Rainbow Warmage combo does not work by RAW

[RedMage125]

This is getting a bit off topic, but if you are a level 9 wizard with mage slayer, your fireball is caster level 5. You can't choose to lower it further. If you were a level 5 wizard with mage slayer, your fireball is caster level 1, but nothing says you can't cast a spell with a lower caster level, just that you can't choose to lower it further. So the CL 1 fireball is legal to cast.

That's just it. The -4 is an adjustment to caster level. And adjustments only affect what the RAW says they do. That level 9 wizard with Mage Slayer is still a level 9 wizard and can cast her level 5 spells. But CL for CL-dependent effects mentioned on page 171 will be CL 5. It's no different than the example level 7 Good domain cleric who uses CL 8 for [Good] spells.

Just as things like orange prism ioun stones and the Practiced Spellcaster feat are not capable of granting extra spells known or spells per day, negative adjustments don't affect those things, either.

The clincher is that page 171 says that "You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question...". Adjustments (positive or negative) from magic items, feats, Prestige classes, and such, are imposed on the caster as they cast their spells. Most don't have caveats allowing the caster to ignore them (I say "most" because I am not 100% sure, but Practiced Spellcaster, for example, does not imply that it can be opted out of). This also means that, by a strict RAW reading, a level 9 wizard who has an orange prism ioun stone can lower her CL to 5 to cast fireball, but when she casts it, the damage, range, and checks to beat SR will be at CL 6. Now, in practice, is this usually enforced? No, most DMs will treat the adjusted caster level as something the caster can also lower. But a strict RAW reading doesn't indicate that it can be opted out of.

So our example wizard with Mage Slayer? When she hits level 12, say, and tries to cast a level 5 spell at the lowest possible caster level (9), will still have those CL-dependent effects adjusted down by an additional 4 when the spell is cast. She isn't able to cast a 5th level spell with all CL-dependent effects equal to CL 9 until she's level 13.

It's important to not conflate "actual/base caster level"* (which a caster can voluntarily lower when casting), with "adjusted caster level" which is for "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 Resistance, page 177) and to the caster level used in dispel checks (both the dispel check and the DC of the check)." [Exact text from the PHB]. Adjusted caster level never affects spells known or per day. It cannot be used to qualify for feats or prestige classes. This is often overlooked in a lot of TO and "early entry exploits", and is exactly why they don't work.

*Just to avoid any pedantic semantics, many prestige classes explicitly add to increased effective level for spellcasting "as if [they] had gained a level in [their spellcasting class]". Those are explicitly equivalent to class levels for that purpose, which includes actual/base caster level. They are effective levels of the class, not an adjustment to caster level.

This is the only coherent way to deal with things that provide a negative CL adjustment (Mage Slayer, Unseen Seer, and Wild Mage, for example), because otherwise a caster is potentially unable to cast their spells at all. It also explains why the section starting with "In the event that a class feature, domain granted power, or other special ability provides an adjustment to your caster level..." comes AFTER the section on the minimum caster level for a given spell level (and the potential voluntary lowering thereof) because those adjustments are applied as the spell is being cast, after such choices have been made.

But this has become tangential, yes. I'm sorry.

[St Fan]

If I may, I'll cast serious doubt on the latest assertions.

Voluntarily lowering your caster is no different than having a caster level penalty (if only to simplify things). If you already have a caster level reduction, you still can't lower your caster level further below the minimum to cast the spell. That means that if the reduction put you below that minimum caster level, you can't cast a spell of this level. You'll need some caster level bonuses to compensate (which isn't that hard).

Please take note of the specification in the text for the Precocious Apprentice feat: "Your caster level with the chosen spell is your normal caster level, even if this level is insufficient to cast the spell under normal circumstances."

Precocious Apprentice is a rare exception to the above rule, specifying the rule in the process: in normal circumstances, if your caster level is insufficient, then you cannot cast the spell.

It falls under the more general rule of Spell Failure: "If you ever try to cast a spell in conditions where the characteristics of the spell cannot be made to conform, the casting fails and the spell is wasted."

[RedMage125]

If I may, I'll cast serious doubt on the latest assertions.

Voluntarily lowering your caster is no different than having a caster level penalty (if only to simplify things). If you already have a caster level reduction, you still can't lower your caster level further below the minimum to cast the spell. That means that if the reduction put you below that minimum caster level, you can't cast a spell of this level. You'll need some caster level bonuses to compensate (which isn't that hard).

Please take note of the specification in the text for the Precocious Apprentice feat: "Your caster level with the chosen spell is your normal caster level, even if this level is insufficient to cast the spell under normal circumstances."

Precocious Apprentice is a rare exception to the above rule, specifying the rule in the process: in normal circumstances, if your caster level is insufficient, then you cannot cast the spell.

It falls under the more general rule of Spell Failure: "If you ever try to cast a spell in conditions where the characteristics of the spell cannot be made to conform, the casting fails and the spell is wasted."

PA is talking about your actual/base caster level. And yes, it is the sole exception to casting a spell of a level above that which one's base class level allows.

There are several problems with your assertion.
1) PHB 171 has an explicit list of what is affected by this that "provide an adjustment to your caster level". Note that it says "adjustment", not "increase". So only those things are affected. And they are all factors of a spells effects, no mention of affecting one's ability to cast spells of a certain level. A level 8 Cleric with the Good domain doesn't get access to 5th level [Good] spells, do they? Of course not. The rule about requiring high enough class level is an absolute, but that works both ways.
2) Building on that...if you were correct, then prestige classes like Wild Mage would be unable to function. They'd lose the ability to cast spells they've had access to for the last 2 levels. They get a -3 to caster level, and then add 1d6 to it when they cast. Whereas by the RAW, as I point out, they have full access to their spells, but only those factors mentioned on page 171 are affected. Your interpretation is also problematic for Unseen Seer. If "adjusted caster level" affects spell access, then how does one figure out what the Unseen Seer's spells per day are, once they have a +3 CL for divination spells and -3 for all others? Do they have access to the spells their base caster level allows or not?
3) Your proposal causes a wild dissonance between RAW and RAI for these things. And while that is not unheard of...what I have just pointed out is entirely based on the text of the RAW and allows these things to function as intended. It also stops a lot of "early entry exploits".

Now, thinking over what you've said, you've given me cause to consider one possibility. That negative adjustments may not be possible to lower past a specific threshold. Which would mean that a level 9 wizard with Mage Slayer still gets to cast their 5th level spells, but that CL9 is an absolute floor to CL for those spells. Which would mean she could only cast them at CL 9 until she hit level 14.

I doubt it, though. Again, the big issue is that what we are calling "adjusted caster level" only affects factors of the spell itself. Those boosts only affect damage/healing, range, duration, SR penetration, and the DC to dispel. Not whether or not it can be cast. A given character is still a caster of whatever level their class(es) say, but the power of their spells are affected. Because the "adjusted caster level" is, more correctly, an adjustment to the power of the spells they can already cast. You know, like the rules text says it is.

Your caster level is your caster level, based on your class(es). A Sor8/Wild Mage 2 uses the 10th level row on the sorcerer table to determine their spells. They are eligible for a bonus 5th level spell slot (if CHA is 20 or more). But when they cast their spells, all those CL-determined factors are going to be anywhere from 8-13.

Where the rules get wonky, is how such a character works if they have Practiced Spellcaster. PS explicitly does not allow CL to exceed HD. But Wild Mage explicitly does. Does PS offset the -3, and allow the full 1d6 boost to be applied? Or does it only affect a low d6 roll by preventing CL for the spell from being under HD? Which would make the CL range for the above character 10-13?

[Elves]

PHB page 7:
"In addition to having a high ability score, [b]a spellcaster must be of high enough class level to be able to cast spells of a given spell level.(See the class descriptions in Chapter 3 for details.)"

Awesome, let's go check the class descriptions for details. What does it say?

"Like other spellcasters, a wizard can cast only a certain number of spells of each spell level per day. Her base daily spell allotment is given on Table: The Wizard. In addition, she receives bonus spells per day if she has a high Intelligence score."

[RedMage125]

Awesome, let's go check the class descriptions for details. What does it say?

"Like other spellcasters, a wizard can cast only a certain number of spells of each spell level per day. Her base daily spell allotment is given on Table: The Wizard. In addition, she receives bonus spells per day if she has a high Intelligence score."

Yes...that is the DETAILS of what the RULE of "must be high enough class level" means. That was my point years ago, and remains my point now.

There's no data you can draw from the table that makes "must be high enough class level" somehow "not a rule". And that's why your analysis years ago failed. And why your claim that "there isn't a clear rule requiring class level" is blatantly false.

"(See the class descriptions in Chapter 3 for details.)" Is in parentheses following a complete sentence. By the grammar and syntax rules of the English language, that means it is supplemental to the preceding sentence. The preceding sentence being: "In addition to having a high ability score, a spellcaster must be of high enough class level to be able to cast spells of a given spell level." That means that, with regard to ability to cast spells of a certain level, the information contained in Chapter 3 is supplemental details of what "must be of high enough class level" means. None of it ever invalidates "high enough class level" as a restriction. And there's only 2 kinds of people that insist that it does.
1) Blatant liars trying to gloss over rules and attempt to fast-talk a DM into giving them an advantage not actually supported by the Rules.
2) Ignorant cretins who don't understand the primacy of FACTS over OPINIONS.

