worded to support this). But I don't like it.

However, your example of a Heightened L1 spell was perfect. That is, in every way, a perfectly valid RAW use of Alarcitous Cogitation and Versatile Spellcaster being used together. Just remember, that two of those L1 spell slots need to be left empty (which must be your default L1 spell and your bonus slot form high INT, as the domain slot MUST be filled with the domain spell, and therefore cannot be left blank) in order to use the AC+VS combo to cast that L2 spell. And your CL remains 1, but the DC will go up, as it it considered a L2 spell. And what I said before about casting it as a full-round action.

To be clear, the AC+VS combo works in this manner once you actually HAVE the higher-level spell slots to sacrifice. So a Level 3 Wizard can leave her default L2 slot and her bonus L2 slot from high INT empty to spontaneously cast a L3 spell that she knows. But (assuming your DM allows, as a houserule, the Domain+EGW combo) your Domain spell slot MUST be filled with the domain spell for that level, and the EGW bonus L2 slot MUST have a spell prepared in it (as per the rules in Races of the Wild for EGW). Which means those spell slots are unavailable for the AC+VS combo, because they must be left empty in order to spontaneously cast (Alarcitous Cogitation) and one must be using spontaneous casting slots in order to combine them for a higher-level slot (Versatile Spellcaster).

Arguably, this allows a caster to meet Feat/Prestige Class requirements of "Must be able to CAST level x arcane spells" (where x is the level of the spell being cast with VS). Or even "must be able to spontaneously cast level x arcane spells". But does not meet the prerequisite of "must be able to prepare and cast level x arcane spells", since the level x spell is not being prepared.

But none of that even requires EGW to achieve.

EDIT:

Out of idle curiosity, does anybody know of any DM that has actually allowed this in his or her game?

Endarire says he has allowed it as a GM. Which is fine for his game. I simply maintain that such is a houserule, and does not constitute RAW.

[RedMage125]

Not a double post, because it's been hours.

I started a new thread on this topic, debunking all the points of the "trick". I've collected all the numerous reasons why it does not work by RAW and put them together.

Here's the link:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?502321-Fallacy-of-Elven-Generalist-Domain-Wizard-quot-Leapfrog-Wizard-quot&p=21260984#post21260984

[Quertus]

There is a rule. All of you claiming there is not, or that it only applies to scrolls, are being either lazy, or intentionally obtuse (which is trolling). Take your pick.

Although I'll gladly cop to being lazy (a maxim of software development is "all good programmers are lazy"), in this case, I'm being pedantic. Rules Lawyers such as myself, and discussions of RAW, thrive on being pedantic.

Taking the rule on scrolls and applying it elsewhere is a dangerous precedent.

Claiming that this trick does not work by RAW for the rest of the reasons you list is fine, and sufficient to debunk it.

However, attempting to tie caster level to spell slots is dangerous. Effective class level is what determines slots.

Consider: when you use items that boost your caster level, do they give you additional spell slots? No.

When you receive (pardon my incorrect terms here) "temporary negative levels" ("energy drain"?), do you lose spells? Yes, according to a very specific, one-off formula. But does it state that you lose access to xth level spells? No.

To the best of my knowledge (and, by all means, correct me if I'm wrong - I've made no claims of omniscience, and will cop to ignorance of you know something I don't), there is no rule that explicitly removes spell slots due to temporary, involuntary caster level loss.

The various quoted texts are, IMO, best read that you cannot voluntarily lower your caster level below the minimum class level to obtain the spell normally (everyone can obtain every 2nd level spell via Arcane Spellcaster using Imbue with Spell Ability, for example).

I believe there's even a comic about D&D overloading terms to commit the logical fallacy of four (or more) parts.


FROM THE PLAYER'S HANDBOOK, page 171 (which was already said on post #5)
"You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the
caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell
in question, and all level-dependent features must be based on the
same caster level. For example, at 10th level, Mialee can cast a fireball
to a range of 800 feet for 10d6 points of damage. If she wishes, she
can cast a fireball that deals less damage by casting the spell at a lower
caster level, but she must reduce the range according to the selected
caster level, and she can’t cast fireball with a caster level lower than
5th (the minimum level required for a wizard to cast fireball)."

