Master spellthief...?

[justiceforall]

Hi playground,

Was reading Master Spellthief and my head started to hurt even from a simple build:

Say I took Spellthief 8/Unseen Seer 2, and had the Master Spellthief feat. What is the actual effect of the feat?

[retaliation08]

Most of its effects wouldn't work because Unseen Seer does not grant arcane casting.

The only bit that would help this build is the ASF reduction of stolen spells.

[Nifft]

Say I took Spellthief 8/Unseen Seer 2, and had the Master Spellthief feat. What is the actual effect of the feat?

You would steal spells as if you were a level 10 Spellthief.

Unfortunately you'd also cast spells as if you were a level 10 Spellthief, which is somewhat worse than what you'd get to cast as a Spellthief 1 / Wizard 4 / Unseen Seer 5.

I don't think you'd be allowed to double-count the Unseen Seer levels.

[Troacctid]

You would steal spells as if you were a level 10 Spellthief.

Unfortunately you'd also cast spells as if you were a level 10 Spellthief, which is somewhat worse than what you'd get to cast as a Spellthief 1 / Wizard 4 / Unseen Seer 5.
I mean, if you only want to steal 1st level spells, sure, I guess.

[Nifft]

I mean, if you only want to steal 1st level spells, sure, I guess. It looks like the feat explicitly says otherwise.



Master Spellthief [General]

Your spellthief levels stack with levels of other arcane spellcaster classes (that is, levels of any class that grants arcane spellcasting other than the spellthief) for the purpose of determining what level of spell you can steal. Is this somehow dysfunctional?

[retaliation08]

It depends on if you rule that it also changes the maximum number of spell levels you can store. By RAW it scales by class level, and the feat makes no explicit exception to that rule.

[Nifft]

I mean, if you only want to steal 1st level spells, sure, I guess.


It depends on if you rule that it also changes the maximum number of spell levels you can store. By RAW it scales by class level, and the feat makes no explicit exception to that rule.

She didn't say "store", she said "steal".

Thanks for trying to help.


Anyway...

The feat explicitly does allow you to steal, as far as I can see.

Am I missing something which contradicts that?

[Zaq]

She didn't say "store", she said "steal".

Thanks for trying to help.


Anyway...

The feat explicitly does allow you to steal, as far as I can see.

Am I missing something which contradicts that?

You are technically correct in that you can use Steal Spell to rip the spell out of an opponent’s head and deny them the potential use of it, but since you can’t store it and can’t cast it, this is often significantly less interesting than, you know, gaining the spell and using it against them. Which is what the term “Steal Spell” implies, especially given the way that the base Spellthief functions.

You are, as I said, technically correct given the wording of the ability. You are using the ability called Steal Spell and removing an opponent’s ability to cast a given spell. All of that is true. But simply denying the opponent the use of the spell without taking it for yourself, regardless of whether the ability is actually called “Steal Spell” or not, feels less like spell theft and more like spell vandalism.

A pure Spellthief is like a Disarm specialist, while a Master Spellthief with minimal levels in the actual ST class is more like a Sunder specialist, pretending for a moment that focusing on either of those combat maneuvers was viable in the way the devs occasionally seemed to think.

[Nifft]

You are technically correct in that you can use Steal Spell to rip the spell out of an opponent’s head and deny them the potential use of it, but since you can’t store it and can’t cast it, this is often significantly less interesting than, you know, gaining the spell and using it against them. Which is what the term “Steal Spell” implies, especially given the way that the base Spellthief functions.

You are, as I said, technically correct given the wording of the ability. You are using the ability called Steal Spell and removing an opponent’s ability to cast a given spell. All of that is true. But simply denying the opponent the use of the spell without taking it for yourself, regardless of whether the ability is actually called “Steal Spell” or not, feels less like spell theft and more like spell vandalism.

