PrCs that give Turn/Rebuke Undead

[Dagroth]

I just read something again and it made me think on this a bit more.

Suppose you are a LN Cleric with Rebuke Undead. When you hit level 6 (minimum level to have 8 ranks in Concentration) you take a level of Death Delver.

Why would you do that, you ask?

The wording of the PrC's Rebuke Undead class ability.


Like an evil cleric, you can rebuke undead. Use your death delver level as the cleric level for determining success and damage. You can do this a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Charisma modifier and can take the Extra Turning feat to gain additional turn attempts. If you already have the ability to rebuke undead from a previous class, death delver levels stack with those class levels for the purposes of rebuking undead.

Note that while the fourth sentence ("if you already have...") does replace the second sentence ("Use your death delver..."), it does not replace the third sentence ("You can do this...").

So now you have 2 pools of Rebuke Undead uses.

Sacred Exorcist doesn't say this!


Turn Undead (Su): Sacred exorcists can turn undead as clerics do. If a sacred exorcist has this ability from another class, her class levels stack to determine her effective turning level.

While one can infer that "turn undead as clerics do" means that you get Turn Attempts per day and the like, it does not explicitly say so. Which means that if you already do turn undead then you only get to stack class levels.

This is, like all things, subject to DM interpretation... but by RAW the Death Delver part works.

The Extra Turning Feat would only apply to one of your turning pools of course, because of the specific wording of the Feat itself.

[GilesTheCleric]

Neat find! This is why 3.5 is constantly engaging. If it were as tightly-written as MtG, then we wouldn't have half as much fun finding neat rules "loopholes".

[Dagroth]

Something else I discovered...

If you have Cleric 1 and get Turn Undead, you can later go Ur-Priest and get Rebuke Undead... and you still keep your Turn Undead!

You only have to forsake your original Divine spellcasting... not any other class features.

[Dagroth]

Okay, another thing I discovered (though this one has probably been discovered already)

Rainbow Servant 10 gives you Cleric Spell Access. However, one specific line says this:


Such spells are cast as divine spells if they don’t appear on
the sorcerer/wizard or bard spell lists.

Note that Arcane Disciple says that the Domain Spells you gain are cast using your Wisdom Modifier for Save DCs, but it doesn't say they are Divine Spells.

The "Extra Domains" section at the beginning of the Prestige Class section of Complete Divine says this about Domain Spells for non-Domain casters:


Unless the prestige class specifies otherwise, such spells are considered arcane spells when cast by arcane spellcasters.

This means that the Good, Air and Law Domain spells granted by Rainbow Servant are Arcane Spells and still use the Arcane Caster's primary Stat for determining the Save DC. Further, all the Cleric Spells are cast using the Arcane Caster's primary Stat.

It also means that the resulting 16th level character (assuming you went in using Beguiler or WarMage) now qualifies for... Mystic Theurge.

By the rules for Mystic Theurge, each level gives you +1 spellcasting for WarMage (your Arcane casting class) and +1 spellcasting for... WarMage (your Divine casting class).

Congratulations... you can get to Caster Level 20 and double-9ths.

[Malimar]

Something else I discovered...

If you have Cleric 1 and get Turn Undead, you can later go Ur-Priest and get Rebuke Undead... and you still keep your Turn Undead!

You only have to forsake your original Divine spellcasting... not any other class features.

Ur-Priest requires Evil. Evil clerics can't Turn, they can only Rebuke.

Plus I'm pretty sure forsaking your god and turning to Ur-Priest-dom counts as grossly violating the code of conduct required by most gods, and would therefore lose lose you all class features.

I suppose you could concoct a pretty specific scenario where you start out a Neutral cleric of a Neutral god of anti-theism, choosing Turn instead of Rebuke, and then fall to evil (in which case you keep Turn because "Once this choice is made, it cannot be reversed", even by switching to an incompatible alignment) and then take up Ur-Priest-dom, which is compatible with the code of conduct of a god of anti-theism. But that's kind of an extremely weird scenario.