From the SRD:
"You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question, and all level-dependent features must be based on the same caster level."

Okay, so bold added for emphasis, underline for more emphasis. Also added bold to the words "for example", for the people who insist on the ridiculous claim that this rule only applies to the spell Fireball.

Is everyone clear now? The minimum caster level in question varies from character to character, based on the class that allows them to cast that spell.

[Dr.Zero]

This is the part that confuses me. How can you say something does work when by RAW it is restricted by the CL, but you can't actually define what CL is?

Shouldn't that lead to a RAW reading of "has no RAW definition, because a chunk of it cannot be defined"? If you're translating a sentence and hit a word you can't translate, you can't just assume that word isn't important and pretend it's not there.

I'm VERY far from being an expert like most people here are (in my group we use mostly basic classes, not necessarily core ones, but we are for sure quite conservative: for example, we have started to introduce psionics recently), but, on a simple logic point, I agree completely with you.

To explain the reasoning to the others: RAW are the rules as they would be interpreted by a dumb, deterministic, unable to learn robot (or, equivalently, by a program with the same features).

Now, if our program/robot must use that rule, it goes to find and retrieve the CL.

If CL isn't defined/doesn't exist (and no "default rule for undefined values" exists either) one of these things happens:
1) the robot/program stops, unable to apply the rule at all (usually in strongly typed programming languages it is an error like "Compiler error: 'CL_of_spell' used but never defined" or something on that line)
2) the robot/program goes on, "retrieving" a value which is undefined, and from there on its behaviour is undefined as well (in a real program this would mean reading a memory cell which contains an unknown value, which might vary between 0-max_number_range)

Saying: "Since it isn't defined explicitly, I can use the value I prefer (and I use the one which breaks the game)", isn't RAW, it's RANI (it's the equivalent to go to the keyboard and add manually a CL value for our robot... and giving it a undesired value on purpose!). It requires an intervention, so it isn't RAW.

My 2 cents.

[RedMage125]

Although I'll gladly cop to being lazy (a maxim of software development is "all good programmers are lazy"), in this case, I'm being pedantic. Rules Lawyers such as myself, and discussions of RAW, thrive on being pedantic.

Taking the rule on scrolls and applying it elsewhere is a dangerous precedent.
It's not "taking the rule on scrolls and applying it elsewhere".
How about from the first page of Chapter 1 of the PHB:
"In addition to having a high ability score, a spellcaster
must be of high enough class level to be able to cast spells of
a given spell level. (See the class descriptions in Chapter 3
for details.) For instance, the wizard Mialee has an
Intelligence score of 15, so she’s smart enough to get one bonus 1stlevel
spell and one bonus 2nd-level spell. (She will not actually get
the 2nd-level spell until she is 3rd level wizard, since that’s the minimum
level a wizard must be to cast 2nd-level spells.)"

AND the rule on page 171, which tells you how caster level plays into it.


However, attempting to tie caster level to spell slots is dangerous. Effective class level is what determines slots.

Consider: when you use items that boost your caster level, do they give you additional spell slots? No.
It's not tied like that, you're extrapolating. Effective class level determines slots, yes. But all spells above 1st level have a minimum Caster Level in order to be cast. What that level is depends on the class the caster is using to cast it.
Scrying is a good example. It's a Brd 3, Clr 5, Drd 4, Sor/Wiz 4 spell. For Bards, Wizards, and Druids, minimum CL is 7. For Sorcs, it's 8, and for Clerics, it's 9.




When you receive (pardon my incorrect terms here) "temporary negative levels" ("energy drain"?), do you lose spells? Yes, according to a very specific, one-off formula. But does it state that you lose access to xth level spells? No.

To the best of my knowledge (and, by all means, correct me if I'm wrong - I've made no claims of omniscience, and will cop to ignorance of you know something I don't), there is no rule that explicitly removes spell slots due to temporary, involuntary caster level loss.

Yes you do, actually, due to the rules on PHB pages 7-8 and 171. Negative levels also make you considered to be lower level.