Unless, of course, you just made an honest mistake, and can now realize that you were wrong. Mistakes happen, too.

[Troacctid]

Awesome, let's go check the class descriptions for details. What does it say?

"Like other spellcasters, a wizard can cast only a certain number of spells of each spell level per day. Her base daily spell allotment is given on Table: The Wizard. In addition, she receives bonus spells per day if she has a high Intelligence score."

This text appears under the "Class Descriptions" header in chapter 3:

Spells per Day: How many spells of each spell level the character can cast each day. If the entry is "—" for a given level of spell, the character may not cast any spells of that level.

I'd interpret this as supporting RedMage125's reading.

[RedMage125]

This text appears under the "Class Descriptions" header in chapter 3:

I'd interpret this as supporting RedMage125's reading.

Quite, thank you.

But he's not going to be convinced. You see, Elves believes that if a level 1 wizard could make a Faustian Pact for a 9th level slot, and if she could boost her CL to 17 (and have an INT of 19+), that she could cast it. That's why he claims that there "isn't a rule requiring class level", because he claims that the tables in the class descriptions show that it means spell slots, therefore, only having spell slots matters. Which utterly disregards the complete sentence on page 7 which explicitly says that "must be of high enough class level" is a requirement, and that referring to Chapter 3 is for details of that.

His argument is that the Faustian Pact L9 slot means that it's no longer a "-". He is incorrect, because the table doesn't change. And the RAW, with context, specify that they wizard must be of a high enough class level that the CLASS TABLE no longer has a "-" for L9 spells, which is level 17. Even if an individual wizard got a higher level spell slot that she could cast, the table doesn't change.

Precocious Apprentice is the only RAW exception to the rule. And the exceptions it provides are only the ones specified in the feat. It's a common misconception for people to try and mix other rules to eke a greater advantage out of this, but those aren't RAW. A level 1 Elven Generalist Wizard with PA gets to prepare a 2nd Level 2 spell, but it must be another iteration of the spell chosen with PA. A Domain Wizard with PA, by the RAW, does not know her 2nd level Domain spell, because she is not "able to cast it". The only L2 spell she can cast is the PA one.

[St Fan]

There are several problems with your assertion.
1) PHB 171 has an explicit list of what is affected by this that "provide an adjustment to your caster level". Note that it says "adjustment", not "increase". So only those things are affected. And they are all factors of a spells effects, no mention of affecting one's ability to cast spells of a certain level. A level 8 Cleric with the Good domain doesn't get access to 5th level [Good] spells, do they? Of course not. The rule about requiring high enough class level is an absolute, but that works both ways.

I disagree that the list of things that are affected by caster level is exhaustive; the text is a quick list of what caster level does, but the wording is not limiting it. And the paragraph right above is the one specifying that caster level cannot be reduced below the minimum for a spell.

The example you give (the Good Domain) has nothing to do with the subject, since it's just a caster level bonus to a specific spell descriptor at the time of casting. Of course that doesn't affect spell access.

The point I am making is that a spellcaster have essentially three value called "levels", and that even if they can be equal on a basic character, they can also quite easily diverge.

The first is CLASS level, the actual level of the character in a given class.
The second is SPELLCASTING level, which define the number of spell per day and maximum spell level that can be cast. This level is the class level plus the number of levels in a prestige class giving "+1 level of existing [arcane/divine] spellcasting class" and applied to said class.
The third is CASTER level, which affect the variable of the spells. Caster level is equal to spellcasting level plus whatever modifiers, positive or negative, change said caster level. A spell cannot be cast below the minimum caster level, which is equal to the minimum class level when a spell of this level is gained. Caster level may also influence some feat prerequisites, but it never modify the actual spellcasting level.

2) Building on that...if you were correct, then prestige classes like Wild Mage would be unable to function. They'd lose the ability to cast spells they've had access to for the last 2 levels. They get a -3 to caster level, and then add 1d6 to it when they cast. Whereas by the RAW, as I point out, they have full access to their spells, but only those factors mentioned on page 171 are affected. Your interpretation is also problematic for Unseen Seer. If "adjusted caster level" affects spell access, then how does one figure out what the Unseen Seer's spells per day are, once they have a +3 CL for divination spells and -3 for all others? Do they have access to the spells their base caster level allows or not?

The rule does affect such classes, indeed, although not to the point of "unable to function" as you're saying. A Wild Mage would indeed risk a spell failure, but only for the highest level of spells he can cast (1d6-3 has a minimum result of -2 caster level). And that can easily be compensated by positive caster level modifiers, like an orange ioun stone.

Likewise, an Unseen seer can indeed only use divination spells for his highest (or maybe two highest when the modifier reaches -3) spell slot(s), unless gifted with enough positive caster level modifiers to compensate the negative modifier for other spell schools. Which again are not that hard to pile up (here's a thread solely on this subject).

Where the rules get wonky, is how such a character works if they have Practiced Spellcaster. PS explicitly does not allow CL to exceed HD. But Wild Mage explicitly does. Does PS offset the -3, and allow the full 1d6 boost to be applied? Or does it only affect a low d6 roll by preventing CL for the spell from being under HD? Which would make the CL range for the above character 10-13?

For such cases as Practiced Spellcaster, my advice is to differentiate modifiers that affect the standing (base) caster level for all spells (which would also influence feat prerequisites), like Practiced Spellcaster (let's call it, "pre-casting CL"), and the modifiers to caster level that take effect solely on casting (about all CL modifier dependent on a spell school or spell descriptor, for starter; let's call it, "post-casting CL"). If you consider the Wild Mage modifier to be applied solely on casting, then the -3+1d6 modifier intervene after Practiced Spellcaster has fixed the base caster level, capped by HD.

Please note that a spellcaster with a negative pre-casting CL modifier can still prepare spells that have a minimum CL higher than his score (caster level doesn't affect spell slots, unlike Class/Spellcasting level). Those spells could be cast without failing if the post-casting CL is raised to the minimum or more, even by separate conditional modifiers from different sources (most CL modifiers are, thankfully, untyped).

[RedMage125]

I disagree that the list of things that are affected by caster level is exhaustive; the text is a quick list of what caster level does, but the wording is not limiting it.

That's not how rules work. They only do what they say they do. Therefore, anything that "provides an adjustment to caster level" only affects what the text says it does.

The point I am making is that a spellcaster have essentially three value called "levels", and that even if they can be equal on a basic character, they can also quite easily diverge.

The first is CLASS level, the actual level of the character in a given class.
The second is SPELLCASTING level, which define the number of spell per day and maximum spell level that can be cast. This level is the class level plus the number of levels in a prestige class giving "+1 level of existing [arcane/divine] spellcasting class" and applied to said class.
The third is CASTER level, which affect the variable of the spells. Caster level is equal to spellcasting level plus whatever modifiers, positive or negative, change said caster level. A spell cannot be cast below the minimum caster level, which is equal to the minimum class level when a spell of this level is gained. Caster level may also influence some feat prerequisites, but it never modify the actual spellcasting level.

Caster level may be different from class level, only because Rangers and Paladins show that this is true.
But you have no written text that says that adjustments to caster level allow for that boosted level to meet feat prerequisites.

The rule does affect such classes, indeed, although not to the point of "unable to function" as you're saying. A Wild Mage would indeed risk a spell failure, but only for the highest level of spells he can cast (1d6-3 has a minimum result of -2 caster level). And that can easily be compensated by positive caster level modifiers, like an orange ioun stone.

Likewise, an Unseen seer can indeed only use divination spells for his highest (or maybe two highest when the modifier reaches -3) spell slot(s), unless gifted with enough positive caster level modifiers to compensate the negative modifier for other spell schools. Which again are not that hard to pile up (here's a thread solely on this subject).

OR...and, hear me out...
Adjustments to CL only affect what the text says they do.

For such cases as Practiced Spellcaster, my advice is to differentiate modifiers that affect the standing (base) caster level for all spells (which would also influence feat prerequisites), like Practiced Spellcaster (let's call it, "pre-casting CL"), and the modifiers to caster level that take effect solely on casting (about all CL modifier dependent on a spell school or spell descriptor, for starter; let's call it, "post-casting CL"). If you consider the Wild Mage modifier to be applied solely on casting, then the -3+1d6 modifier intervene after Practiced Spellcaster has fixed the base caster level, capped by HD.

That's nonsensical. If the -3 from Wild Mage is only applied on casting, then so is the +4 from PS. Both are adjustments to caster level, and only affect what page 171 of the PHB says they do.

What I am pointing out about the RAW allows these things to work as RAI. Your assertion means they don't.

Wild Mage is meant to be a class whose power fluctuates, not "has a 1 in 3 chance of failing completely".