[Troacctid]

By the rules for Mystic Theurge, each level gives you +1 spellcasting for WarMage (your Arcane casting class) and +1 spellcasting for... WarMage (your Divine casting class).

Congratulations... you can get to Caster Level 20 and double-9ths.
This one does not work. Picking the same class simply means that you add +1 to it at each Mystic Theurge level. Pretty pointless.

[Dagroth]

Ur-Priest requires Evil. Evil clerics can't Turn, they can only Rebuke.

Plus I'm pretty sure forsaking your god and turning to Ur-Priest-dom counts as grossly violating the code of conduct required by most gods, and would therefore lose lose you all class features.

I suppose you could concoct a pretty specific scenario where you start out a Neutral cleric of a Neutral god of anti-theism, choosing Turn instead of Rebuke, and then fall to evil (in which case you keep Turn because "Once this choice is made, it cannot be reversed", even by switching to an incompatible alignment) and then take up Ur-Priest-dom, which is compatible with the code of conduct of a god of anti-theism. But that's kind of an extremely weird scenario.

But what if you're a Cleric of an ideal ("Gods are terrible" is a good one for this)?


This one does not work. Picking the same class simply means that you add +1 to it at each Mystic Theurge level. Pretty pointless.

Are you sure?

The text from Mystic Theurge is pretty clear:


When a new mystic theurge level is gained, the character gains new spells per day as if he had also gained a level in any one arcane spellcasting class he belonged to before he added the prestige class and any one divine spellcasting class he belonged to previously.

The Arcane Spellcasting class you belonged to is: WarMage (or Beguiler). The Divine Spellcasting class you belonged to is: WarMage (or Beguiler) because it is the class that casts Divine Spells.

Or you could say that it gives you a level of Rainbow Servant, since that is the class that gave you Divine Spellcasting.

Of course, the text of Rainbow Servant says that it gives spellcasting every level... which is at odds with the table. If you go by the Text, you don't need the Mystic Theurge shenanigans.

If you to by the table and MT advances Rainbow Servant, then you end up at Caster Level 19.

[Troacctid]

The Arcane Spellcasting class you belonged to is: WarMage (or Beguiler). The Divine Spellcasting class you belonged to is: WarMage (or Beguiler) because it is the class that casts Divine Spells.
Right, so you add +1 to that class. And if you're thinking "Oh, it's ambiguous," the rest of the paragraph makes it pretty clear:

This essentially means that he adds the level of mystic theurge to the level of whatever other arcane spellcasting class and divine spellcasting class the character has, then determines spells per day and caster level accordingly. If a character had more than one arcane spellcasting class or more than one divine spellcasting class before he became a mystic theurge, he must decide to which class he adds each level of mystic theurge for the purpose of determining spells per day.
Add your Mystic Theurge level to your Warmage level for the purpose of determining spells per day and caster level. (And not spells known, interestingly enough.)

[Dagroth]

Right, so you add +1 to that class. And if you're thinking "Oh, it's ambiguous," the rest of the paragraph makes it pretty clear:

Add your Mystic Theurge level to your Warmage level for the purpose of determining spells per day and caster level. (And not spells known, interestingly enough.)

Ah, but he doesn't have more than one class, unless you count Rainbow Servant as the class that grants divine spellcasting. Besides, that sentence is clearly aimed at PCs who might have more than 2 spellcasting classes... for example, having Cleric, Archivist & Wizard. You would have to choose between Cleric & Archivist, but Wizard would still get the increase despite that.

Yeah, Mystic Theurge, by RAW would advance the spells per day of a Sorcerer/Favored Soul... but they would never get any new spells known. Same goes with Wizard & Archivist. So, I think you have to throw a little hand-wavium at the class for that.

[sleepyphoenixx]

You can actually get 3 turning pools that count as TU for divine feats.
One from cleric with an ACF like Rebuke Dragons or Channel Incarnum that explicitly counts as TU, Turn/Destroy from Sacred Exorcist and Rebuke/Command from Death Delver.
You could get up to 4 if you also take 4 levels of Paladin and take Rebuke Dragons (and Channel Incarnum on your cleric level). Don't do that though, it's not worth it.

