Would you allow stacking Focused Specialist and Spontaneous Summoning?

[thorr-kan]

Would you allow stacking Focused Specialist and Spontaneous Summoning on the same conjurer? First is from Complete Mage, second is from Unearthed Arcana.

Spontaneous Summoning takes away your specialist spell/level/day and replaces it with the ability to convert a prepared spell to a summon monster spell of the same or lesser level.

Focused Specialist takes away one spell/level/day and adds two more specialist spells/level/day. It also requires an additional banned school.

I don't see any conflict here. Yea/Nay?

[Venger]

There is no conflict. One gives away a specialist slot, one gives away a base slot. Take them both if you want to, the rules allow it.

[AnimeTheCat]

Would you allow stacking Focused Specialist and Spontaneous Summoning on the same conjurer? First is from Complete Mage, second is from Unearthed Arcana.

Spontaneous Summoning takes away your specialist spell/level/day and replaces it with the ability to convert a prepared spell to a summon monster spell of the same or lesser level.

Focused Specialist takes away one spell/level/day and adds two more specialist spells/level/day. It also requires an additional banned school.

I don't see any conflict here. Yea/Nay?


There is no conflict. One gives away a specialist slot, one gives away a base slot. Take them both if you want to, the rules allow it.

I see a problem, personally. Unearthed Arcana says:



Spontaneous Summoning (ex)
"A conjurer using this variant does not gain additional spells per day for being a specialist wizard."

Based on that, and the fact that the second thing you're referencing is a Focused Specialist, I would say that if you trade away bonus spells for specializing, they're gone. That's my opinion. Focused Specialist spells are bonus spells for being a specialist wizard, and you traded those away.

[Venger]

Nope.

Spontaneous summoning means you lose the 1 extra slot/lvl you get from normally being a specialist.

Focused specialist gives you a different, unrelated pool of 1 extra slot/lvl. No conflict. Spontaneous summoning doesn't say you can never get bonus slots from somewhere else, or that if you do it ceases to function, like craven, for example and its fear vulnerability.

[thorr-kan]

I see a problem, personally. Unearthed Arcana says:
Based on that, and the fact that the second thing you're referencing is a Focused Specialist, I would say that if you trade away bonus spells for specializing, they're gone. That's my opinion. Focused Specialist spells are bonus spells for being a specialist wizard, and you traded those away.
These are specialists variants. Just because you traded the extra spells doesn't mean you stop being a specialist.

[AnimeTheCat]

I did say that it was my opinion... I realize that the points you're making are "rules legal" but the question was asked "do you see a problem" and I did. In my opinion, since the only way you can get extra spells from being a focused specialist is to first be a specialist wizard, those spells are bonus spells from being a specialist wizard which are traded away for your ability to spontaneously cast summon monster spells.

I see a problem, and that problem is bypassing the limitations I feel were intended by the ability, therefore, I said what I felt was a problem. Wizards don't need any help being awesome, their overly bloated spell list does that just fine even in the absense of alternate class features, feats, or literally anything, wizards can cause problems (just as easily as they can fix them) due to an overly inclusive spell list. I don't think that enforcing the loss of a couple of bonus spells is a bad thing for a wizard, especially when the very same class can also get augment summoning and standard action summon spells all at the same time...

The question was asked, "do you see a problem" to which my answer, and my opinion, are yes.

EDIT: Further, in my opinion, the rules say that a focused specialist gets their spells in addition to those granted by being a specialist. The alternative class feature in question doesn't grant you 0 bonus spells, it remove the reception of bonus spells all together, and you are therefore not receiving any bonus spells. Typically, when a class feature from a prestige class or other source builds on something, it cat build on "nothing". For instance, if you get in to a prestige class by using feats, and it progresses a class feature, like say meldshaping, you don't gain meldshaping levels and you don't improve meldshaping because you didn't have it to begin with. Since you don't have bonus spells to begin with, you can't improve your bonus spells with the alternate class feature.

[Venger]

I did say that it was my opinion... I realize that the points you're making are "rules legal" but the question was asked "do you see a problem" and I did. In my opinion, since the only way you can get extra spells from being a focused specialist is to first be a specialist wizard, those spells are bonus spells from being a specialist wizard which are traded away for your ability to spontaneously cast summon monster spells.

I see a problem, and that problem is bypassing the limitations I feel were intended by the ability, therefore, I said what I felt was a problem. Wizards don't need any help being awesome, their overly bloated spell list does that just fine even in the absense of alternate class features, feats, or literally anything, wizards can cause problems (just as easily as they can fix them) due to an overly inclusive spell list. I don't think that enforcing the loss of a couple of bonus spells is a bad thing for a wizard, especially when the very same class can also get augment summoning and standard action summon spells all at the same time...

The question was asked, "do you see a problem" to which my answer, and my opinion, are yes.

You may want to nerf casters, but he asked a raw question, not "should casters be nerfed." Bypassing limitations "intended" by the ability is the whole point of dnd.

[AnimeTheCat]

You may want to nerf casters, but he asked a raw question, not "should casters be nerfed." Bypassing limitations "intended" by the ability is the whole point of dnd.

I edited my post and showed a rules issue.

[Venger]

I edited my post and showed a rules issue.

Hm. I don't agree with your rules interpretation, but I can see how you'd read it that way. Makes sense.