[RedMage125]

Apologies for the double post, but I feel guilty for getting so off-topic, and wanted to try and veer the thread back to the OP's original subject.

Let's look at the text again, shall we? I'm going to start by copy/pasting what you cited in your OP.

Warmage Class
"When a warmage gains access to a new level of spells, he automatically knows all the spells for that level listed on the warmage's spell list. Essentially, his spell list is the same as his spells known list."

Rainbow Servant Prestige Class
"Cleric Spell Access: A 10th-level rainbow servant can learn and cast spells from the cleric list, even if they don?t appear on the lists of any spellcasting class he has. Such spells are cast as divine spells if they don't appear on the sorcerer/wizard or bard spell lists."

Elves, you know I am one who certainly appreciates finding holes in commonly accepted "tricks" (I am, after all, the author of the original thread debunking the "Leapfrog Wizard" that you referenced in your own thread). And I see your point. You are correct that RS does not "add cleric spells to the Warmage spell list".

HOWEVER, what it does do is let the RS cast spells from the cleric spell list.

What's the difference? Well, if all the cleric spells were "added to the Warmage spell list", they would all be Arcane spells. But we can see from the text of the "cleric spell access" ability that such is explicitly not the case. Rainbow Servants are primarily arcane spellcasters who are out there casting divine spells.

Moreover, you've left out text that I think is actually critical.
[This is the rest of the "Cleric Spell Access" power from Rainbow Servant]
"This class feature grants access to the spells, but not extra spells per day. The 10th-level rainbow servant can likewise read scrolls with cleric spells on them and use wands and staffs that contain cleric spells."

[Note: going forward, to ease confusion, I am going to refer to a specific character. His name is Billy, and he is a Warmage 6/Rainbow Servant 10. I do this to clarify the language that is sometimes confusing when discussing the term "warmage" when used with regards to the class as a whole vis a specific individual, as well as the spell lists thereof. Most confusion seems to stem from when it I used in the possessive form.]

It has already been brought up to you that things like Advanced Learning add a spell to Billy's spell list, not the Warmage Class Spell List. And the Warmage class ability quoted above means that Billy's Spells Known List is the same as Billy's Spell List (which, as of Warmage level 6, is the Warmage Class Spell List and has 2 extra wizard evocation spells not normally on that list). I'm sorry for repeating the obvious, but I just want to make sure we're all on the same page. Okay, moving on...

Cleric Spell Access, as I acknowledged, does not add cleric spells to Billy's Warmage Spell List. Again, if it did, those spells would be Arcane spells when he cast them. Also, if Billy were to hypothetically get another Advanced Learning ability (which would would be Warmage 11, and thus character level 21), he could, of course add a cleric spell to Billy's Warmage Spell List (but it would be a divine spell). From what you have said, Elves, I believe you agree to all this so far. That would be "learning" the spell, even by the metrics you have established, right? After all, a Wizard/Rainbow Servant would have to scribe cleric spells into their spellbook and memorize them as normal, right? And a Sorcerer/RS would have to choose a cleric spell as a Spell Known when they gained a level that gave them one, right?

Everything so far is a perfectly valid way to read the RAW text (and you know me, I am a stickler for the grammar and syntax of the written word of the RAW).

Here's where you may disagree. There is another way to read that text (really, two). I will include explanation of why they are in keeping with the text.
1) One is that, the next time Billy gains access to a new level of spell (which would be Warmage 8, 7th level spells), he also gets all of the cleric spells of that level added to Billy's Spell List. This is because of that singular possessive use of the word "warmage's" in the Warmage class entry quoted above, indicating that it is the individual's (Billy's, in this case), and not just that of the Warmage Class. This seems like a redundant distinction, because in the case of a single-classed warmage, those would be the same. But this case makes it relevant. Warmages (unlike Wizards and Sorcerers mentioned above) get to spontaneously cast from their entire spell list, which, once they get access to a given spell level, includes all spells of their entire Class Spell List. And Billy now has two classes' lists to draw from. This reading does NOT allow Billy to cast cleric spells of level 1-6, however. The text of the Warmage class explicitly says he "automatically knows all spells of that level". But RS gave Billy "access" to the Cleric Class Spell List in addition to the Warmage Class Spell List.
2) The other reading (and this is the one most commonly endorsed by people), is that Billy isn't "adding cleric spells to his Warmage Class list", but rather, it is focused on the following lines of the text: "can cast spells from the cleric spell list" and "This class feature grants access to the spells" (this is part of what you left out of your OP). If the cleric class spell list is now accessible to him, he can cast from it. This only works with classes that can spontaneously cast from the entire list of spells they have access to. Wizards and Sorcerers have less spells known (the PHB Glossary specifies that an individual Wizard's "spells known" are the spells in their spellbook), but the Warmage class and its spellcasting do not require them to "learn" spells like Wizards and Sorcerers do (because "[a warmage's] spell list is the same as his spells known list."). It's predicated on the concept of Specifc > General, and the notion that explicit "access to cleric spells" and text saying the RS may "cast spells from the cleric list" specifically means that the Cleric Spell List is accessible like the Warmage Spell List is. This is actually very similar to how multiclass spellcaster characters in 5e later worked. That they have one table that is their "spells per day", but they have multiple class spell lists to draw from and spend the spell slots on. So they're casting spells from, essentially, 2 different spell lists. That's the principle, anyway.

Like I said, I see how you came to your conclusion. And, admittedly, I think the most permissible reading is a bit fast and loose with the application of "can cast from", and "access to the spells", but those exact words ARE in the text.

[Darg]

HOWEVER, what it does do is let the RS cast spells from the cleric spell list.

What's the difference? Well, if all the cleric spells were "added to the Warmage spell list", they would all be Arcane spells. But we can see from the text of the "cleric spell access" ability that such is explicitly not the case. Rainbow Servants are primarily arcane spellcasters who are out there casting divine spells.

The problem here is that warmage only has permission to cast spells they know. The spells they know are their class spell list and any others that they "learn." The dysfunction is that the feature doesn't add the spells to the class list or their spells known. It's the exact same process for learning domain spells spelled out at the beginning of the chapter. Warmage cannot cast domain spells to a domain they got access to from a prestige class either because they cannot learn those spells. To assume that domain access and cleric spell access work differently when they say the same things is a leap.

Here's where you may disagree. There is another way to read that text (really, two). I will include explanation of why they are in keeping with the text.

1) One is that, the next time Billy gains access to a new level of spell (which would be Warmage 8, 7th level spells), he also gets all of the cleric spells of that level added to Billy's Spell List. This is because of that singular possessive use of the word "warmage's" in the Warmage class entry quoted above, indicating that it is the individual's (Billy's, in this case), and not just that of the Warmage Class. This seems like a redundant distinction, because in the case of a single-classed warmage, those would be the same. But this case makes it relevant. Warmages (unlike Wizards and Sorcerers mentioned above) get to spontaneously cast from their entire spell list, which, once they get access to a given spell level, includes all spells of their entire Class Spell List. And Billy now has two classes' lists to draw from. This reading does NOT allow Billy to cast cleric spells of level 1-6, however. The text of the Warmage class explicitly says he "automatically knows all spells of that level". But RS gave Billy "access" to the Cleric Class Spell List in addition to the Warmage Class Spell List.

2) The other reading (and this is the one most commonly endorsed by people), is that Billy isn't "adding cleric spells to his Warmage Class list", but rather, it is focused on the following lines of the text: "can cast spells from the cleric spell list" and "This class feature grants access to the spells" (this is part of what you left out of your OP). If the cleric class spell list is now accessible to him, he can cast from it. This only works with classes that can spontaneously cast from the entire list of spells they have access to. Wizards and Sorcerers have less spells known (the PHB Glossary specifies that an individual Wizard's "spells known" are the spells in their spellbook), but the Warmage class and its spellcasting do not require them to "learn" spells like Wizards and Sorcerers do (because "[a warmage's] spell list is the same as his spells known list."). It's predicated on the concept of Specifc > General, and the notion that explicit "access to cleric spells" and text saying the RS may "cast spells from the cleric list" specifically means that the Cleric Spell List is accessible like the Warmage Spell List is. This is actually very similar to how multiclass spellcaster characters in 5e later worked. That they have one table that is their "spells per day", but they have multiple class spell lists to draw from and spend the spell slots on. So they're casting spells from, essentially, 2 different spell lists. That's the principle, anyway.

1) "Access" does not equal "knows." This falls apart as I mention above domain access does not grant the ability to cast the domain spells outside of learning them from the advanced learning feature. So "access" has precedence in this meaning considering this is at the beginning of the chapter.

2) If the line "can learn and cast spells from the cleric list" gets gutted to "can cast spells from the cleric list" for warmage, you must apply this logic to all classes. Not just the warmage. Wizards and sorcerers wouldn't need to actually learn the spells as the feature says they must. Honestly, this is the shakiest argument of all because it requires contradicting the text itself.

This also falls apart when you realize that warmages don't learn their spells as they level, they already know them.