If you're content with just two pools you can leave out Death Delver and not even lose any casting.

[Dagroth]

You can actually get 3 turning pools that count as TU for divine feats.
One from cleric with an ACF like Rebuke Dragons or Channel Incarnum that explicitly counts as TU, Turn/Destroy from Sacred Exorcist and Rebuke/Command from Death Delver.
You could get up to 4 if you also take 4 levels of Paladin and take Rebuke Dragons (and Channel Incarnum on your cleric level). Don't do that though, it's not worth it.

If you're content with just two pools you can leave out Death Delver and not even lose any casting.

Three, if you take Paladin for Rebuke Dragons, Cleric for Channel Incarnum & Sacred Exorcist for Turn Undead (or DN or Death Delver for Rebuke Undead), is the most optimum... since Extra Turning only adds to turning pools that affect different things. If you have both Turn Undead & Rebuke Undead, Extra Turning only adds to one of them since they both affect the same type of creature.

I'm currently trying to talk my DM into allowing Death Delver to take Rebuke Dragons... :smalltongue:

[Troacctid]

Ah, but he doesn't have more than one class, unless you count Rainbow Servant as the class that grants divine spellcasting. Besides, that sentence is clearly aimed at PCs who might have more than 2 spellcasting classes... for example, having Cleric, Archivist & Wizard. You would have to choose between Cleric & Archivist, but Wizard would still get the increase despite that.
I quoted the whole paragraph for the sake of completeness, but the operative sentence was the one that says you add your Mystic Theurge levels to the levels of the other class to determine your spells per day and caster level. So a Sha'ir 3/Mystic Theurge 10 has an effective level of 3+10=13.

[Dagroth]

I quoted the whole paragraph for the sake of completeness, but the operative sentence was the one that says you add your Mystic Theurge levels to the levels of the other class to determine your spells per day and caster level. So a Sha'ir 3/Mystic Theurge 10 has an effective level of 3+10=13.

I think you're downplaying the "And" in that sentence too much. Parsing the English it says you add your MT level to your Arcane Casting Class Level and you add your MT level to your Divine Casting Class Level. So if you're Wiz-5/Clr-5/MT-5 You're casting as a Wiz-10 & a Clr-10.

If you read it the way you imply, then you add your MT level to your Wiz Level and your Clr Level... which gives you 15. Then you determine spells per day and caster level.

[Thurbane]

This is, like all things, subject to DM interpretation... but by RAW the Death Delver part works.

The Extra Turning Feat would only apply to one of your turning pools of course, because of the specific wording of the Feat itself.

This all works as you assume, and is a known exploit to increase turning pool for DMM etc. to reduce reliance on Night Sticks and such...

[animewatcha]

Where is wording you speak of for only applying to one pool at a time? I just looked over Extra turning feat and it covers more than one pool. Also, things like Rebuke dragons, etc. explicit count as Turn Undead for pre-reqs. So Extra Turning would add to them.

[Dagroth]

Where is wording you speak of for only applying to one pool at a time? I just looked over Extra turning feat and it covers more than one pool. Also, things like Rebuke dragons, etc. explicit count as Turn Undead for pre-reqs. So Extra Turning would add to them.

The text states:


If you have the ability to turn or rebuke more than one kind of creature (such as a good-aligned cleric with access to the Fire domain, who can turn undead and water creatures and can also rebuke fire creatures), each of your turning or rebuking abilities gains four additional uses per day.

As you can see, it says "more than one kind of creature". So if you have Turn Undead & Rebuke Undead, that's only one kind of creature so Extra Turning would not apply to both.

A small number of people say that if you can Turn Undead, Rebuke Dragons & Rebuke Undead then you can rebuke more than one kind of creature so all of your pools get four additional uses. The majority says this is not RAI and only one of the Undead pools would get the extra uses (along with the Rebuke Dragons pool).

[OldTrees1]

Am I the only one that sees both Death Delver and Sacred Exorcist saying the same thing & only having 1 resulting pool?


