RangerWickett
Legend
From that, I'd think they just mean the level of the spells, not the spells themselves. Finding out more seems to be more powerful than a feat should grant at 9th level.
Nathan said:In case only the levels are disclosed, why doesn't the feat then say "you learn the levels of the highest-level spells the opponent is capable of casting"?
Corsair said:Because that would be redundant.
John can drive an unknown number of cars to work, painted in at most 10 different colors (assuming no epic custom paint jobs). By taking the feat "Hack into the MAACO database", "you learn the darkest-color cars john is capable of driving".
Does that sentence sound to you like you learn what color the cars might be, or that you would learn not only the color, but the make and model of every car of that color?
I suppose what makes this somewhat more confusing is that I don't think that sentence is technically grammatically correct. It has two nouns which could be the subject of the sentence (color and cars). One of those two nouns should be part of a prepositional phrase starting with the word "of". Either "the darkest-color of cars" or "cars of the darkest color". Given the phrasing used, I lean towards the former. I understand why the confusion existed in the first place though.
That being said, I can't think of a single spell, feat, effect, etc in the game which tells you what specific spells/powers a person has, while arcane sight already exists to tell you the levels. As such, I'd be inclined to say that alone lends support to Victim's reasoning.
Nathan said:However, then it sounds more like a meta-game feat as I don't like the idea of characters knowing the concept of spell levels. (There shouldn't also be a feat disclosing hit points or HD.) Thus, I'd ban the feat altogether.
Corsair said:This confuses me. It's pretty clear to any spellcaster that there are some spells which are more powerful than others. They might not use the word level (then again, they might), but anyone capable of casting 0th and 1st level spells knows the distinction between the two.
It talks about intangibles. Thus I think that the Vatic Gaze feat (telling levels) contradicts the spirit of the core rules a bit.Regardless of the version of binding you cast, you can specify triggering conditions that end the spell and release the creature whenever they occur. These triggers can be as simple or elaborate as you desire, but the condition must be reasonable and have a likelihood of coming to pass. The conditions can be based on a creature’s name, identity, or alignment but otherwise must be based on observable actions or qualities. Intangibles such as level, class, Hit Dice, or hit points don’t qualify. Once the spell is cast, its triggering conditions cannot be changed. Setting a release condition increases the save DC (assuming a saving throw is allowed) by 2.
Just as a side note which may be ignored: A geometric progression a progression of the form 1, q, q^2, q^3, e.g. 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, ... (exponential growth). I am not aware of any D&D rule using this progression. I think you mean an arithmetic progression (albeit of higher order), which means polynomial growth like it is used for item pricing.Along the way, some amateur mathematician would have figured out the weird geometric progression, and how it ties into concepts like the number of pages required to scribe a spell and how many multiples of 6 seconds your spells last.