[RedMage125]

The problem here is that warmage only has permission to cast spells they know. The spells they know are their class spell list and any others that they "learn." The dysfunction is that the feature doesn't add the spells to the class list or their spells known. It's the exact same process for learning domain spells spelled out at the beginning of the chapter. Warmage cannot cast domain spells to a domain they got access to from a prestige class either because they cannot learn those spells. To assume that domain access and cleric spell access work differently when they say the same things is a leap.



1) "Access" does not equal "knows." This falls apart as I mention above domain access does not grant the ability to cast the domain spells outside of learning them from the advanced learning feature. So "access" has precedence in this meaning considering this is at the beginning of the chapter.

2) If the line "can learn and cast spells from the cleric list" gets gutted to "can cast spells from the cleric list" for warmage, you must apply this logic to all classes. Not just the warmage. Wizards and sorcerers wouldn't need to actually learn the spells as the feature says they must. Honestly, this is the shakiest argument of all because it requires contradicting the text itself.

This also falls apart when you realize that warmages don't learn their spells as they level, they already know them.

Warmages, however, have a unique relationship with their "known" spells that is different from all PHB arcane casters. Icefractal pointed this out, and I don't think you debunked it as well as you think you did.

"Their spells known are their class list" is the General rule for Warmages. Rainbow Servant explicitly granting access to the Cleric Class Spell List is a Specific rule. That means the entire Cleric Spell List is (arguably) also available to Billy.

Again, as I closed with, I do think the most permissive reading is a little generous. But "can learn and cast cleric spells" is explicit RAW text, therefore it must be true. As are the words "grants access to the spells". How do you propose it is true that Billy has "access" to those spells?

You focused for a bit in your linked post on the narrative of how warmages already learned all those spells in their warmage training. If that's relevant, then why isn't the cleric-like power imparted to the Rainbow Servant? They get domains. They can cast Detect Evil/Chaos/Thoughts at will. They can grow wings like a couatl. A Rainbow Servant is more than just a standard Warmage. And clerics get access to those spells with no training in them. Why is it so difficult for you that Billy is imparted knowledge of them and casting them like prayers? They are, after all, divine, and not arcane spells.

[Darg]

Warmages, however, have a unique relationship with their "known" spells that is different from all PHB arcane casters. Icefractal pointed this out, and I don't think you debunked it as well as you think you did.

"Their spells known are their class list" is the General rule for Warmages. Rainbow Servant explicitly granting access to the Cleric Class Spell List is a Specific rule. That means the entire Cleric Spell List is (arguably) also available to Billy.

Again, as I closed with, I do think the most permissive reading is a little generous. But "can learn and cast cleric spells" is explicit RAW text, therefore it must be true. As are the words "grants access to the spells". How do you propose it is true that Billy has "access" to those spells?

You focused for a bit in your linked post on the narrative of how warmages already learned all those spells in their warmage training. If that's relevant, then why isn't the cleric-like power imparted to the Rainbow Servant? They get domains. They can cast Detect Evil/Chaos/Thoughts at will. They can grow wings like a couatl. A Rainbow Servant is more than just a standard Warmage. And clerics get access to those spells with no training in them. Why is it so difficult for you that Billy is imparted knowledge of them and casting them like prayers? They are, after all, divine, and not arcane spells.

They get access to domains, sure, but they can't cast domain spells without learning them through advanced learning or the extra spell feat. Domain access doesn't add spells to your list or spells known. Why would cleric spell access be any different?

The feature grants you the ability to learn and cast cleric spells. Logic dictates that you must learn the spells before you can cast them, otherwise there would be no reason to learn them in the first place. Use of the word "can" in "can learn and cast spells" means that the feature does not automatically grant you the knowledge of the spells.

Thus the only valid way to say a warmage gets to cast all cleric spells is to say that "automatically knows" equates to "automatically learns." But logically speaking, knows and learns have two different meanings. Implying they are the same would be wrong.

The reason I quoted the background is to put the rules into context where it's easier to understand the words on the page. You wouldn't normally equate "knows" with "learns" outside of the confusing circumstances surrounding the class and it's interaction with rainbow servant.

[Zancloufer]

They get access to domains, sure, but they can't cast domain spells without learning them through advanced learning or the extra spell feat. Domain access doesn't add spells to your list or spells known. Why would cleric spell access be any different?

So Domain access DOES add spells to your list of spells known. To summarize the bit in Complete Divine about Extra Domains for non-Clerics;

If they are like Druids/Rangers/Paladins (IE: Prepared casters that known the entire list) they add all their spells to their spells known.

Classes with a spellbooks (IE: Wizard) can scribe the relevant divine scrolls into their book.

Spontaneous casters that choose their spells known (IE: Favored Souls or Sorcerers) can learn these new spells, but don't gain extra spells known.

Warmages (along with Beguilers and Dread Necros) are unique in that they have an entire list they know (Like Druids) but cast spontaneously (like Sorcerers). Since their spells known are their entire list and don't have a limited number of spells known one can extrapolate that they probably should use the rules for the fist set of classes as it describes them the best. They don't have a spell book, they have no limit on spells known and they know their entire list.

Finally you can not use Advanced Learning on Cleric spells, as for Warmages that only works on Evocation spells on the Wiz/Sorc list.

[RedMage125]

They get access to domains, sure, but they can't cast domain spells without learning them through advanced learning or the extra spell feat. Domain access doesn't add spells to your list or spells known. Why would cleric spell access be any different?

Arcane Disciple would be better than extra spell. That feat explicitly adds the domain's spells to your class list.

But that's a tangent. My point was to address you bringing up how warmages "did all their learning" in the past, as if it were a relevant point. You kind of missed the forest for the trees on that one. Domains (not just the spells) were relevant because the RS still gets the granted power of those domains, as well as at-will spells, and wings. And to the point, divine casters themselves are never narratively described as being trained on all their spells in their past, and they have access to their whole spell list (why all members of the same class access the same list is veering into magical theory, which is not RAW).
The knowledge of their spells are a result of external forces imparting that knowledge. As a Rainbow Servant is also casting divine spells, as part of an organization that they were not a part of when they were in warmage training, why would not having trained on those spells be relevant?
THAT was the point. Was that the narrative of the Warmage's training was irrelevant, because the knowledge of the cleric spells would be imparted, similar to how it is for other divine casters.

The feature grants you the ability to learn and cast cleric spells. Logic dictates that you must learn the spells before you can cast them, otherwise there would be no reason to learn them in the first place. Use of the word "can" in "can learn and cast spells" means that the feature does not automatically grant you the knowledge of the spells.

I'm going to stop for a moment before replying and reiterate something for what is now the 3rd time. I, personally, believe that the "most permissive" reading of the text is playing a bit fast and loose with "can cast cleric spells", "grants access to the spells", and "spell list is the same as spells known list". But as those words ARE in the text, I can see it as one valid way to read that, even if I am not convinced that it's the most correct one. So, going forward, I am playing a bit of Devil's Advocate here.

First off, you are basing your point off of "logic dictates you must learn before you can cast". But that is ignoring that, as a class, Warmages (and Beguilers and Dread Necromancers) have a unique relationship with their spells that other spellcasting classes do not. They DON'T "learn" their new spells on their spell lists when they gain access to a new level of spells. Wizards do (spells known for a wizard means the ones in their spellbook and the term "learn" is occassionally used to describe the process of adding a spell to the book, but not consistently), sorcerers and bards do (they use the term "learn" for adding to their Spells Known list). The word "learn" is never used for any of the 3 full-list casters adding to their spell list, except in the title of the ability "Advanced Learning". That ability just says "add a spell to your list". Meanwhile, if "their spell list is the same as their spells known list", then the inverse, being "their spells known list is the same as their spell list" is also true, right? If "A=B", then "B=A", yes? So, if we add more value to "B" (spell list explicitly given access to), then those spells become "A" (i.e. "known").

So while you COULD be correct in insisting that "can learn" must be a prerequisite to "cast", there's also a strong case for the Warmage being a Specific Overrides General situation, as the Rainbow Servant PrC in general can be taken by any Arcane spellcasting class (probably hardest for a Dread Necromancer, though, who cannot be Good, and frequently makes use of objectively evil magicks). And, more to the point, Warmages themselves don't ever need to "learn" in order to cast. Even a single-classed Warmage never "learns" a new spell throughout their career. They only "add spells to their spell list".

Thus the only valid way to say a warmage gets to cast all cleric spells is to say that "automatically knows" equates to "automatically learns." But logically speaking, knows and learns have two different meanings. Implying they are the same would be wrong.

Your logic ignores the logic-defying nature of the Warmage's relationship to "learning" and "knowing". And in a strict-RAW sense, Warmages have no mechanism for, and indeed no need for, "learning" spells. They simply "know" them.

RAW is sometimes a thing that operates in defiance of conventional logic and common sense (especially in 3.5e). If you don't believe me, look up "drown healing". And what we are discussing is the RAW semantics.