Example. Mialee the 6th level wizard has 3 3rd level spells prepared. She gets hit with 2 negative levels. She loses two prepared spells of her highest level (3rd). Her caster level is also reduced to 4, she is considered a 4-HD creature, and a 4th level wizard. So even though she still has one 3rd level spell prepared, she cannot cast it. When Jozan hits her with a Restoration spell and the negative levels go away, she can once again cast that 3rd level spell she still has prepared, but she does not get back the two prepared spells that she lost. She must rest to refresh those slots and then prepare new ones.



The various quoted texts are, IMO, best read that you cannot voluntarily lower your caster level below the minimum class level to obtain the spell normally (everyone can obtain every 2nd level spell via Arcane Spellcaster using Imbue with Spell Ability, for example).

I believe there's even a comic about D&D overloading terms to commit the logical fallacy of four (or more) parts.
Again, the first page of chapter one of the PHB (page 7) spells out that you must be of a high enough class level to cast a spell.

Imbue with Spell Ability uses the stats, including CL, of the cleric who cast IwSA. I don't see how that applies here.

[zergling.exe]

-snip-

Here's something to help your argument: Every time you mention CL (caster lever) instead use spellcaster level. CL is easy to boost and determines save DCs and damage. Spellcaster level is only gained through levels in classes granting spellcasting, and is what determines spells per day and spells known.

[RedMage125]

Here's something to help your argument: Every time you mention CL (caster lever) instead use spellcaster level. CL is easy to boost and determines save DCs and damage. Spellcaster level is only gained through levels in classes granting spellcasting, and is what determines spells per day and spells known.

Caster Level is the term the books use.

Also, it's spellcasting ability modifier that affects spell DCs, not caster level.

[Andezzar]

Spellcaster level/level in a spellcasting class is a different property. It is only loosely related to caster level

[Quertus]

It's not "taking the rule on scrolls and applying it elsewhere".
How about from the first page of Chapter 1 of the PHB:
"In addition to having a high ability score, a spellcaster
must be of high enough class level to be able to cast spells of
a given spell level. (See the class descriptions in Chapter 3
for details.)

The original post to which I was replying referenced item creation rules, and extrapolating a generalized rule from there. I rejected such extrapolation.

The original appearance in the PH is what led me to determine "be able to cast" / "can cast" is best read as, "is of sufficient class level to receive base slots".


It's not tied like that, you're extrapolating. Effective class level determines slots, yes. But all spells above 1st level have a minimum Caster Level in order to be cast.

Actually, I'm being pedantic, and explicitly not extrapolating. Because it is not worded explicitly that way, I am searching for all possible interpretations, throwing away the silly ("why should it matter what level of the dungeon we are on?"), and attempting to choose the reading that is most consistent.


Example. Mialee the 6th level wizard has 3 3rd level spells prepared. She gets hit with 2 negative levels. She loses two prepared spells of her highest level (3rd). Her caster level is also reduced to 4, she is considered a 4-HD creature, and a 4th level wizard. So even though she still has one 3rd level spell prepared, she cannot cast it. When Jozan hits her with a Restoration spell and the negative levels go away, she can once again cast that 3rd level spell she still has prepared, but she does not get back the two prepared spells that she lost. She must rest to refresh those slots and then prepare new ones.

If this is an example from the book, then I guess I have to concede the point. But if this is just you explaining your PoV, well, I understand that's what you're saying, but I don't read it that way.


Imbue with Spell Ability uses the stats, including CL, of the cleric who cast IwSA. I don't see how that applies here.

My poorly written point is actually best expressed here: we need to define what is meant by "can cast".

Because I believe it is best defined as "has a slot zero or more base slots of the appropriate level".

Consistently reading it this way for bonus spells for high stats, item creation, bonus domain spells for clerics, bonus domain spells for domain wizard, and anywhere else it appears, seems the simplest solution, and therefore the one I have always used, and the one I believe most likely to be correct.

However, under this reading, replacing all "can cast"-style text accordingly, there is, to the best of my knowledge, nothing that explicitly ties caster level (as distinct from class level) to ability to cast spells.