A pure Spellthief is like a Disarm specialist, while a Master Spellthief with minimal levels in the actual ST class is more like a Sunder specialist, pretending for a moment that focusing on either of those combat maneuvers was viable in the way the devs occasionally seemed to think. The term "Steal Spell" implies the ability Steal Spell (Su), which is literally the name of the main Spellthief ability, and which includes the rules for storing & casting stolen spells. There isn't a separate section for storing or casting. It's all in Steal Spell (Su).

If you can steal spell as an Xth level Spellthief, it's plausibly RAW that you can also store & cast that spell, since that's part of the same ability. Not certain, but arguable.

The example makes that reasoning explicit -- your logic is invalid unless you can disqualify the example text.



Your spellthief levels stack with levels of other arcane spellcaster classes (that is, levels of any class that grants arcane spellcasting other than the spellthief) for the purpose of determining what level of spell you can steal. For example, a 4th-level spellthief/4th-level wizard could steal spells of up to 4th level, as if he were an 8th-level spellthief.

There is a coherent reading which doesn't invalidate any text.

That reading is preferable IMHO.


RAI, it's not even a close contest. You take the feat so you can Steal Spell as an Xth level Spellthief, and you ought to get whatever required secondary powers you need to make that happen.

[retaliation08]

I agree with you that it should work that way, but many of the multiclassing feats in 3.5 only advance part of the class feature:

Ascetic Knight
Devoted Performer
Devoted Tracker
Sacred Performer


Swift Avenger is an interesting case:

Your druid and scout levels stack for the purpose of determining the extra damage and bonus to Armor Class when skirmishing. For example, a 4th-level druid/4th-level scout deals +2d6 points of damage and gains a +2 bonus to AC when skirmishing.
This feat explicitly mentions each part of the feature that is progressed even though both AC and +Damage are part of the same feature, much like spell level stolen and spell level stored.

EDIT: The implication here is that only the specified parts of a class feature are advanced by multiclassing feats.


Your druid and scout levels also stack for the purpose of determining the number of times per day you can wild shape (but not for the size or type of creature available). For example, a 4th-level druid/4th-level scout can change form into a Small or Medium animal three times per day, but she does not gain the ability to take the shape of a Large animal.
This wording advances only wildshapes/day, but adds in the explanation, (but not for the size or type of creature available), as if the reader would assume it advances both, even though wildshape/day is a separate feature and not even gained at the same level as sizes or types except for elemental wild shape.

EDIT: Whats weird about this paragraph is that it seems to be assuming the opposite of the implication made by the first paragraph.


Your spellthief levels stack with levels of other arcane spellcaster classes (that is, levels of any class that grants arcane spellcasting other than the spellthief) for the purpose of determining what level of spell you can steal.

If it said "for the purpose of your Steal Spell feature" or similar, then what you are suggesting would be RAW. As is, I agree with you that it may be RAI, but there is evidence to the contrary to be found in the other multiclass feats.

[Doctor Awkward]

Nifft is correct.

Casting a stolen spell is explicitly a function of the "Steal Spell (Su)" class feature.
There are exactly four sentences of rules regarding this function:


After stealing a spell, a spellthief can cast the spell
himself on a subsequent turn. Treat the spell as if it
were cast by the original owner of the spell for the
purpose of determining caster level, save DC, and so
forth. A spellthief can cast this spell even if he doesn’t
have the minimum ability score normally required to
cast a spell of that level. The spellthief must supply the
same components (including verbal, somatic, material,
XP, and any focus) required for the stolen spell.

And that's it.
Therefore any spell that a spellthief is capable of stealing, he can also cast.

If it was not the intent of the feat to function like this, then the Master Spellthief feat text would exclude this function of steal spell specifically, just like the feat text of Swift Avenger does for wild shape for size and creature type.

[retaliation08]

Nifft is correct.

Casting a stolen spell is explicitly a function of the "Steal Spell (Su)" class feature.
There are exactly four sentences of rules regarding this function:



And that's it.
Therefore any spell that a spellthief is capable of stealing, he can also cast.

