+1 of existing spellcasting class??

[Rudar Dimble]

Let's take a 5th lvl wizard. He can cast 1 3rd lvl spell (not take int bonus into account). He advances 1 lvl in a prestige class, and one of the features of that PrC is that every lvl he gets +1 of existing arcane spellcasting class. That means he can cast 2 3rd lvl spells, like a 6th lvl wizard now, right?

But what if he advances another lvl of the wizard class after that? Then he actually is a 6th lvl wizard, instead of being a 5th lvl wizard, but casting like a 6th lvl wizard. Does he get to cast only 2 3rd lvl spells, like a normal 6th lvl wizard? Or does that +1 of existing spellcasting class still count, so he gets to cast 1 4th lvl spell, like a 7th lvl wizard?

 

[Taluron]

that +1 of existing spellcasting class still count, so he gets to cast 1 4th lvl spell, like a 7th lvl wizard?

This one

 

[Rudar Dimble]

Thanks

 

[glass]

This one

Seconded.


glass.

 

[Infiniti2000]

All in favor?

The ayes have it.

 

[kjenks]

There are some class features that are gained by this "+1 of existing spellcasting class" and some that are not. Typically, a prestige class will grant an increase in caster level, an increase in spells known (for sorcerers, bard and other spontaneous casters) and an increase in spells per day. But it does not always grant an increase in a familiar's advancement (wiz, sorc), progress toward bonus feats (wiz), and (debatably) spells automatically added to spellbook (wiz).

So read the prestige class carefully to see what you really get and what you don't. And -- by accident or by design -- not all prestige classes have the same wording for this "+1 of existing spellcasting class" ability.

 

[Corsair]

and (debatably) spells automatically added to spellbook (wiz).

Assuming that by "debatably" you actually mean "every source even vaguely related to WotC has said it does count towards it"...

 

[Scion]

Assuming that by "debatably" you actually mean "every source even vaguely related to WotC has said it does count towards it"...

Which doesnt necissarily make it true

 

[Corsair]

Which doesnt necissarily make it true

I always find comments like this amusing. Except in cases where sage advice / rules of the game expressly contradict the RAW/errata, I'm intrigued how people go out of their way to ignore them, and then create their OWN interpretations which they push as being "true".

 

[Scion]

Strangely nothing you have just said does anything to contradict what I said

We do tend to like to stick to the raw in the rules forum however. It is always a good place to start.