improved familiar early entry?

[newguydude1]

anyway to get a mephit earlier than having 7 class levels?

heres an important raw

Prerequisites

Ability to acquire a new familiar, compatible alignment, sufficiently high level (see below).

so what happens when you temporarily boost your arcane spellcaster level to 7, obtain a mephit familiar, and then get lowered to arcane spellcaster level 6?

obviously improved familiar isn't a feat like weapon focus, where each type of weapon focus is a different feat from each other right? or is it like weapon focus as in if you get improved familiar for a specific creature, that is the only type of familiar you can ever get?

[Darg]

When it says Arcane Spellcaster Level, they are referring to class levels. Obtain Familiar spells it out quite clearly.

If you were to be a 7th level wizard who acquired an improved familiar and then lost a level, as long as you don't lose the familiar then you get to keep it. The feat gives a benefit of choosing a different familiar. It doesn't actually give you the familiar.

[Rebel7284]

I mean, there are ways, they are convoluted. First of all, you need the obtain familiar feat since that links your familiar to caster level instead of class level.
Then Improved Familiar.
Then get infected with Lyconthropy getting a bunch of Animal HD and take the practiced spellcaster feat to increase your caster level.
Select a higher level familiar.
Cure Lyconthropy
The improved familiar should stay your familiar, however, this is never made 100% clear, so bribe your DM with food or drink to make sure they rule that it's okay.

[newguydude1]

When it says Arcane Spellcaster Level, they are referring to class levels. Obtain Familiar spells it out quite clearly.
were using improved familiar not obtain familiar. obtain familiar is talking about share spells and those kind of stuff.

complete scoundrels improved familiar table says caster level not spellcaster level.

If you were to be a 7th level wizard who acquired an improved familiar and then lost a level, as long as you don't lose the familiar then you get to keep it. The feat gives a benefit of choosing a different familiar. It doesn't actually give you the familiar.

but the feat prerequisite says "sufficiently high arcane spellcaster level" and if you no longer meet feat prerequisites, the feat becomes inactive until prerequisites are met again.

I mean, there are ways, they are convoluted. First of all, you need the obtain familiar feat since that links your familiar to caster level instead of class level.

not necessary. obtain familiar is just a prerequisite. none of its effects are used.

Then Improved Familiar.
Then get infected with Lyconthropy getting a bunch of Animal HD and take the practiced spellcaster feat to increase your caster level.
Select a higher level familiar.
Cure Lyconthropy

there are easier ways. persistent suffer the flesh. its a swift action so you can match the 24 hour duration with the 24 hour familiar obtaining process perfectly.

The improved familiar should stay your familiar, however, this is never made 100% clear, so bribe your DM with food or drink to make sure they rule that it's okay.

lets make it 100% clear by discussing it here.

[gogogome]

If you were to be a 7th level wizard who acquired an improved familiar and then lost a level, as long as you don't lose the familiar then you get to keep it. The feat gives a benefit of choosing a different familiar. It doesn't actually give you the familiar.

The improved familiar should stay your familiar, however, this is never made 100% clear, so bribe your DM with food or drink to make sure they rule that it's okay.

If you no longer meet the prerequisites of a feat, you no longer receive its benefits. Sufficiently high arcane spellcaster level is listed in the prerequisite section of the feat, so if you no longer meet because of things like level drain, then you no longer receive the benefits of the feat.

Seems 100% clear to me.

[Thurbane]

There is some RAW debate as to whether cater level = spellcaster level or arcane spellcaster level.

Some of the language WotC uses is somewhat inconsistent and less than clear.

[newguydude1]

There is some RAW debate as to whether cater level = spellcaster level or arcane spellcaster level.

Some of the language WotC uses is somewhat inconsistent and less than clear.

complete scoundrel's improved familiar has prerequisite arcane spellcaster level but the table of familiars has a column called caster level. combined with obtain familiar specifically calling out class level for familiar abilities, i think its definitive that arcane spellcaster level = arcane caster level.

[Darg]

First of all, you need the obtain familiar feat since that links your familiar to caster level instead of class level.

For the purpose of determining familiar abilities that depend on your arcane caster class level, your levels in all classes that allow you to cast arcane spells stack.

It says nothing about caster level.

I don't see any reason why complete Scoundrel which short hands the entire description and table should have precedence over other sources. You have the original, which is referenced in complete scoundrel, in the DMG. Complete Warrior also has a more fleshed out version of the table and description.

A spell’s power often depends on its caster level, which for most
spellcasting characters is equal to your class level in the class you’re
using to cast the spell...