In pure English, when Imbue with Spell Ability is used, suddenly, the character "can cast" a second level spell.

Similarly, if "can cast" is defined as you have indicated, I'm fairly sure that the combo works.

Because the mage could sacrifice 2 1st level spells to cast a second level spell, by English, they "can cast" a 2nd level spell, and therefore get their domain bonus spell. Because they could sacrifice that as yet unprepared slot and their floating slot, they "can cast" a 3rd level spell, and therefore get their 3rd level domain slot. Etc etc etc.

But, because I consistently read "can cast" in all your quoted examples, and domain wizard, the same way I do for bonus spells by high stat, as "must be of sufficient class level to possess a base slot", a) I read RAW as saying that spell access is neither granted not lost for changes in caster level (other than as explicitly called out under, um, "energy drain"?, where it is not causal - energy drain causes loss of caster level, loss of spell slots, loss of HP, etc); b) one does not get bonus domain spells simply by having the option to cast spells above their normal slots by level.

[RedMage125]

The original post to which I was replying referenced item creation rules, and extrapolating a generalized rule from there. I rejected such extrapolation.

The original appearance in the PH is what led me to determine "be able to cast" / "can cast" is best read as, "is of sufficient class level to receive base slots".

That's an accurate re-wording of what the rules say.



Actually, I'm being pedantic, and explicitly not extrapolating. Because it is not worded explicitly that way, I am searching for all possible interpretations, throwing away the silly ("why should it matter what level of the dungeon we are on?"), and attempting to choose the reading that is most consistent.
What I've been telling you IS consistent.

It's just that "caster level" is tied to effective class level. The minimum effective class level to cast a spell is also the minimum caster level for such a spell.

Does that make more sense?



If this is an example from the book, then I guess I have to concede the point. But if this is just you explaining your PoV, well, I understand that's what you're saying, but I don't read it that way.
I double-checked and realized I made one mistake. When Restoration removes the negative levels, Mialee gets those 2 lost ones back.

Here's the RAW (PHB Glossary):
"negative level: A loss of vital energy resulting from energy drain,
spells, magic items, or magical effects. For each negative level
gained, a creature takes a –1 penalty on all attack rolls, saving
throws, skill checks, and ability checks, loses 5 hit points, and takes a
–1 penalty to effective level. (That is, whenever the creature’s level is
used in a die roll or calculation, reduce its value by 1 for each
negative level.) In addition, a spellcaster loses one spell or spell slot
from the highest spell level castable. If two or more spells fit this
criterion, the caster decides which one becomes inaccessible. The
lost spell becomes available again as soon as the negative level is
removed, providing the caster would be capable of using it at that
time. Negative levels remain in place for 24 hours after acquisition,
or until removed. After that period, the negative level goes away, but
the afflicted creature must make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + 1/2 the
attacker’s Hit Dice + the attacker’s Cha modifier) to determine
whether there is a lasting effect. If the saving throw succeeds, there
is no harm to the character. Otherwise, the creature’s character level
drops by one and any benefits acquired with that level are lost. The
afflicted creature must make a separate saving throw for each
negative level possessed."

So..when your effective level and caster level are reduced to below the minimum to cast a spell, you cannot cast that spell as per the normal rules regarding minimum caster level. If Mialee had taken 3 negative levels, she would have lost all 3 of her prepared L3 spells. And if only one of those negative levels were removed (leaving her with 2 negative levels and an effective level of 4), while she would have regained the prepared spell, she would not be able to cast a L3 spell until her Caster Level was again sufficient.




My poorly written point is actually best expressed here: we need to define what is meant by "can cast".

Because I believe it is best defined as "has a slot zero or more base slots of the appropriate level".

Consistently reading it this way for bonus spells for high stats, item creation, bonus domain spells for clerics, bonus domain spells for domain wizard, and anywhere else it appears, seems the simplest solution, and therefore the one I have always used, and the one I believe most likely to be correct.
While not the exact wording used, that reading will usually net you the correct results.