The reason I quoted the background is to put the rules into context where it's easier to understand the words on the page. You wouldn't normally equate "knows" with "learns" outside of the confusing circumstances surrounding the class and it's interaction with rainbow servant.

You're right. Outside of Warmages, Beguilers, and Dread Necromancers, there is no such dissonance.

But there is with these classes. And while, as single-classed characters, it's largely irrelevant, it has ramifications with the interaction with some other game elements, like Rainbow Servant.

Also, as mentioned, the Arcane Disciple feat. That feat adds spells to the person's class list of arcane spells. A Wizard would still need to find a scroll for each of those 9 spells and scribe it into his book (i.e. "learn" it). A Bard or Sorcerer would still need to add them to their Spells Known individually (i.e. "learn" them). But our 3 full-list casters? Since the exact wording of "spells are added to your class list of Arcane spells"...that means that they, for 100% know all of those spells and can cast them (1 per spell level per day, as per the restrictions of the feat).

As an aside, I would like to add a note, here. One of the reasons I'm less convinced of the most permissive reading is that the Complete Divine is trash. That book has more errors in it than any other D&D book of any edition I've ever seen. And I don't just mean "bad elements", I mean actual ERRORS. The editors of that book were asleep at the wheel.

Spoiler: Errors that I just remember off the top of my head

Show

Multiple instances of "see page XX" (as in the book actually says "XX").
Spells that change name between the spell lists and the full description (I remember one is a high level druid spell relating to water).
Favored weapon of one of the deities in the book is listed as "check toee" (presumably Temple Of Elemental Evil).
Dissonance between the text and table of some prestige classes. Rainbow Servant is actually one of them, the table says it's a 6/10 caster increase, the text says it's 10/10. By RAW, text trumps table, and even the Sage Advice of the time acknowledged that, but says that the 6/10 was probably what was intended.

So...for a lot of reasons, I am generally loathe to just accept any super-powerful combo that hinges on an element from that book. I am also super-critical of any "tricks" people rely on (like "early entry" tricks). But when I look at the RAW for this combo -through the same pedantic lens that acknowledges that "drown healing" is RAW- I can see multiple ways to read the text. And all 3 that I mentioned in my post could be drawn from that text. I'm not unilaterally declaring any of them as "correct", least of all the most permissive one. My point is that they are actually all supported by text and precedent.

So Domain access DOES add spells to your list of spells known. To summarize the bit in Complete Divine about Extra Domains for non-Clerics;

If they are like Druids/Rangers/Paladins (IE: Prepared casters that known the entire list) they add all their spells to their spells known.

Classes with a spellbooks (IE: Wizard) can scribe the relevant divine scrolls into their book.

Spontaneous casters that choose their spells known (IE: Favored Souls or Sorcerers) can learn these new spells, but don't gain extra spells known.

Warmages (along with Beguilers and Dread Necros) are unique in that they have an entire list they know (Like Druids) but cast spontaneously (like Sorcerers). Since their spells known are their entire list and don't have a limited number of spells known one can extrapolate that they probably should use the rules for the fist set of classes as it describes them the best. They don't have a spell book, they have no limit on spells known and they know their entire list.

While I appreciate you trying to help, your last paragraph is an inference, and is not in the text of the RAW, which is the crux of the discussion.

Finally you can not use Advanced Learning on Cleric spells, as for Warmages that only works on Evocation spells on the Wiz/Sorc list.

I disagree here, too. The RAW explicitly "grant access to the spells". Even the most restrictive reading of the RAW would acknowledge that as a Specific>General line that would allow a Warmage/Rainbow Servant to "learn" a cleric spell with that feature. Although, without any "early entry" shenanigans, that won't happen until character level 21.

[Pezzo]

Finally you can not use Advanced Learning on Cleric spells, as for Warmages that only works on Evocation spells on the Wiz/Sorc list.

RAW doesn't specify that warmages can't learn spells. Their advance learning feature is mentioned inside their spellcasting description as the way they learn new spells, where normal spontaneous caster have their text on how many spells they can learn at each level, and how to swap spells known.
The cleric spell access doesn't specify when they can learn new spells, it's very vague. It could mean it works with advanced learning, but subject to level and school restriction, or unrestricted, or it could mean that they can add only spells that are both on the sorcerer/wizard AND cleric spell list and of the evocation school, and one level lower than the max (which would make it an anti-feature).
Also the sorcerer/wizard spell list is tricky as it's a double class spell list with single class exceptions, making it look like 3 different spell lists (I'm looking at you arcane fusion!)

[Crake]

RAW doesn't specify that warmages can't learn spells. Their advance learning feature is mentioned inside their spellcasting description as the way they learn new spells, where normal spontaneous caster have their text on how many spells they can learn at each level, and how to swap spells known.

The advanced learning feature never actually says they learn the spell however, merely that it is added to their spell list, the implication being that, if its on their spell list, they automatically know it.

The real question is, does cleric spell access count as adding it to your spell list? It doesn’t specifically SAY it does, but it grants literally all the benefits of having the spells on your spell list, with one ADDED stipulation (not a removed one), that if a spell is not on the sorc/wiz spell list, it is cast as a divine spell.

For me, that is enough to consider it as being added to the caster’s spell list, but for others its not.

[lylsyly]

Okay, we've established that it doesn't work by Raw. How about we work on reworking the class so it does work?

[Troacctid]

Okay, we've established that it doesn't work by Raw. How about we work on reworking the class so it does work?

There's not much to rework. You either decide, "Yes, it works," or "No, it doesn't work," and that's pretty much it.

[RedMage125]

RAW doesn't specify that warmages can't learn spells. Their advance learning feature is mentioned inside their spellcasting description as the way they learn new spells, where normal spontaneous caster have their text on how many spells they can learn at each level, and how to swap spells known.

The RAW doesn't say they CAN, either. Their class feature called "Advanced Learning" (both in its mention inside the spellcasting description and it it's own description) uses the words "add spells to his list".
The word "learn" is never used as a verb to describe a warmage's spell acquisition. In fact, it's only ever used as a verb to describe the 8th level ability to cast spells without failure in Medium Armor. And once in the narrative description of the class, talking about mundane warlike skills and learning to cast in armor.

The cleric spell access doesn't specify when they can learn new spells, it's very vague. It could mean it works with advanced learning, but subject to level and school restriction, or unrestricted, or it could mean that they can add only spells that are both on the sorcerer/wizard AND cleric spell list and of the evocation school, and one level lower than the max (which would make it an anti-feature).
Also the sorcerer/wizard spell list is tricky as it's a double class spell list with single class exceptions, making it look like 3 different spell lists (I'm looking at you arcane fusion!)

Technically...the Warmage class says it must be picked from "a wizard spell". So, spells that are "Sorcerer only" (like arcane fusion) aren't eligible. Mordy's Lucubration and Rary's Menmonic Enhancer (both Wizard only) would be eligible, but they're both Transmutation.

The advanced learning feature never actually says they learn the spell however, merely that it is added to their spell list, the implication being that, if its on their spell list, they automatically know it.

That's not an implication. "his spell list is the same as his spells known list" is a direct quote.

The real question is, does cleric spell access count as adding it to your spell list? It doesn’t specifically SAY it does, but it grants literally all the benefits of having the spells on your spell list, with one ADDED stipulation (not a removed one), that if a spell is not on the sorc/wiz spell list, it is cast as a divine spell.

For me, that is enough to consider it as being added to the caster’s spell list, but for others its not.

That is the crux. Getting access to the cleric's list doesn't specify that it DOES or DOES NOT work with the class exactly like his own class list does.

However, to be fair, for Wizards, Bards, and Sorcerers who take RS, it does. They just also have to "learn" spells from their own class list in a way Warmages do not.

Okay, we've established that it doesn't work by Raw. How about we work on reworking the class so it does work?

We have not established that. We have established that there are at least 3 ways to read how these rules interact. Some are more permissive than others.

There's not much to rework. You either decide, "Yes, it works," or "No, it doesn't work," and that's pretty much it.

Basically, yes.

[Darg]

So Domain access DOES add spells to your list of spells known. To summarize the bit in Complete Divine about Extra Domains for non-Clerics;

If they are like Druids/Rangers/Paladins (IE: Prepared casters that known the entire list) they add all their spells to their spells known.

Classes with a spellbooks (IE: Wizard) can scribe the relevant divine scrolls into their book.

Spontaneous casters that choose their spells known (IE: Favored Souls or Sorcerers) can learn these new spells, but don't gain extra spells known.

Warmages (along with Beguilers and Dread Necros) are unique in that they have an entire list they know (Like Druids) but cast spontaneously (like Sorcerers). Since their spells known are their entire list and don't have a limited number of spells known one can extrapolate that they probably should use the rules for the fist set of classes as it describes them the best. They don't have a spell book, they have no limit on spells known and they know their entire list.

Finally you can not use Advanced Learning on Cleric spells, as for Warmages that only works on Evocation spells on the Wiz/Sorc list.