Ability_Name:
Description_Of_The_Ability. If you already have Ability_Name or an equivalent ability, do X (instead of doing nothing).

If you can't turn/rebuke, you gain turn/rebuke. If you do have turn/rebuke, you advance turn/rebuke (instead of gaining nothing this level).

For a concrete hypothetical example:
Evasion:
Description_Of_Evasion. If you already have Evasion, gain Improved Evasion (instead of gaining nothing this level).

[Dagroth]

Am I the only one that sees both Death Delver and Sacred Exorcist saying the same thing & only having 1 resulting pool?


Ability_Name:
Description_Of_The_Ability. If you already have Ability_Name or an equivalent ability, do X (instead of doing nothing).

If you can't turn/rebuke, you gain turn/rebuke. If you do have turn/rebuke, you advance turn/rebuke (instead of gaining nothing this level).

For a concrete hypothetical example:
Evasion:
Description_Of_Evasion. If you already have Evasion, gain Improved Evasion (instead of gaining nothing this level).

Death Delver Explicitly says it gives you Rebuke Undead 3+Cha times per day. Sacred Exorcist only Implies that you get Turn Undead 3+Cha times per day... but that's the generally accepted RAI.

Neither class says "If you already Rebuke (or Turn) Undead, you don't get the ability we just said you get." They say "If you already have ability X, then the levels stack instead of only using the PrC's Level to determine the effects."

Evasion rarely says you gain Improved Evasion if you already had Evasion. Otherwise, Monk-2/Rogue-2 would have Improved Evasion.

Only specific PrCs Explicitly say you get Improved Evasion if you already had Evasion. No where else does it say that 2 classes giving you Evasion means you have Improved Evasion. Likewise, a Ring of Evasion on the finger of a Level 2 Rogue does nothing.

[OldTrees1]

Death Delver Explicitly says it gives you Rebuke Undead 3+Cha times per day. Sacred Exorcist only Implies that you get Turn Undead 3+Cha times per day... but that's the generally accepted RAI.

Neither class says "If you already Rebuke (or Turn) Undead, you don't get the ability we just said you get." They say "If you already have ability X, then the levels stack instead of only using the PrC's Level to determine the effects."

Evasion rarely says you gain Improved Evasion if you already had Evasion. Otherwise, Monk-2/Rogue-2 would have Improved Evasion.

Only specific PrCs Explicitly say you get Improved Evasion if you already had Evasion. No where else does it say that 2 classes giving you Evasion means you have Improved Evasion. Likewise, a Ring of Evasion on the finger of a Level 2 Rogue does nothing.

I'm sorry but when I read it, it still reads:

Ability Name:
Ability Description.
Duplicate Ability Clause.

Take Death Delver for example:

Like an evil cleric, you can rebuke undead. Use your death delver level as the cleric level for determining success and damage. You can do this a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Charisma modifier and can take the Extra Turning feat to gain additional turn attempts.

If you already have the ability to rebuke undead from a previous class, death delver levels stack with those class levels for the purposes of rebuking undead.
The first part is the description of the ability(a general rule)

The second part is a specific rule(you get precisely this) that trumps the general duplicate ability rule(you get nothing). This second part has, if you already have this ability and thus generally would gain nothing, you add these levels(death delver levels) as stacking with the levels the original copy is based off of(those class levels).

Sacred Exorcist has the same line(albeit paraphrased)

If a sacred exorcist has this ability from another class, her class levels stack to determine her effective turning level.

This second part is a specific rule(you get precisely this) that trumps the general duplicate ability rule(you get nothing). This second part has, if you already have this ability and thus generally would gain nothing, you add these levels(her class levels) as stacking with the levels the original copy is based off of(stack to determine her effective turning level).


PS: In regards to Evasion, you regain reading comprehension points if you can name the class I was talking about. Warning: this is a trick question. As a Hypothetical example I was writing a new Evasion that did not exist to a class. This was to use it(the hypothetical Evasion) as concrete example of the form I had previously discussed in the abstract.

