Eldritch Theurge x Master Spellthief 2: The Return of The Revenge

[Jowgen]

Master Spellthief (MS) is a neat, badly written/conceived feat that is basically as much of an honorary classfeature for the Spellthief as Natural Spell is for Druids.

Its most common application is in caster level shenanigans per its "spellthief and arcane spellcaster levels also stack when determining your caster level for all arcane spells" line, which sometimes features cheesy combos with the Magical Training feat for ludicrous caster levels and expanded spell selections.

Also, there's a whole debate about how its stacking for stealing spells really works, but this thread ain't about that.

In this particular instance, what interests me is the interaction between MS and Eldritch Theurge (ET) in regards to the "level of spell you can steal" (caster level not a concern atm).

Now as with previous iterations of this sorta cheese, the underlying assumption is that Warlock is accepted as an arcane spellcasting class by virtue of being described as arcane casters. If you're not on board with operating under that assumption, this thread is probably not your cup of ale.

But back onto to the gouda at hand:

ET advances both a chosen arcane non-invocation spellcasting class, and an invocation using class. It uses the standard wording: "gain new invocations known/spells per day and an increase in caster level (and spells known, if applicable) as if you had also gained a level in an arcane spellcasting class"

For the purpose of what level of spells you can steal, MS lets you stack "levels of other arcane spellcaster classes (that is, levels of any class that grants arcane spellcasting other than the spellthief)"

The simple question: can there be a reasonable RAW argument that ET's double progression can apply to the Steal Spell progression granted by MS?

I don't think the RAW quite favour the idea, but I've seen people cook up far more aggregious dairy, so I'm just wondering if anyone fancied taking a stab at it. :smallsmile:

[PoeticallyPsyco]

RAW, no I don't think so. Eldritch Theurge (and any other casting progression class for that matter) isn't an arcane spellcasting class, so the simplest method of just adding those class levels to the total doesn't work. Similarly, it's not advancing "arcane spellcasting class levels", just the few features named (caster level, spells known, spell slots available), so I don't think there's an argument to be made that it's advancing what your existing arcane class already provides to Master Spellthief.

However, I think RAI is very much on the side of counting it. It just doesn't make sense that, for instance, a Spellthief 1/Sorcerer 10 would be so much better at stealing spells than a Spellthief 1/Sorcerer 4/Sea Witch 6. Especially when it works just fine on other prestige classes that provide their own spellcasting (e.g. Sublime Chord), so it's clearly not the added complexity of prestige classes causing a problem.

[Jowgen]

RAI wise, yeah; if you can cast spells with the power of an X level caster in two classes and MS is meant to let you stack those two together, then it should follow fluffwise that your MS abilities should be equal to the sum of those X's, even if they exceed your total HD. But that aside...


RAW wise, I think one might be able to make an argument by defining MS's "levels of any class that grants arcane spellcasting" in a way that aligns with the casting progression abilities of PrCs.

MS does not actually use the term "class levels", which would have been a defined game term. If it said that it only counts class levels in a class, then yeah, you'd only count the number of HD you have in a class (which would interact real weird with Hexblades and such).

But as it only talks about "levels" in a more ill-defined/general sense, so I think that it could just as reasonably be read to apply to effective class levels.

PrC casting progressions increase your effective level in another class for determining what spells you can cast and what CL you do so at, which is the totality of the how the Spellcasting class feature normally progresses based on levels in a class (i.e. as if you had gained X levels)

I guess what I am saying that unlike "class level", which is a function of actual HD spent on a class, "level in class that grants spellcasting" could just as well be seen as a function of how many (effective )levels you have that advance your Spellcasting class ability, i.e. spells known, /day & CL.


Under that reading, I think a Spellthief X, Warlock Y, Theurge Z would have a MS Spellstealing progression of = X + Y + 2 * Z, as each ET level adds +1 to both the X and the Y.

[daremetoidareyo]

RAI wise, yeah; if you can cast spells with the power of an X level caster in two classes and MS is meant to let you stack those two together, then it should follow fluffwise that your MS abilities should be equal to the sum of those X's, even if they exceed your total HD. But that aside...


RAW wise, I think one might be able to make an argument by defining MS's "levels of any class that grants arcane spellcasting" in a way that aligns with the casting progression abilities of PrCs.

MS does not actually use the term "class levels", which would have been a defined game term. If it said that it only counts class levels in a class, then yeah, you'd only count the number of HD you have in a class (which would interact real weird with Hexblades and such).

But as it only talks about "levels" in a more ill-defined/general sense, so I think that it could just as reasonably be read to apply to effective class levels.

PrC casting progressions increase your effective level in another class for determining what spells you can cast and what CL you do so at, which is the totality of the how the Spellcasting class feature normally progresses based on levels in a class (i.e. as if you had gained X levels)

I guess what I am saying that unlike "class level", which is a function of actual HD spent on a class, "level in class that grants spellcasting" could just as well be seen as a function of how many (effective )levels you have that advance your Spellcasting class ability, i.e. spells known, /day & CL.


Under that reading, I think a Spellthief X, Warlock Y, Theurge Z would have a MS Spellstealing progression of = X + Y + 2 * Z, as each ET level adds +1 to both the X and the Y.

That's my presumption as well. I like it with rage mage.

[Jowgen]

That's my presumption as well. I like it with rage mage.

It just strikes me as the least dysfunctional way to read MS, while still fitting with the RAI and arguably the RAW.

[Darg]

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.
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.
In addition, you do not incur a chance of arcane spell failure for arcane spells cast or stolen from other classes, but only if you are wearing light armor. You incur the normal arcane spell failure chance when wearing medium or heavy armor or when using a shield.

Eldritch Theurge progresses on one side an arcane spellcaster and an invoker on the other. Caster Levels are defined. Arcane spellcaster levels is a more specific way to say "specifically caster levels from arcane spellcasters." Warlocks are arcane casters but not an arcane spellcaster; this fact leads to a lot of disappointment.

If you want a broken dual progression class just go Ultimate Magus with equal levels. I don't believe it would stack caster level as you still have separate caster level progressions, but it would let you double up the spell level you could steal.

[enderlord99]

I don't remember exactly how Master Spellthief works, but it sounds vaguely like someone (not necessarily you) is trying to turn the prestige-classes Ultimate Magus and Eldritch Theurge into a makeshift Beholder Mage. The thing is, there's already a prestige-class that provides the accelerated advancement of a Beholder Mage...

It's called "Beholder Mage."