[3.5] Unseen Seer and Practiced Spellcaster

[ErrantX]

I have a quick rules query about the interaction of this feat with this class. So say I'm playing the standard style build of Spellthief 1/Wizard 5/Unseen Seer 10/Arcane PrC 4 or thereabouts (with Master Spellthief of course) and I take Practiced Spellcaster. Does this offset the Divination Spellpower penalty of -3 CL to all other schools of magic?

Thanks in advance!
-X

P.S. I am aware that my above build may not be legal, but it at least it illustrates close to a normal Unseen Seer build.

[Keld Denar]

A character always adds effects and abilities in a way most advantageous to him. Thus, he would apply the -3 CL penalty from USS, then apply the +4 CL from Practiced Spellcaster, which should not exceed his HD.

Also, you don't need Practiced Spellcaster if you have Master Spellthief because of the wording of MS. It only factors in your class levels, rather than your CL. Thus, you'd have a Wizard CL of 1 (ST) +5 (Wizard) + 10 (USS) +4 (other full caster PrC), regardless of the penalty of USS.

EDIT:
and your build is perfectly legal, but not optimal unless you are able to take the FREAKIN AMAZING Spontaneous Divination ACF from Complete Champion. Otherwise, duck out after 4 levels of Wizard tacked on to 1 level of Spelltheif and get into USS ASAP.

Great finishers for that build include Archmage (if you can swing the prereqs) or Arcane Trickster.

[olentu]

Well as already said yes practiced spellcaster does offset the penalty.

However the given action of master spellthief is questionable to me unless I have missed something. Master spellthief stacks levels but does not set your caster level (like martial arcanist would) and so other bonuses and penalties should apply as normal and as such you should need practiced spellcaster.

[Keld Denar]

Not when you apply the same logic I mentioned above. Apply things in the order that is most beneficial to your character. So...you apply the penalty to your wizard CL, then MST sets your CL equal to the sum of your Spellthief and Arcane Spellcaster levels.

[olentu]

Not when you apply the same logic I mentioned above. Apply things in the order that is most beneficial to your character. So...you apply the penalty to your wizard CL, then MST sets your CL equal to the sum of your Spellthief and Arcane Spellcaster levels.

It does not say it sets caster level it says it stacks when determining caster level.

[Keld Denar]

But MST only reference levels, not CLs.

<snip>
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.
<snip>

So, in applying effects, you take the -3 penalty to your CL from USS, then apply MST to set your arcane caster level for all of your arcane spells equal to the sum of all arcane spellcaster levels + spellthief levels. It doesn't add your arcane CL and your spellthief levels...its adds your arcane spellcaster levels and your spellthief levels. Regardless of what your CL was before applying MST, its now what MST makes it.

Thats the way that rule works. Most benefitial order.

[olentu]

But MST only reference levels, not CLs.



So, in applying effects, you take the -3 penalty to your CL from USS, then apply MST to set your arcane caster level for all of your arcane spells equal to the sum of all arcane spellcaster levels + spellthief levels. It doesn't add your arcane CL and your spellthief levels...its adds your arcane spellcaster levels and your spellthief levels. Regardless of what your CL was before applying MST, its now what MST makes it.

Thats the way that rule works. Most benefitial order.

It does not SET your arcane spellcaster level. I do not see the word set anywhere in the feat.

[Keld Denar]

Its gives an alternative method of calculating CL, IE, the summation of your arcane caster and spellthief class levels, as opposed to the traditional method of only gaining CLs from the base class or a +1 spellcaster PrC. Due to the way that a character can apply beneficial ability in any order, then YES, it would effectively SET your CL to an alternate value regardless of losses encountered at different points in your career.

Unless you have citation to prove otherwise?

[olentu]

Its gives an alternative method of calculating CL, IE, the summation of your arcane caster and spellthief class levels, as opposed to the traditional method of only gaining CLs from the base class or a +1 spellcaster PrC. Due to the way that a character can apply beneficial ability in any order, then YES, it would effectively SET your CL to an alternate value regardless of losses encountered at different points in your career.

Unless you have citation to prove otherwise?

You have not given any citation that says that the feat does not follow general stacking and so you are the one that needs to provide a citation.

Stack means to combine for a cumulative effect and so the feat only allows one to combine your wizard and spellthief levels for a cumulative effect on your arcane caster level. This gives a cumulative effect on your arcane caster level equivalent to of 6 levels of wizard. So unless you are saying that the effect of 6 levels of wizard is to set your caster level at 6 (which for this I can not remember support anywhere in the rules) then the penalty still applies unless you have a citation to prove otherwise.

On the other hand if you are arguing that having x levels of an arcane spellcasting class allows you to set your caster level at x then it becomes impossible to apply a penalty to any spellcasting class ever unless the penalty states that it applies last.