If it was not the intent of the feat to function like this, then the Master Spellthief feat text would exclude this function of steal spell specifically, just like the feat text of Swift Avenger does for wild shape for size and creature type.

I tend to agree but there are many more instances to the contrary.
What about the first part of Swift Avenger? Why doesn't it say "Your druid and scout levels stack for the purpose of your Skirmish feature?" It calls out each part of the feature specifically.

Then there are the other feats like Devoted Performer:

If you have levels in paladin and bard, those levels stack for the purpose of determining the bonus damage dealt by your smite evil ability and determining the number of times per day that you can use your bardic music.

This also specifies particular parts of the class feature, like the first paragraph of Swift Avenger, but to the unspecified exclusion of others: Smites/day and Bardic Music effects.

[Doctor Awkward]

I tend to agree but there are many more instances to the contrary.
What about the first part of Swift Avenger? Why doesn't it say "Your druid and scout levels stack for the purpose of your Skirmish feature?" It calls out each part of the feature specifically.

Then there are the other feats like Devoted Performer:


This also specifies particular parts of the class feature, like the first paragraph of Swift Avenger, but to the unspecified exclusion of others: Smites/day and Bardic Music effects.

For one thing, Devoted Performer and Swift Avenger are from entirely different sources than Master Spellthief and written by different authors. It's not a good idea to try and draw any correlations between them, or try to guess specific author intent as it relates to the individual feats. You don't know their intent because you weren't there. You can only interpret them by the rules text as it is written.

Secondly, because they were written by different authors for different purposes it's also not a good idea to try and use one of them as some kind of standard by which to judge the others. That's a bad idea in general for interpreting the rules. D&D is an exception-based rules system. The rules define a set of general truths and the rules list exceptions to them as needed. The only text that matters with respect to the function of a spellthief's Steal Spell supernatural ability is the description of that ability and any errata to it. Maybe the author did intent for you to only be able to steal and not cast higher level spells (even though this wouldn't make a lot of sense given the nature of how Steal Spell works), but he didn't say so in the feat. Therefore you have only the rules text provided to use.

Per the class feature a spellthief can cast any spell that they are capable of stealing. Per Master Spellthief, your levels in all arcane classes stack for the purposes of determining what level of spell you can steal, as noted on the class table in complete adventurer. Therefore, since a Spellthief 1/Wizard 7/Unseen Seer 10 has 18 levels in classes that grant arcane spellcasting, he can steal and cast up to 9th level spells.

[retaliation08]

Spell storage scales 1:1 with class level, which is different than spell level.

[Doctor Awkward]

Spell storage scales 1:1 with class level, which is different than spell level.

No it's not.

"Storing" is also a function of Steal Spell (Su).
A 4th level wizard/4th level spellthief with the Master Spellthief feat steals spells "as if he were an 8th level spellthief." An 8th level spellthief can take and cast up to 4th level spells, and up to eight total spell levels held at any one time.

If all of the functions of Steal Spell (Su) did not apply, then the feat would say so.

[Jowgen]

Nifft is correct.

I also agree with Nifft. That is all.

[Zaq]

That's kind of an interesting interpretation! I've actually never encountered that argument before. I'm not 100% certain that I buy it outright, but it would certainly make Master Spellthief more generally useful if we assume that MS advances the ability to hold stolen spells as well as the ability to steal them in the first place.

The example in Complete Scoundrel (Spellthief 4 / Wizard 4 stealing a level 4 spell) is a bit awkward because even under the most restrictive reading, 4 Spellthief levels would let you hold a stolen level 4 spell. What would be much more conclusive is if the example showed a Spellthief 3 / Wizard 5 stealing (and then holding and casting) a level 4 spell. The "as an 8th level Spellthief" clause is relevant because Spellthief 8 is when you normally get the ability to steal spells of 4th level, which is entirely consistent with the "what level of spell you can steal" clause.