However, under this reading, replacing all "can cast"-style text accordingly, there is, to the best of my knowledge, nothing that explicitly ties caster level (as distinct from class level) to ability to cast spells.

Except the text on PHB 171.
Look, 9/10 times, it's redundant, because a character's CASTER LEVEL will not be lower than their effective level in that spellcasting class (Paladins and Rangers are their own monsters, let's only discuss classes which get spells right away).
But Negative Levels are a factor, because until 24 hours have passed and the Fort Save is attempted and failed, the victim of a negative level hasn't ACTUALLY lost levels. But they reduce how many HD the individual is considered to be, and caster level. That's why I used the example I did. With Mialee's CASTER LEVEL reduced to 4, she can no longer cast a L3 spell, even though she REMAINS a 6th level Wizard. Negative levels are a status effect that can be removed.



In pure English, when Imbue with Spell Ability is used, suddenly, the character "can cast" a second level spell.
That's a temporary effect, however, that lasts until discharged. You couldn't use IwSA on a Fighter, for example, to let him qualify for a Feat or Prestige Class with a prerequisite of "ability to cast divine spells".



Similarly, if "can cast" is defined as you have indicated, I'm fairly sure that the combo works.

Because the mage could sacrifice 2 1st level spells to cast a second level spell, by English, they "can cast" a 2nd level spell, and therefore get their domain bonus spell. Because they could sacrifice that as yet unprepared slot and their floating slot, they "can cast" a 3rd level spell, and therefore get their 3rd level domain slot. Etc etc etc.
A few things here.
RAI for Versatile Spellcaster was that spontaneous casters who run out of higher level slots would still be able to cast their higher-level spells by burning lower-level slots. So a Sorc 6 who runs out of L3 spells can burn two L2 slots and cast any L3 spell that he knows. That is the most basic function of the feat. That same Sorc 6 trying to burn 2 L3 spells to cast a L4 spell would be wasted because he doesn't "know" any L4 spells.
Now, by the RAW, a Domain Wizard "automatically adds each new domain spell to her list of known spells as soon as she becomes able to cast it." But that's a bit complicated, isn't it? Because Wizards don't have a "spells known" list, they have a spellbook. All their spells "known" are written in there. The next line in UA even supports that by saying that the domain spell does not count against her two spells known per level (which go into the spellbook). So her domain spell "known" is supposed to go in her spellbook, like the rest of her spells.
Now EVEN IF one accepts that using AC+VS to burn two L1 slots to "cast a L2 spell" means that she suddenly "knows" her L2 domain spell, we have no means of overcoming the default rules for casting L2 spells, which is that she must be of an appropriate level to cast L2 spells AND have a CL of at least 3 (the only specific exception to this rule is Precocious Apprentice). So, the proponents of this trick, can ARGUABLY claim that doing this adds their L2 domain spell to their list of "spells known" (even though it obviously does not spontaneously appear in their spellbook), but they CANNOT cast a L2 spell. Which is why I used the example of a Heightened L1 spell. That's still a L1 spell (because the spell, as printed, says so), but takes up a higher spell slot, and counts as higher for purposes of save DC.
Finally, there is no "floating slot". The EGW can PREPARE an extra spell each day of the highest level she can cast. Those are the exact words of the ability. It's not an empty "bonus slot" like a sorcerer uses. The EGW thus only GETS an extra spell of the highest level per day IF she prepared said extra spell.
Nothing in the RAW says this spell slot "floats", ergo, it does not.


But, because I consistently read "can cast" in all your quoted examples, and domain wizard, the same way I do for bonus spells by high stat, as "must be of sufficient class level to possess a base slot", a) I read RAW as saying that spell access is neither granted not lost for changes in caster level (other than as explicitly called out under, um, "energy drain"?, where it is not causal - energy drain causes loss of caster level, loss of spell slots, loss of HP, etc); b) one does not get bonus domain spells simply by having the option to cast spells above their slots by level.
You are correct. Since the DW cannot actually CAST a L2 spell, even though she can access a L2 spell slot by sacrificing 2 L1 slots in accordance with AC+VS, she does not meet the prerequisite to get her L2 domain spell "known", and her EGW extra prepared spell must be of L1.
I'm sorry if I was confusing with my usage of "can cast". I've been attempting to show why the trick fails on each level it fails on, which occasionally requires me to-for the sake of argument-allow some of the prior nonsense, because there's SO MUCH in the RAW that a DM must ignore, handwaive or houserule in order to make the "trick" work.