[animewatcha]

Where is this small number of people? Considering the Extra turning versus Turn and Rebuke pools ( not even needing alternative pools like Rebuke Undead ) thing has been around for atleast a decade, across these forums, brilliant gameologists, WOTC forum when it was active, and even ENWorld.

One must also keep in mind that Player's Handbook 3.5 assumes only the PHB 3.5, DMG 1 and MM 3.5. Makers at that time didn't have things like one character having multiple turn pools ( outside of the basic 3 ) for RAI at that time. Specific instances outside the main big 3 allowed for multiple turn pools. Granted, there is also the special text in the feat saying each time you take the feat, each pool gets to be used 4 additional times.

Gotta love how RAW can be silly.

If gonna quote the feat, the whole thing needs to be quoted versus only going by just the particular parts that support our argument and conveniently ignoring the rest.

[Dagroth]

Again, there's nothing that says what you're saying. The wording is the key.

If you look at WarPriest, for example, it does not say it gives you Turn Undead as a Cleric... it only says it stacks with your class that gave you Turn Undead. Same with RSoP.

Sacred Exorcist & Death Delver say they give you Turn/Rebuke Undead. Then they go on to say that you Turn/Rebuke Undead using your PrC level as your Cleric Level for effect purposes. Then Death Delver specifically says how often you can Rebuke Undead. Lastly they say if you already had this ability from another class, those levels stack with your PrC levels for effect purposes.

The wording only indicates a change in how to calculate "effective level" for turning purposes. Not in an overall change in what the class gives you.

Now, optimizers (the only ones who go this far) will start with either Rebuke Dragons or Channel Incarnum. Then they'll get Rebuke Undead from Death Delver and then Turn Undead from Sacred Exorcist.

Even according to your way of reading the wording, they will get all three abilities because they didn't have said abilities already when the appropriate PrC granted them.

[Grooke]

I don't have my notes handy, but I remember a while ago reading an alternate class feature in a Ravenloft book that replaced Turn/Rebuke with something else. This still counted as Turn/Rebuke undead but frees you up for getting the other two later on (through Death Delver and/or Sacred Exorcist for example)

I'll try to find it again later.

Edit: also, if you're just going from number of pools, the domains that grant Turn/Rebuke X (like Plant) are arguably the same thing as Rebuke Dragons. I don't have the exact wording at hand so they might have important differences.

[sleepyphoenixx]

I don't have my notes handy, but I remember a while ago reading an alternate class feature in a Ravenloft book that replaced Turn/Rebuke with something else. This still counted as Turn/Rebuke undead but frees you up for getting the other two later on (through Death Delver and/or Sacred Exorcist for example)

I'll try to find it again later.

Edit: also, if you're just going from number of pools, the domains that grant Turn/Rebuke X (like Plant) are arguably the same thing as Rebuke Dragons. I don't have the exact wording at hand so they might have important differences.

The ACF that makes turning deal straight damage is in Expedition to Castle Ravenloft. The problem is that unlike Rebuke Dragons it doesn't stack with (grant a separate pool from) normal turning, anything that grants normal turning simply increases your effective turning level and makes it deal more damage.
That's nice if you're actually fighting undead (well, "nice" in the sense of doing 1d6/level of aoe damage without using a spell slot), but if you want to use DMM or other divine feats it's counterproductive.

As for using other pools to fuel divine feats, most of them explicitly require turn UNDEAD (most notably DMM). Some require elemental turning (the ones on DrM and RoS), some work with any kind of turning (Divine Spell Power iirc).
Most people care mainly about DMM though.
The thing about Rebuke Dragons (and Channel Incarnum) is that it explicitly counts as Turn Undead - it's in the description. The elemental turning domains and other sources of alternative turning generally lack that rather important clause.
Your DM may allow you to use any turning pool for DMM, but that's pretty clearly a houserule.

[GilesTheCleric]

The ACF that makes turning deal straight damage is in Expedition to Castle Ravenloft. The problem is that unlike Rebuke Dragons it doesn't stack with (grant a separate pool from) normal turning, anything that grants normal turning simply increases your effective turning level and makes it deal more damage.
That's nice if you're actually fighting undead (well, "nice" in the sense of doing 1d6/level of aoe damage without using a spell slot), but if you want to use DMM or other divine feats it's counterproductive.