And just so we're clear, I don't think anyone is advocating that a Master Spellthief who steals a given spell that they are able to hold onto for whatever reason cannot cast that stolen spell; the tricky part is in holding onto it long enough to be able to cast it, which MS doesn't advance when read restrictively. If we pretend for the sake of discussion that there's a separate game element that increases your stolen spell capacity, then sure, you can absolutely cast any spell that you steal and then hold onto until you've got an action free to cast it. The only tricky part is holding it.

The argument about advancing the entire "Steal Spell" feature is interesting. The part where I get tripped up is that it doesn't say "Spellthief stacks with other arcane classes to advance Steal Spell;" the feat says "your Spellthief levels stack with levels of other arcane spellcaster classes [. . .] for the purpose of determining what level of spell you can steal." Nothing about simply advancing the entire feature, and nothing about advancing what level of spell you can hold; the clause about how "at any one time, a Spellthief can possess a maximum number of stolen spell levels equal to his class level" would seem to be governing here. It's not contradicted by anything in the Master Spellthief feat. The argument against, for example, a Spellthief 3 / Wizard 5 stealing and then casting a 4th level spell is that the "if he steals a spell that would cause him to exceed this limit, he must choose to lose stolen spells sufficient to reduce his total number of stolen spell levels to no more than his maximum" rule would prevent him from holding the level 4 spell he can absolutely steal long enough to get an action to cast it, since Master Spellthief doesn't mention anything about how many levels of spells you can hold.

Really, I don't see why it's necessary to look outside of the self-contained paragraph that says "As a spellthief gains levels, he can choose to steal higher-level spells. At 4th level, he can steal spells of up to 2nd level, and for every two levels gained after 4th, the maximum spell level stolen increases by one."

Honestly, I'm still willing to listen to the argument that MS advances stolen spell holding capacity (if for no other reason than that I really like Spellthieves and would love to see them end up as stronger or more useful than they are), but I don't think the discussion has made a compelling link yet. I don't think it's necessarily true that advancing "what level of spell you can steal" is the same as advancing all of the different aspects of the Steal Spell class feature.

No matter what, I think we can agree that Master Spellthief is an extraordinarily unclearly-worded feat in several respects and that it bumps into edge cases more easily than the average feat might.

[justiceforall]

This is what I was afraid of when I read the feat, and then several entire threads on here and was still confused.

If my character is Spellthief 8/Unseen Seer 2 and I take Master Spellthief, is my CL 5, 10 or something else? The example from the feat appears to imply somehow it turns your Spellthief levels into full CLs?

[retaliation08]

This is what I was afraid of when I read the feat, and then several entire threads on here and was still confused.

If my character is Spellthief 8/Unseen Seer 2 and I take Master Spellthief, is my CL 5, 10 or something else? The example from the feat appears to imply somehow it turns your Spellthief levels into full CLs?

CL would be 5.

[justiceforall]

Ok, if I then took a single level of another base caster class? Like wizard, sorc, etc?

[retaliation08]

It would be CL6.

[Nifft]

The example from the feat appears to imply somehow it turns your Spellthief levels into full CLs?

The way you get mostly full casting at mostly full caster level on a Spellthief is Spellthief 1 / Wizard 4 / Unseen Seer 5, and Practiced Spellcaster (Wizard) to compensate for what Unseen Seer does to non-Divination spells.

(You get the same +3d6 Sneak Attack, too.)

[Doctor Awkward]

The best way to get "full" casting with a Spellthief build is to use the Trickster Spellthief variant from Dragon Magazine #353, pg. 85.

You give up:

2 skill points per level (4 + Int mod at each level instead of 6)
Appraise, Bluff, Disable Device, Escape Artist, Hide, Jump, Move Silently, Open Lock, Search, Swim, and Tumble are no longer class skills.
Trapfinding
No additional sneak attack dice as you level in spellthief (but you can still get more from other classes)

You gain:

Spellcasting as a bard equal to your spellthief level
Caster level equal to your class HD (instead of half HD)
Spells per day and spells known as a bard of your level
Ability to select spells known from the bard spell list


Then you can pull shenanigans on account of the specific wording of Master Spellthief by combining it with a theurge class like Ultimate Magus.