In the event that a class feature, domain granted power, or other
special ability provides an adjustment to your caster level, that
adjustment applies not only to effects based on caster level (such as
range, duration, and damage dealt) but also to your caster level
check to overcome your target’s spell resistance (see Spell Resis-
tance, page 177) and to the caster level used in dispel checks...

Caster level is not beholden to class level. Take rangers and paladins for instance, their caster level is equal to half class level.

If you no longer meet the prerequisites of a feat, you no longer receive its benefits. Sufficiently high arcane spellcaster level is listed in the prerequisite section of the feat, so if you no longer meet because of things like level drain, then you no longer receive the benefits of the feat.

Seems 100% clear to me.

The benefit of the feat is that it allows you to pick a different familiar when you are able to. It doesn't give you a familiar. If you lose the feat you don't lose your familiar because it is already your familiar. You just can't pick a familiar on the list again until you benefit from the feat again.

[WhamBamSam]

I take 'spellcaster level' to refer to the effective level of casting progression, ie, a Wizard 3/Master Specialist 3 has a spellcaster level of 6. A Kobold Sorcerer 6 can undergo the Greater Draconic Rite of Passage and have an Arcane Spellcaster Level of 7.

[newguydude1]

It says nothing about caster level.

I don't see any reason why complete Scoundrel which short hands the entire description and table should have precedence over other sources. You have the original, which is referenced in complete scoundrel, in the DMG. Complete Warrior also has a more fleshed out version of the table and description.

why do you keep talking about obtain familiar?
obtain familiar is talking about deliver touch spells, speak with master, spell resistance, and the like. it has absolutely nothing to do with improved familiar. nothing.

The benefit of the feat is that it allows you to pick a different familiar when you are able to. It doesn't give you a familiar. If you lose the feat you don't lose your familiar because it is already your familiar. You just can't pick a familiar on the list again until you benefit from the feat again.

oh i see. your saying improved familiar is the ability to obtain a familiar. so if you lose improved familiar feat, you just lose the ability to get a familiar.

[Darg]

why do you keep talking about obtain familiar?
obtain familiar is talking about deliver touch spells, speak with master, spell resistance, and the like. it has absolutely nothing to do with improved familiar. nothing.

I was responding to a comment that said Obtain Familiar makes your familiar key off of your caster level which is not the case.

Either way, the original iteration of the feat as presented in the DMG mentions level in the prerequisites:

Prerequisites: Ability to acquire a new familiar, compatible
alignment, sufficiently high level (see below).

At the very least, further iterations specify Arcane Spellcaster Level as a reference to the original table. From this the RAI is quite obvious even if you don't believe the RAW supports this (it's pretty obvious it does).

[newguydude1]

I was responding to a comment that said Obtain Familiar makes your familiar key off of your caster level which is not the case.

Either way, the original iteration of the feat as presented in the DMG mentions level in the prerequisites:



At the very least, further iterations specify Arcane Spellcaster Level as a reference to the original table. From this the RAI is quite obvious even if you don't believe the RAW supports this (it's pretty obvious it does).

your mistaken.

first later reprints trump original. so improved familiar of complete scoundrel trumps dmg, especially if your trying to get a monster listed in complete scoundrels table.
second complete scoundrel says arcane spellcaster level, then the table says caster level.
third, through out all of d&d spellcaster level is interchangeable with caster level. just like it is in complete scoundrels improved familiar, create magic tattoo also says +1 spellcaster level
fourth when something refers to class level it always uses the word class. always. not caster, class. obtain familiar directly says class. prcs directly say +1 class level.

so you are very mistaken to think that raw or even rai supports your side of the argument. they both dont.

[Darg]

your mistaken.

first later reprints trump original. so improved familiar of complete scoundrel trumps dmg, especially if your trying to get a monster listed in complete scoundrels table.
second complete scoundrel says arcane spellcaster level, then the table says caster level.
third, through out all of d&d spellcaster level is interchangeable with caster level. just like it is in complete scoundrels improved familiar, create magic tattoo also says +1 spellcaster level
fourth when something refers to class level it always uses the word class. always. not caster, class. obtain familiar directly says class. prcs directly say +1 class level.

so you are very mistaken to think that raw or even rai supports your side of the argument. they both dont.

1) While it's true that later printings trump earlier ones, they don't completely change how something works on multiple levels without explaining anything. If they do it's generally accepted as an oversight/mistake.

2) If you watch the progression from the DMG to CW to CS you would see how it all works. DMG requires a sufficiently high level then references the table which has arcane spellcaster level. CW requires a sufficiently high arcane spellcaster level and has arcane spellcaster level in the table. CS requires a sufficiently high arcane spellcaster level and has caster level in the table. It is really easy to see that the pattern holds that the intent was the level of the caster.