As for using other pools to fuel divine feats, most of them explicitly require turn UNDEAD (most notably DMM). Some require elemental turning (the ones on DrM and RoS), some work with any kind of turning (Divine Spell Power iirc).
Most people care mainly about DMM though.
The thing about Rebuke Dragons (and Channel Incarnum) is that it explicitly counts as Turn Undead - it's in the description. The elemental turning domains and other sources of alternative turning generally lack that rather important clause.
Your DM may allow you to use any turning pool for DMM, but that's pretty clearly a houserule.

I made an argument (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?512362-Turning-Undead-vs-Other-Creatures) that all turning pools should apply for all feats and things. Nobody seemed interested in rebutting it, though.

[sleepyphoenixx]

I made an argument (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?512362-Turning-Undead-vs-Other-Creatures) that all turning pools should apply for all feats and things. Nobody seemed interested in rebutting it, though.

No offense, but that kind of thing has been debated about for ages.
I can't speak for others but personally i'd really rather not get into an another argument about it that'll end the same way it did countless times before.

Because i remember digging through books trying to find anything that clearly supports one side over the other. The "other creatures" part barely rates a two-line paragraph in the description of TU, and how it interacts with items or other abilities that affect TU is never specified. That's pretty much everything all the official books have to say about it, in fact.
That some turning-related ACFs explicitly count as Turn Undead but other alternate turning pools lack that bit doesn't help clear that up either.

The simple fact is that the RAW can be interpreted either way if your DM wants to.
In the case of DMM most DMs want the less broken interpretation - the one that doesn't give you practically unlimited metamagic.
In the case of a dedicated rebuke/command build most DMs don't want one player to walk around with 2 permanent minions per turning pool that are likely higher HD than he is, so items that increase turn undead are unlikely to affect alternative turning pools.

[Troacctid]

I made an argument (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?512362-Turning-Undead-vs-Other-Creatures) that all turning pools should apply for all feats and things. Nobody seemed interested in rebutting it, though.
As long as the feats and things ask for turning/rebuking without calling out turn/rebuke undead specifically, then sure, you can use any kind of turning/rebuking for them.

[GilesTheCleric]

No offense, but that kind of thing has been debated about for ages.

No worries. I just don't happen to have one of those threads bookmarked for easy reference; if you know of one, I'd appreciate a link.

[sleepyphoenixx]

No worries. I just don't happen to have one of those threads bookmarked for easy reference; if you know of one, I'd appreciate a link.

The only one i remember clearly was unfortunately on the old wizards forum, so it's gone now.
Not that it reached a satisfying conclusion either. There just isn't a definite ruling on non-elemental turning anywhere.
You can infer and conclude a lot one way or the other from the way they're written and various specific feats that are around, but there's no really clear general rule anywhere.

[Dagroth]

The only one i remember clearly was unfortunately on the old wizards forum, so it's gone now.
Not that it reached a satisfying conclusion either. There just isn't a definite ruling on non-elemental turning anywhere.
You can infer and conclude a lot one way or the other from the way they're written and various specific feats that are around, but there's no really clear general rule anywhere.

Which is what House Rules are for.

Of course, 3.5 is so "out of print" that if the majority of the community agrees with a House Rule, it might as well be a Standard Rule.

[GilesTheCleric]

The only one i remember clearly was unfortunately on the old wizards forum, so it's gone now.
Not that it reached a satisfying conclusion either. There just isn't a definite ruling on non-elemental turning anywhere.
You can infer and conclude a lot one way or the other from the way they're written and various specific feats that are around, but there's no really clear general rule anywhere.

I agree that it's not incredibly clear-cut, which is why I wanted to put out an argument for what I see as the minority position, to see if I couldn't get some debate going. I think the argument I made above is the stronger fluff argument, but I understand that the position you're advancing is probably the more RAW-tight (as far as it can be, in this situation).