Something along the lines of Trickster Spellthief 3/Diviner 2/Unseen Seer 5/Ultimate Magus 10.

Three levels in Spellthief plus seventeen levels in other arcane casting classes gives you a caster level of 20 in both Diviner and Spellthief. Arcane Power from Ultimate Magus brings this up to 24, and Divine Power from Unseen Seer sets it to 25 for Divination spells and 23 for everything else. And you have the spellcasting of a 13th level bard, who can pull from the abjuration, divination, enchantment, illusion, and transmutation sorcerer/wizard lists any bard spell for spells known, with a 17th level Wizard.

[Doctor Awkward]

That's a tough entry into unseen seer (skill wise).

Also, doesn't it say spellcaster levels and not caster levels?

You don't have to take the classes in that order. That's just the end result at level 20.

And yeah, but the 24 would only be for Wizard. CL 16 before Arcane Power at 20 HD. Practiced Spellcaster (wizard) makes that 20. Arcane Power does not have an HD cap like the feat does. Wizard is the one that matters anyway, since it has access to higher levels of spells.

One of the tricks you can do with this is use Unseen Seer advanced learning to grab Hunter's Eye (PHBII) off of the Ranger list for an extra 1d6 of sneak attack per three caster levels you have (uncapped), and it stacks with any other sneak attack you have.

[justiceforall]

The example provided in the Feat appears to contradict your CL6 answer for wiz1/spellthief8/unseen 2:

"For example, a 4th-level spellthief/4th-level wizard could steal spells of up to 4th level, as if he were an 8th-level spellthief.
Your spellthief and arcane spellcaster levels also stack when determining your caster level for all arcane spells. The character described above would have a caster level of 8th for both his spellthief spells and his wizard spells."

Can you show me the maths for the answer?

[Doctor Awkward]

The example provided in the Feat appears to contradict your CL6 answer for wiz1/spellthief8/unseen 2:

"For example, a 4th-level spellthief/4th-level wizard could steal spells of up to 4th level, as if he were an 8th-level spellthief.
Your spellthief and arcane spellcaster levels also stack when determining your caster level for all arcane spells. The character described above would have a caster level of 8th for both his spellthief spells and his wizard spells."

Can you show me the maths for the answer?

Master Spellthief overrides the caster level that would normally be determined by class level. It does not change anything about spellcasting, except for caster level.

In your example, You have three class levels that advance arcane casting that are not spellthief, and eight class levels that are. 8 (St) + 1 (Wiz) + 2 (US) = 11. Your caster level for both Wizard and Spellthief would be 11.

If Unseen Seer is advancing Wizard, you would then have spells known and prepared as a 3rd level Wizard (one 2nd-level slot, two 1st-level slots, two, 2nd-level spells known, five 1st-level spells known, cantrips, plus specialization spells and slots, if applicable), and as an 8th level Spellthief (four 1st-level spells, and two 2nd-level spells known, with one 1st-level and zero 2nd-level spell slots per day, plus bonus slots from high Charisma, if applicable).

Class features are now counted after this. For instance, Divination Power from another level in Unseen Seer. Base caster level at that point would be 12 (Wiz 1/Spellthief 8/Unseen Seer 3), which becomes 13 for Divination spells, and 11 for everything else.

I think it's very likely the author of Master Spellthief didn't notice that normally a Spellthief only gets half his class level as his caster level (like Ranger and Paladin). So as a result of the specific wording on the feat your caster level for Spellthief effectively becomes your spellthief level.
On account of the absurdly loose requirements, you can even take it as a single-classed Spellthief after level 8 (assuming 14 Charisma, which is the minimum to cast all possible Spellthief spells).