3) interchangeable sure, but spell compendium has been known to take shortcuts when they rewrite the descriptions of spells. The original iteration of create magic tattoo has "+1 level of spellcasting ability" and is explained right after. "+1 spellcaster level" is definitely shorter.

4) The problem with that explanation is that you ignore that separate classes that provide familiars stack, such as the wizard and sorcerer. When you have a scenario of 2 levels sorc and 1 level of wiz you would have 3 arcane spellcaster levels in relation to your familiar. Saying class levels would also require another word such as "combined" if they didn't want to exclude such scenarios.

I could be wrong, but my case is not weak either.

[newguydude1]

I could be wrong, but my case is not weak either.

i already showed you that all of 3.5 uses spellcaster level and caster level interchangeably. i gave you two direct examples that do. so you need to go and find cases where spellcaster level refers to class level. not me. you dont get to dismiss the examples i give you by saying "wotc is lazy" and demand more examples from me. you need to go hunting, not me.

by your own example of obtain familiar we see when wotc wants to talk about class levels they directly say arcane spellcaster class level.

and the dmg version of improved familiar doesnt say class level = arcane spellcaster level. sufficiently high level means arcane spellcaster level, not class level. it proves nothing. complete warrior uses arcane spellcaster level for both the prerequisite and table. complete soundrel uses arcane spellcaster level for prerequisite and caster level for table thus proving once again the two terms are interchangeable.

4) The problem with that explanation is that you ignore that separate classes that provide familiars stack, such as the wizard and sorcerer. When you have a scenario of 2 levels sorc and 1 level of wiz you would have 3 arcane spellcaster levels in relation to your familiar. Saying class levels would also require another word such as "combined" if they didn't want to exclude such scenarios.

what? theres no problem. if a text says they stack then they stack. obtain familiar directly says different class levels stack so they stack. it doesnt use the word "combined". i have no idea what your going on about here.

For the purpose of determining familiar abilities that depend on your arcane caster class level, your levels in all classes that allow you to cast arcane spells stack.

the word "combined" is not used, wotc says class level, wiz and sorcerer stack, what are you trying to say? if your talking about improved familiar then sor and wiz levels dont stack because nowhere does it say they do.

[Darg]

You are free to play the way you wish. I have never seen a feat or prestige class use a caster level requirement to mean the transient form of caster level:

In the context of a feat or prestige class requirement, a caster level prerequisite (such as "caster level 5th") measures the character's ability to channel a minimal amount of magical power. For feats or prestige classes requiring a minimum caster level, creatures that use spell-like abilities or invocations instead of spells use either their fixed caster level or their class level to determine qualification. For example, Craft Wondrous Item has a requirement of caster level 3rd, so both a 3rd-level warlock and a nixie (caster level 4th for its charm person spell-like ability) meet the requirement.

I'm sure it's the same way for spellcasters. As I said, play how you want; I was only replying to provide clarification.

[Darrin]

Lesser Gray Dwarf (PGtF p. 190) can cast enlarge person as an SLA 1/day, and "Caster level equals twice the lesser duergar’s class levels (minimum 3rd)." So assuming your DM agrees that you can use your SLA caster level to qualify for Improved Familiar, a 4th-level lesser gray dwarf could get Improved Familiar. Fire Gnomes (Planar Handbook p. 126) also get heat metal/produce flame SLAs with a caster level equal to character level +2, although there's Level Adjustment +1 to deal with there.

RAW is murky. While Complete Arcane explicitly allows SLAs to qualify for a generic "minimum caster level", there's still an unresolved debate about whether an SLAs count as "arcane". Strict RAW would say no, but personally, I consider that argument to be hogwash. Monster Manual p. 315 says, "A monster's spell-like abilities are presumed to be the sorcerer/wizard versions. If the spell in question is not a sorcerer/wizard spell, then default to cleric, druid, bard, paladin, and ranger, in that order." To me, that says an SLA defaults to arcane, unless the spell only appears on a cleric/druid spell list.

On the gripping hand, the rules on when exactly SLAs count as spells and when they don't are confusing and not rigidly defined by the text. You'll want to talk this over with the DM and reach an understanding of the rules that works for your table.

[Darg]

SLAs qualify for caster levels. The only reason warlock is considered an arcane caster is that it is inferred by their special arcane specific penalties and PrC qualifications. Nothing in the book actually says that a warlock can take an arcane caster level requiring feat.