Quote Originally Posted by Veklim View Post
If that's the case then why do the requirements push towards Art.5/Wiz.1 ? Surely it should be the other way around if they're meant to be primarily spellcasters..? Practiced Spellcaster doesn't affect infusions at all, as far as I remember. One of the huge problems with Artificers is their almost complete lack of support materials in publication (as far as I've ever come across), due to the fundamental differences between casting and infusing. They behave similarly but are not the same thing.
To my knowledge practised spellcaster works with artificer, since it affects caster level which artificers have.
This is why I have been confused, since the beginning, as to why you didn't aim for the usual theurge requirement pattern and ask for 3rd level (or thereabouts) in each class. Personally I would have chosen to go for 'Ability to cast 2nd level arcane spells and ability to use 2nd level infusions', which does drop the power rating a little from one side, but bolsters the other and keeps in line with just about every other theurge PrC I remember seeing.
I chose Caster Level requirements so Warlocks could qualify and to stop there being the heighten, versatile trick.
If you're dead-set on using the practiced spellcaster approach, you first need to brew a re-wording of the feat, and present it above the class AND in the requirements, otherwise this only really works for Art.5/Wiz.1
I think it works simply because it says you need a spellcasting class for it to work. Artificer is a casting class, it just isn't arcane or divine.
On the bright side, once this scrubs up and re-words for clarity and concise phrasing, I think this could work nicely. You still need to fill up the level 9 vacuum, did you dislike the other suggestions or do you have something bubbling already?
I'm planning on leaving level 9 blank, since the capstone is pretty powerful, I might throw in something simple like Armoured Mage (Heavy Shield).
Commments Bolded.