[Darrin]

As much as I dearly love sticking to RAW, there are several examples where doing so is just plain stupid. This is one of those examples. I have seen designers do a lot of questionable things, but I like to think that they don't do stupid things *intentionally*. If we have two ambiguous interpretations, but one of them requires *intentional* stupidity to be true, then I think it's fair to say that going with the other one should be preferred by all reasonable parties.

[Doctor Awkward]

As much as I dearly love sticking to RAW, there are several examples where doing so is just plain stupid. This is one of those examples. I have seen designers do a lot of questionable things, but I like to think that they don't do stupid things *intentionally*. If we have two ambiguous interpretations, but one of them requires *intentional* stupidity to be true, then I think it's fair to say that going with the other one should be preferred by all reasonable parties.

Well, if you don't like the Master Spellthief feat because of questionable wording then house-ruling is perfectly fine.

To me, spellthief is such an astronomically underpowered class that anything that gives it more "oomph" is okay in my book.

[retaliation08]

Well, if you don't like the Master Spellthief feat because of questionable wording then house-ruling is perfectly fine.

To me, spellthief is such an astronomically underpowered class that anything that gives it more "oomph" is okay in my book.

Oh for sure. And the feat is very poorly worded. But I see the feat being used in T2+builds that dip Spellthief to abuse the feat rather than in Spellthief builds that dip other arcane classes.

[The Shadowmind]

Well, if you don't like the Master Spellthief feat because of questionable wording then house-ruling is perfectly fine.

To me, spellthief is such an astronomically underpowered class that anything that gives it more "oomph" is okay in my book.


The Spellthief should of had the Trickster ACF casting as its base, like a bard, instead of the half-caster progression. It makes no sense that the a spell-focused class should be a 4th caster, instead of being a 6th or 9th caster.

[justiceforall]

It's definitely one of the worst worded feats I've read. Hence the thread.

I was basically hoping it was going to act like some sort of scaling Practiced Caster feat that might somehow let Unseen Seer count for the signature ability.

[ottdmk]

This is what I was afraid of when I read the feat, and then several entire threads on here and was still confused.

If my character is Spellthief 8/Unseen Seer 2 and I take Master Spellthief, is my CL 5, 10 or something else? The example from the feat appears to imply somehow it turns your Spellthief levels into full CLs?I have to disagree with other interpretations of Master Spellthief as far as Caster Level goes. To quote the feat:
Your spellthief and arcane spellcaster levels also stack when determining your caster level for all arcane spells. The character described above would have a caster level of 8th for both his spellthief spells and his wizard spells.Note, not spellthief caster level, spellthief level. After taking Master Spellthief, a Spellthief has a Caster Level equal to his Class Level + the Class Level of any other Arcane Spellcasting class.

So, one possible interpretation of Spellthief 8/Unseen Seer 2 would be the character having a Caster Level of 8. I'd be inclined to be generous and allow it to be 10. At the very least it makes my brain hurt a little less.

[Doctor Awkward]

I have to disagree with other interpretations of Master Spellthief as far as Caster Level goes. To quote the feat:Note, not spellthief caster level, spellthief level. After taking Master Spellthief, a Spellthief has a Caster Level equal to his Class Level + the Class Level of any other Arcane Spellcasting class.

So, one possible interpretation of Spellthief 8/Unseen Seer 2 would be the character having a Caster Level of 8. I'd be inclined to be generous and allow it to be 10. At the very least it makes my brain hurt a little less.

Master Spellthief defines, in its text, other arcane spellcaster levels as "levels of any class that grant arcane spellcasting other than the spellthief".

Unseen Seer grants additional arcane spellcasting, so if it is advancing spellthief, you'd have Spellthief 8 + Unseen Seer 2 = caster level of 10. And you would be casting spells as a 10th level spellthief (up to 2nd level sorc/wizard spells).