[Lorddenorstrus]

Out of idle curiosity, does anybody know of any DM that has actually allowed this in his or her game?

I have played a character using this. My DM didn't mind. Campaign ongoing not played often due to our busy schedules. But it's been fun so far.

[Quertus]

I double-checked and realized I made one mistake. When Restoration removes the negative levels, Mialee gets those 2 lost ones back.

Here's the RAW (PHB Glossary):
"negative level: A loss of vital energy resulting from energy drain,
spells, magic items, or magical effects. For each negative level
gained, a creature takes a –1 penalty on all attack rolls, saving
throws, skill checks, and ability checks, loses 5 hit points, and takes a
–1 penalty to effective level. (That is, whenever the creature’s level is
used in a die roll or calculation, reduce its value by 1 for each
negative level.) In addition, a spellcaster loses one spell or spell slot
from the highest spell level castable. If two or more spells fit this
criterion, the caster decides which one becomes inaccessible. The
lost spell becomes available again as soon as the negative level is
removed, providing the caster would be capable of using it at that
time. Negative levels remain in place for 24 hours after acquisition,
or until removed. After that period, the negative level goes away, but
the afflicted creature must make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + 1/2 the
attacker’s Hit Dice + the attacker’s Cha modifier) to determine
whether there is a lasting effect. If the saving throw succeeds, there
is no harm to the character. Otherwise, the creature’s character level
drops by one and any benefits acquired with that level are lost. The
afflicted creature must make a separate saving throw for each
negative level possessed."

My epic level mage takes lots of negative levels. Then chooses to fail all of his saving throws. RAW, he a) does not recover the spells lost to negative levels; but b) never lost the rest of his spells, and so c) could still have a memorized 9th (or higher!) level spell... at first level.

A completely different trick, but is that consistent with what you've said?


Now, by the RAW, a Domain Wizard "automatically adds each new domain spell to her list of known spells as soon as she becomes able to cast it." But that's a bit complicated, isn't it? Because Wizards don't have a "spells known" list, they have a spellbook. All their spells "known" are written in there. The next line in UA even supports that by saying that the domain spell does not count against her two spells known per level (which go into the spellbook). So her domain spell "known" is supposed to go in her spellbook, like the rest of her spells.

My wizard goes up a level, and learns 2 new spells, which "magically appear" in his spellbook (some people take issue with that; let's just take that as a given pls). Let's say one of those spells is "Wall of Chocolate". Then my spellbook is stolen, spontaneously combusts, becomes the new body for the Dark Lord, whatever. Even so, Wall of Chocolate still counts as one of my spells known. So fixating on the spellbook portion of the equation doesn't seem to actually buy you anything.

[Gemini476]

My epic level mage takes lots of negative levels. Then chooses to fail all of his saving throws. RAW, he a) does not recover the spells lost to negative levels; but b) never lost the rest of his spells, and so c) could still have a memorized 9th (or higher!) level spell... at first level.

A completely different trick, but is that consistent with what you've said?

From the quote you quoted:

[If the saving throw fails], the creature’s character level
drops by one and any benefits acquired with that level are lost.

[Quertus]

From the quote you quoted:

For maximum pedantry: what ability do I lose that matters to this trick?

The ability to memorize spells? Ok, I can't memorize new ones, but that doesn't remove the ones I've already memorized.

Spell slots? No problem, as "memorized spells" were being defined as not being spell slots.

So, what ability do I lose that invalidates this trick, under the definitions that were being argued?

EDIT: As a software developer, I find it very important to make sure you've defined your terms correctly, as minor changes can have huge unintended consequences. This is why I am far more likely to ask a DM, "are you sure?" than I am as DM to use that phrase when talking to a player.