It is not added to their spell list. If it were it would have said so. There is precedence for this too. Domain spells aren't added to a cleric's spell list, they are held separate even though they can prepare and cast from the domains they access. There is no rule that says all spells you know must be on your spell list.

Warmages are spontaneous casters which explicitly must choose the domain spell when they select a new known spell.

The rules about selecting a domain spell are more specific than the warmage's class feature.

The advanced learning feature never actually says they learn the spell however, merely that it is added to their spell list, the implication being that, if its on their spell list, they automatically know it.

I mean, there's a lot of dysfunction if the name of a feature can't confer it's own meaning. For example, a psion's Maximum Power Level Known feature doesn't say you have a maximum power level known unless you take the name as part of the explanation.

Arcane Disciple would be better than extra spell. That feat explicitly adds the domain's spells to your class list.

But that's a tangent. My point was to address you bringing up how warmages "did all their learning" in the past, as if it were a relevant point. You kind of missed the forest for the trees on that one. Domains (not just the spells) were relevant because the RS still gets the granted power of those domains, as well as at-will spells, and wings. And to the point, divine casters themselves are never narratively described as being trained on all their spells in their past, and they have access to their whole spell list (why all members of the same class access the same list is veering into magical theory, which is not RAW).
The knowledge of their spells are a result of external forces imparting that knowledge. As a Rainbow Servant is also casting divine spells, as part of an organization that they were not a part of when they were in warmage training, why would not having trained on those spells be relevant?
THAT was the point. Was that the narrative of the Warmage's training was irrelevant, because the knowledge of the cleric spells would be imparted, similar to how it is for other divine casters.

Clerics don't learn or "know" spells in the mechanical sense. The term "known spell" is baseline reserved for wizard, bard, and sorcerer by definition. Other books have included other spellcasters, but always by explicit inclusion. The reason why a warmage bypassing the learning stage is wrong is because for it to work the feature would have to be permissive enough to do the same for all classes. Why would the warmage know all the divine spells all at once when a wizard or sorcerer has to put in time and effort to learn these spells? That doesn't make any sense, nor does the feature say that happens.

I'm going to stop for a moment before replying and reiterate something for what is now the 3rd time. I, personally, believe that the "most permissive" reading of the text is playing a bit fast and loose with "can cast cleric spells", "grants access to the spells", and "spell list is the same as spells known list". But as those words ARE in the text, I can see it as one valid way to read that, even if I am not convinced that it's the most correct one. So, going forward, I am playing a bit of Devil's Advocate here.

First off, you are basing your point off of "logic dictates you must learn before you can cast". But that is ignoring that, as a class, Warmages (and Beguilers and Dread Necromancers) have a unique relationship with their spells that other spellcasting classes do not. They DON'T "learn" their new spells on their spell lists when they gain access to a new level of spells. Wizards do (spells known for a wizard means the ones in their spellbook and the term "learn" is occassionally used to describe the process of adding a spell to the book, but not consistently), sorcerers and bards do (they use the term "learn" for adding to their Spells Known list). The word "learn" is never used for any of the 3 full-list casters adding to their spell list, except in the title of the ability "Advanced Learning". That ability just says "add a spell to your list". Meanwhile, if "their spell list is the same as their spells known list", then the inverse, being "their spells known list is the same as their spell list" is also true, right? If "A=B", then "B=A", yes? So, if we add more value to "B" (spell list explicitly given access to), then those spells become "A" (i.e. "known").

So while you COULD be correct in insisting that "can learn" must be a prerequisite to "cast", there's also a strong case for the Warmage being a Specific Overrides General situation, as the Rainbow Servant PrC in general can be taken by any Arcane spellcasting class (probably hardest for a Dread Necromancer, though, who cannot be Good, and frequently makes use of objectively evil magicks). And, more to the point, Warmages themselves don't ever need to "learn" in order to cast. Even a single-classed Warmage never "learns" a new spell throughout their career. They only "add spells to their spell list".

Your logic ignores the logic-defying nature of the Warmage's relationship to "learning" and "knowing". And in a strict-RAW sense, Warmages have no mechanism for, and indeed no need for, "learning" spells. They simply "know" them.

RAW is sometimes a thing that operates in defiance of conventional logic and common sense (especially in 3.5e). If you don't believe me, look up "drown healing". And what we are discussing is the RAW semantics.

First, drown healing doesn't actually work by RAW because once you fail your first save to start drowning, you don't make anymore. In 3 rounds you're just dead.

Second, your argument contradicts itself. Warmages and the other two classes only cast known spells. According to the definition of a known spell in the glossary, a known spell is one they have already learned. To know a spell means they must have learned them at some point. Unlike wizards or sorcerers, a warmage doesn't have text stating they learn spells as they level. If they can't learn spells from levels, but they automatically know the spells and must have learned them at some point prior; then the only viable explanation is that they learn their spell list at level 1 and unlock mechanical knowledge as they level. Just like the background description describes.

Third, yes they do. It's in the name of Advanced Learning. Adding a spell to a warmage's spell list adds it to their known spells which means by definition they learned the spell.

Fourth, a specific exception is explicit in what it does. Cleric spell access doesn't overwrite anything, it doesn't conflict with another rule, nor does it add to spells known or to a spell list. In order to get rainbow warsnake to work, you have to add more to or subtract from what is there to get it to work. Whether by ignoring the "learn" which literally causes every caster to have the ability to cast every cleric spell without having to learn them. Or by saying it adds to the warmage's spell list; which is much less destructive, but still not RAW.

You're right. Outside of Warmages, Beguilers, and Dread Necromancers, there is no such dissonance.

But there is with these classes. And while, as single-classed characters, it's largely irrelevant, it has ramifications with the interaction with some other game elements, like Rainbow Servant.

Also, as mentioned, the Arcane Disciple feat. That feat adds spells to the person's class list of arcane spells. A Wizard would still need to find a scroll for each of those 9 spells and scribe it into his book (i.e. "learn" it). A Bard or Sorcerer would still need to add them to their Spells Known individually (i.e. "learn" them). But our 3 full-list casters? Since the exact wording of "spells are added to your class list of Arcane spells"...that means that they, for 100% know all of those spells and can cast them (1 per spell level per day, as per the restrictions of the feat).

It only has ramifications if you try to make the text say something it doesn't. Arcane disciple adds to the spell list and therefor the spells known of a warmage. Cleric spell access does neither. Sometimes the simplest answer IS the answer even if it isn't the one you want. Then again, arguing RAW for PrCs is kind of like arguing about homebrew RAW because by RAW PrCs are under the full purview of the DM, not the player.

As an aside, I would like to add a note, here. One of the reasons I'm less convinced of the most permissive reading is that the Complete Divine is trash. That book has more errors in it than any other D&D book of any edition I've ever seen. And I don't just mean "bad elements", I mean actual ERRORS. The editors of that book were asleep at the wheel.

Spoiler: Errors that I just remember off the top of my head

Show

Multiple instances of "see page XX" (as in the book actually says "XX").
Spells that change name between the spell lists and the full description (I remember one is a high level druid spell relating to water).
Favored weapon of one of the deities in the book is listed as "check toee" (presumably Temple Of Elemental Evil).
Dissonance between the text and table of some prestige classes. Rainbow Servant is actually one of them, the table says it's a 6/10 caster increase, the text says it's 10/10. By RAW, text trumps table, and even the Sage Advice of the time acknowledged that, but says that the 6/10 was probably what was intended.

So...for a lot of reasons, I am generally loathe to just accept any super-powerful combo that hinges on an element from that book. I am also super-critical of any "tricks" people rely on (like "early entry" tricks). But when I look at the RAW for this combo -through the same pedantic lens that acknowledges that "drown healing" is RAW- I can see multiple ways to read the text. And all 3 that I mentioned in my post could be drawn from that text. I'm not unilaterally declaring any of them as "correct", least of all the most permissive one. My point is that they are actually all supported by text and precedent.

While I agree there are a lot of flaws in the rules in general (like an elf wizard killing you with enervation and you rising as an elf), but RAW is RAW. Personally I don't think there is a conflict between the table and the text. Other irregular progression classes state the exact same thing in the text that rainbow servant does, but do have a parenthetical notation to mention the exception. Not having a notation wouldn't automatically disqualify the table because of this precedence. But that's just the way I rule things: if there is a way for the rules not to conflict, then that is the correct way to read them.

[Elves]

This text appears under the "Class Descriptions" header in chapter 3:
Quote Originally Posted by PHB 23
Spells per Day: How many spells of each spell level the character can cast each day. If the entry is "—" for a given level of spell, the character may not cast any spells of that level.

This clause is about how to read the Spells per Day entry and seems to just be communicating that "—" means "none". Taking it out of context to mean more than that seems like willful misinterpretation.

I agree you could spin that quote into a technically-RAW argument, but I think it would be a misreading. The problem is that the actual spellcasting rules are silent on this. IIRC there was some fireball example in the PHB that used the word "level" in a way that some argued referred to class level instead of caster level, but the example was removed in RC, so it's irrelevant. The only thing the actual spellcasting rules give us is minimum CL.

This does change my view to it being something you could at least argue for. Thank you for bringing evidence instead of accusing people of fallacies.

[Darg]

This clause is about how to read the Spells per Day entry and seems to just be communicating that "—" means "none". Taking it out of context to mean more than that seems like willful misinterpretation.

I agree you could spin that quote into a technically-RAW argument, but I think it would be a misreading. The problem is that the actual spellcasting rules are silent on this. IIRC there was some fireball example in the PHB that used the word "level" in a way that some argued referred to class level instead of caster level, but the example was removed in RC, so it's irrelevant. The only thing the actual spellcasting rules give us is minimum CL.

This does change my view to it being something you could at least argue for. Thank you for bringing evidence instead of accusing people of fallacies.

Following the general class description comes game rule information. Not all of the following categories apply to every class.

Spells per Day: How many spells of each spell level the character can cast each day. If the entry is “—” for a given level of spells, the character may not cast any spells of that level. If the entry is “0,” the character may cast spells of that level only if he or she is entitled to bonus spells because of a high ability score tied to spellcasting. (Bonus spells for wizards are based on Intelligence; bonus spells for clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers are based on Charisma. See Table 1–1: Ability Modifiers and Bonus Spells, page 8.) If the entry is a number other than 0, the character may cast that many spells plus any bonus spells each day.

"Game rule information" is pretty explicit. It's an uphill battle to try to warp that around. Dismissing a rule because you think it means something that was never actually written is not RAW.

[Crake]

"Game rule information" is pretty explicit. It's an uphill battle to try to warp that around. Dismissing a rule because you think it means something that was never actually written is not RAW.

I imagine “ may not cast any spells of that level.” comes with an implied “through the merits of this class feature”. Its not a ban on the ability to do so, its merely stating that the class does not grant them such ability.

Otherwise, if youre a level 19 wizard, and take 1 level of any other spellcasting class, like say, sorcerer, you lose the ability to cast 2nd-9th level spells, because, for sorcerer, the table says “-“, therefore they cannot cast spells of those levels.

Theres a distinction between “cannot do it due to lack of capability” and “cannot do it at all, regardless of capability.”

I would argue, 9/10, dnd rules text is the former. If a rule says you cant do something, most of the time its not forbidding you, its reminding you of your (normal) limits, but if another ability bypasses, or surpasses said limits, then the rule no longer applies.

[Elves]

"Game rule information" is pretty explicit. It's an uphill battle to try to warp that around. Dismissing a rule because you think it means something that was never actually written is not RAW.

I didn't say it wasn't game rule information, I said it's clear what it's saying in context. That clause is called "Spells per day" and it's about the spells per day entry. It's saying that — means you don't get any spells per day of that level.

If you're willing to take lines out of context, there are lots of false rules you could construct.

[Darg]

I imagine “ may not cast any spells of that level.” comes with an implied “through the merits of this class feature”. Its not a ban on the ability to do so, its merely stating that the class does not grant them such ability.

Otherwise, if youre a level 19 wizard, and take 1 level of any other spellcasting class, like say, sorcerer, you lose the ability to cast 2nd-9th level spells, because, for sorcerer, the table says “-“, therefore they cannot cast spells of those levels.

That is so off base I don't even know how to respond. Multiclass characters have their own rules to keep spellcasting separate.

Theres a distinction between “cannot do it due to lack of capability” and “cannot do it at all, regardless of capability.”

I would argue, 9/10, dnd rules text is the former. If a rule says you cant do something, most of the time its not forbidding you, its reminding you of your (normal) limits, but if another ability bypasses, or surpasses said limits, then the rule no longer applies.

The rules just say you can't do it. If you can't do something, that means you lack the capability to do it.

Empower spell doesn't say I can't empower an empowered spell. Does that mean I should be able to even though there is a general rule that says I shouldn't be able to do that? In the same way versatile spellcaster doesn't say you can't cast spells of a level you can't cast. What specifically makes them different? What makes ruling them differently not arbitrary.

[Crake]

The rules just say you can't do it. If you can't do something, that means you lack the capability to do it.

Great, so we agree. The rules text is not describing something forbidden that cannot be overcome, merely that, all other things being normal, said action would be out of your capabilities

[RedMage125]

It is not added to their spell list. If it were it would have said so. There is precedence for this too. Domain spells aren't added to a cleric's spell list, they are held separate even though they can prepare and cast from the domains they access. There is no rule that says all spells you know must be on your spell list.

No, but for Warmages, there is a rule saying those two are the same thing. If "A=B", then "B=A", remember?

Warmages are spontaneous casters which explicitly must choose the domain spell when they select a new known spell.

The rules about selecting a domain spell are more specific than the warmage's class feature.

The other poster did extrapolate a bit too much from what the Complete Divine says about Extra Domains.

I mean, there's a lot of dysfunction if the name of a feature can't confer it's own meaning. For example, a psion's Maximum Power Level Known feature doesn't say you have a maximum power level known unless you take the name as part of the explanation.

That's not a hill you want to die on.

Spoiler: to conserve space

Show

Trap sense: confers a bonus to Reflex saves and AC after a trap has been triggered, does not sense them.
(Improved) Uncanny Dodge: keep Dex bonus to AC, and later unable to be flanked. Not obvious.
Inspire Courage/Greatness/Heroics: provide bonuses to hit, temp hp, and AC/saves. Not obvious.
Still Mind: bonus to Will saves against Enchantment. Nothing about stillness or calm.
Purity of Body: immunity to non magic diseases. Not obvious.
Diamond Body: immunity to poison. Name sounds like it would be DR.
Abundant Step: teleport, not "stepping" at all.
Diamond Soul: SR. No connection to the soul at all.
Empty Body: move to Ethereal plane. Not obvious.
Divine Grace: saving throw bonus. Not obvious.

That's just from the PHB. Nothing about the name of the feature conveys anything factual or of mechanical weight with regard to the rules text. Let's just go ahead and call any claim regarding the name of the feature debunked.

Clerics don't learn or "know" spells in the mechanical sense. The term "known spell" is baseline reserved for wizard, bard, and sorcerer by definition.

I'm breaking up this paragraph to stop here because this is consistently an issue with your claims. You can't just bounce back and forth between colloquial use of "know" and "learn" whenever it's convenient for you to make your point, and be fickle about how others use it. This whole tangent was about you bringing up how "logically" it must follow that one must "learn" before one can "know". That's colloquial use of those terms. That's exactly why I brought up the parallels of cleric abilities and knowledge.
Colloquially, clerics DO "know" their spells. After all, they know what their spells do and how to cast them. And that knowledge is imparted to them. So, by that same metric, a Rainbow Warsnake who is likewise casting divine spells from that cleric list could have such knowledge imparted on them.
On the other hand, if we want to stick with pure mechanics use of the term, then we must acknowledge that a Warmage (even a single classed one) never "learns" any spell. They simply "know" them. So again, no issue.

Your whole objection stems from saying "because one must colloquially learn before one can know, a Rainbow Warsnake knowing (in the mechanics sense) without learning (in the mechanics sense) causes dissonance with me". But when it's pointed out to you that clerics can "know without learning" (in the colloquial sense)", you want to fall back on "know doesn't have mechanical meaning for clerics". That is LITERALLY moving the goalposts after I attempted to meet you where you were at. So going forward, we'll have none of that. It's one or the other, only.

Other books have included other spellcasters, but always by explicit inclusion. The reason why a warmage bypassing the learning stage is wrong is because for it to work the feature would have to be permissive enough to do the same for all classes. Why would the warmage know all the divine spells all at once when a wizard or sorcerer has to put in time and effort to learn these spells? That doesn't make any sense, nor does the feature say that happens.

Why? Because Rainbow Servant has that Cleric Spell Access feature work the same way for all classes. It makes the cleric spell list accessible to them in the same way their own base class spell list is. A Wizard RS may pick a cleric spell to add to her spellbook when leveling up, or may copy a divine spell scroll into her spellbook. A Sorcerer or Bard may choose a cleric spell to be one of his spells known when gaining a level.
So...what happens when a Warmage RS treats the cleric spell list exactly like he treats his own base class spell list?

First, drown healing doesn't actually work by RAW because once you fail your first save to start drowning, you don't make anymore. In 3 rounds you're just dead.

This answer only make it clear to me that you don't know what "drown healing" is. It has nothing to do with making saving throws, and you don't hold them for 3 rounds.

Spoiler: For Space

Show

Here's the RAW for drowning in the DMG. I'm going to bold the most relevant bit.
"Any character can hold her breath for a number of rounds equal to twice her Constitution score. After this period of time, the character must make a DC 10 Constitution check every round in order to continue holding her breath. Each round, the DC increases by 1.
When the character finally fails her Constitution check, she begins to drown. In the first round, she falls unconscious (0 hp).
In the following round, she drops to –1 hit points and is dying. In the third round, she drowns."
So "drown healing" is when you take a character who is already at negative hp (let's say, for example, that Tordek has -7 hp). So he's already unconscious, and cannot hold his breath. You drown Tordek for 1 round. By the RAW, he falls unconscious (redundant), and his hit points become 0.
Congratulations. You have just "healed" Tordek for 7 hp. Pull him out of the water.
Is this illogical and absurd? Yes. Does it fly in the face of logic and common sense? Absolutely. Do we expect any DM on earth would let this work? No. But none of that is the point. The RAW explicitly say after one round of drowning, the person is at 0 hp.
Here is a link to a thread of people discussing this, in case you doubt that what I am telling you is how "drown healing" works. But it is a well-known Rules Dysfunction of 3e.

The whole point of bringing this up is to point out that the RAW sometimes fly in the face of logic and common sense. That's why I invited you to look up "drown healing", which you clearly did not. A pedantic adherence to the semantics of what's in the text is what a RAW discussion calls for. It does not matter if this causes dissonance with you.
And to the point of this: the RAW say that Warmages "know" their spells. It never uses "learn" as a verb to describe adding spells to their list (the 3 PHB arcane casters do). It even says explicitly that "he automatically knows all the spells for that level listed on the warmage's spell list." Note the singular possessive. HIS spell list. Not just "the warmage spell list" (language used just a few sentences up). So, by strict RAW text adherence, and without worrying if logic and common sense fit, what happens when a warmage is explicitly given access to a whole additional spell list?

Like I have said, all 3 of the possible interpretations have validity from what the text says. To include only giving access to cleric spells of the spell level of warmage spells he just accessed (i.e. when the Rainbow Warsnake gets access to 7th level warmage spells, he only gets 7th level cleric spells, not any of the lower ones). I am playing Devil's Advocate here, because I can understand where the most permissive reading gets its text support.

Second, your argument contradicts itself. Warmages and the other two classes only cast known spells. According to the definition of a known spell in the glossary, a known spell is one they have already learned. To know a spell means they must have learned them at some point. Unlike wizards or sorcerers, a warmage doesn't have text stating they learn spells as they level. If they can't learn spells from levels, but they automatically know the spells and must have learned them at some point prior; then the only viable explanation is that they learn their spell list at level 1 and unlock mechanical knowledge as they level. Just like the background description describes.

You're mixing colloquial and mechanics use of those words again. Let's just stick with mechanics, shall we?
The glossary specifies what a known spell is for the 3 PHB arcane casters. The PHB also refers to acquisition of new "known" (mechanics sense) spells as "learning" (but not consistently with the Wizard, see for yourself).
The Complete Arcane, OTOH, specifies that a Warmage "knows" (mechanics sense) his spells. All of them. It doesn't matter how you want to justify with narrative about any kind of "learning" (which is colloquial use of that word), because the RAW state that he just "knows" them (mechanics sense).
You don't like it. Fine, log your opinion somewhere, but stick to facts when making an argument.

Third, yes they do. It's in the name of Advanced Learning. Adding a spell to a warmage's spell list adds it to their known spells which means by definition they learned the spell.

As I pointed out, the name of a feature doesn't always convey anything. The Monk feature Diamond Body does not make her body any physically harder, after all.

Fourth, a specific exception is explicit in what it does. Cleric spell access doesn't overwrite anything, it doesn't conflict with another rule, nor does it add to spells known or to a spell list. In order to get rainbow warsnake to work, you have to add more to or subtract from what is there to get it to work. Whether by ignoring the "learn" which literally causes every caster to have the ability to cast every cleric spell without having to learn them. Or by saying it adds to the warmage's spell list; which is much less destructive, but still not RAW.

OR, as I pointed out, you let cleric spell access work the same way, unilaterally. You allow each caster to access the cleric spell list in the same way that their base class does. You're not "ignoring the word 'learn'" unilaterally. That's an appeal to absurdity, and I think you know it. Wizards will treat the cleric spells like they do Wizard spells. Rainbow Sorcerers and Bards will treat cleric spells like they do their own. But Warmages, specifically, do not need to "learn", they just "know". All of the specific exceptions are contained within the warmage class itself.

It only has ramifications if you try to make the text say something it doesn't. Arcane disciple adds to the spell list and therefor the spells known of a warmage. Cleric spell access does neither. Sometimes the simplest answer IS the answer even if it isn't the one you want. Then again, arguing RAW for PrCs is kind of like arguing about homebrew RAW because by RAW PrCs are under the full purview of the DM, not the player.

And the simplest answer is: Cleric Spell Access allows each Rainbow Servant to treat the cleric spell list like it is the spell list of their own base class. Man, that was SO EASY.

While I agree there are a lot of flaws in the rules in general (like an elf wizard killing you with enervation and you rising as an elf), but RAW is RAW. Personally I don't think there is a conflict between the table and the text. Other irregular progression classes state the exact same thing in the text that rainbow servant does, but do have a parenthetical notation to mention the exception. Not having a notation wouldn't automatically disqualify the table because of this precedence. But that's just the way I rule things: if there is a way for the rules not to conflict, then that is the correct way to read them.

You don't think there is a conflict? Other Prestige Classes that do not have full spell progression specify in the text which levels that do add progression.

Spoiler: Examples

Show

Black Flame Zealot, a 5/10 caster from the same book: "At every other Black Flame zealot level beginning with 2nd, the character gains new spells per day as if he had also gained a level in a divine spellcasting class to which he belonged before adding the prestige class level."
Contemplative, a 10/10 caster from the same books:"A contemplative who was previously a divine spellcaster continues to gain access to more powerful divine magic while following the contemplative path. Thus, when a new contemplative level is gained, the character gains new spells per day as if she had also gained a level in the divine spellcasting class she belonged to before she added the prestige class."
Rainbow Servant: "When a new rainbow servant level is gained, the character gains new spells per day as if she had also gained a level in whatever spellcasting class in which she could cast 3rd-level arcane spells before she added the prestige class."

The text clearly matches the text of PrCs that give spell progression every level. The table does not. It's utterly disingenuous to pretend that there's not a conflict, especially when this is one of the well-known errors in that book.
RAW says that "text trumps table". (DMG errata says:"Primary Sources When you find a disagreement between two D&D rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct. One example of a primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a table entry").

This clause is about how to read the Spells per Day entry and seems to just be communicating that "—" means "none". Taking it out of context to mean more than that seems like willful misinterpretation.

I agree you could spin that quote into a technically-RAW argument, but I think it would be a misreading. The problem is that the actual spellcasting rules are silent on this. IIRC there was some fireball example in the PHB that used the word "level" in a way that some argued referred to class level instead of caster level, but the example was removed in RC, so it's irrelevant. The only thing the actual spellcasting rules give us is minimum CL.

This does change my view to it being something you could at least argue for. Thank you for bringing evidence instead of accusing people of fallacies.

I never just "accused you of fallacies", play the victim somewhere else. I've provided evidence the entire time. The spellcasting rules in the PHB are not "silent on this". It's been quoted to you so many times that this statement is blatant and intentional lie. But here it is again:
(PHB, page 7):"In addition to having a high ability score, a spellcaster must be of high enough class level to be able to cast spells of a given spell level.
(See the class descriptions in Chapter 3 for details.)"
Bolded, italicized, and underlined for you. In black and white text. The very thing you claim the rules are "silent on".

"Game rule information" is pretty explicit. It's an uphill battle to try to warp that around. Dismissing a rule because you think it means something that was never actually written is not RAW.

I've been fighting that battle for awhile. I've cited the actual text, as well as the English language Grammer and syntax rules that prove that "(see chapter 3 for details)" is supplemental to the line about requiring high enough class level (due to it being a complete sentence in parentheses following a complete sentence). He made some spurious claim about what is "common in a citational reading of non fiction" (without supporting that claim in any way), and then just ignores rules text because he finds it inconvenient to a TO theory he was positing.

[Crake]

This answer only make it clear to me that you don't know what "drown healing" is. It has nothing to do with making saving throws, and you don't hold them for 3 rounds.

I think darg’s point was that, once you fail the con check, you begin drowning, and will die in 3 rounds, even if you’re pulled out of the water.

Which kinda makes sense, since you’re unconscious, and your lungs are filled with water, even if you get pulled out, youre still gonna be drowning

[RedMage125]

I think darg’s point was that, once you fail the con check, you begin drowning, and will die in 3 rounds, even if you’re pulled out of the water.

Which kinda makes sense, since you’re unconscious, and your lungs are filled with water, even if you get pulled out, youre still gonna be drowning

Interesting point. This made me go back and see if I could answer this with RAW, and not rely on "Common Sense".

I found this, right above the drowning rules, in the DMG, under the heading "Water Dangers":
"Water presents adventurers with five general problems. First, it’s an obstacle that can block their movement. Second, characters in the water face the danger of drowning or losing gear...*snip*"
This tells me, unequivocally, that once the character is removed from the water, that the "water danger" of drowning has been eliminated. Thus stopping the drowning process.

So while I believe that answers that point, I do appreciate the challenge to my assumptions! I do enjoy pedantic semantics analysis of RAW.