D&D FAQ gets it wrong?

[takasi]

I'm looking at Ranger and Paladin, and they're not matching up...

I'm looking at Eldritch Knight, and he's not matching up either.

...for clarifying Caster Level requirements, but that's not what wildstarsreach was referring to in his quote.

PS is not core. wildstarsreach is saying that regardless of the discussion over caster level vs spellcaster (,) level the PS feat is not core and can be ignored or changed.

Then again, even core can be changed with house rules and this isn't a house rules forum. For convention play, RPGA and "by-the-books" DM arbitrators if a clarification from the developers can be made then it should. I think it's pretty clear in this case what PS allows for PrC qualification, right?

 

[RigaMortus2]

No I'm saying that you look at intent by what you can do with core rules only. Then you scrutinize carefully when you expand beyond core. Yes now you have where you can supplement caster level without actually earning let us say 5th level caster.

Even though a minor cloak of displacement requires only a 3rd level character to make, you must be at least 5th level to cast. I personally don't like the idea of using scrolls to create magic items but under 3.5 I believe that that is allowable. But if you have to cast yourself, then the above limits are where I'm coming from. To me there has to be some worth to taking a standard wizard. When you make only caster level, as most PrC's don't give you an increase in spellcaster level every level. I think that PS is giving too much for one single feat.

Caster level should be spellcaster level of PrC's and item creation.

Caster Level = The level at which you cast your spells.
Spellcaster Level = The level of the actual spellcasting class you have.

So a 5th level Paladin would be a 5th level spellcaster (he is capable of casting spells, so that makes him a spellcaster) and his level in that spellcasting class (which is Paladin) is 5th.

However, his caster level would only be 2, since the Paladin has a caster level of 1/2 his level (rounded down).

A level 5 Paladin with Practiced Spellcaster feat could get into Acolyte of the Skin PrC next level since he meets the prereq of "caster level 5th".

Likewise, a Wizard1/Rogue4 with PS feat is a level 1 spellcaster, but HAS a caster level of 5. And since PrCs require a specific caster level, he would qualify. If it required a specific spellcaster level, then he would not. Please tell me what PrCs out there require a specific spellcaster level.

 

[wildstarsreach]

Sorry to have ignored you all for a few days but I was hospitalized for an infection.

Where can we have an official ruling on whether taking PS will meet the requirements of PrC's?

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Sorry to have ignored you all for a few days but I was hospitalized for an infection.

Where can we have an official ruling on whether taking PS will meet the requirements of PrC's?

The only way to get an official response if one does not exist in the FAQ is through Customer Service. I have quoted their replies to this question above.

 

[Rystil Arden]

The only way to get an official response if one does not exist in the FAQ is through Customer Service. I have quoted their replies to this question above.

Though I agree with the answer they gave this time, I can't agree that custserv gives an official response. Custserv contradicts itself and flip-flops on difficult rulings with nearly 50% probability.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Though I agree with the answer they gave this time, I can't agree that custserv gives an official response. Custserv contradicts itself and flip-flops on difficult rulings with nearly 50% probability.

Whether they are right or wrong, they are the only "official" source without an errata or FAQ entry. Besides, the Sage does the same thing and his rulings get posted to the FAQ all the time. Depends on whether you want "official" or "common consensus among fans." I usually test both and am also convinced in this instance that CustServ got it right.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Whether they are right or wrong, they are the only "official" source without an errata or FAQ entry. Besides, the Sage does the same thing and his rulings get posted to the FAQ all the time. Depends on whether you want "official" or "common consensus among fans." I usually test both and am also convinced in this instance that CustServ got it right.

CustServ isn't an official or authoritative source, though. As to the Sage and the FAQ, the Sage rulings pretty much are what becomes the FAQ, and they are thus equally contradictory. Which is to say, the FAQ is unreliable because it sometimes conflicts with itself or the actual text. CustServ, on the other hand, is even more unreliable, and conflicts with itself on a large number of occasions (though not quite half) for a sufficiently difficult question.

 

[Legildur]

CustServ isn't an official or authoritative source, though. As to the Sage and the FAQ, the Sage rulings pretty much are what becomes the FAQ, and they are thus equally contradictory. Which is to say, the FAQ is unreliable because it sometimes conflicts with itself or the actual text. CustServ, on the other hand, is even more unreliable, and conflicts with itself on a large number of occasions (though not quite half) for a sufficiently difficult question.

A man after my own heart.

While I am typically scathing of CustServ responses, there is, however, some anecdotal evidence from reputable posters on these boards that Cust Serv have lifted their game in the last few months. It may not be enough to make them reliable, but it sounds like an improvement.

 

[RigaMortus2]

Where can we have an official ruling on whether taking PS will meet the requirements of PrC's?

If by "official" you mean often wrong with respect to the RAW or often gives contradicotry answers/rulings then CustServ is who you'll have to ask, or the FAQ is where you'll have to look. If you are alright with accepting an "official" answer that may be wrong according to RAW, well there you have it.

 

[RigaMortus2]

CustServ isn't an official or authoritative source, though. As to the Sage and the FAQ, the Sage rulings pretty much are what becomes the FAQ, and they are thus equally contradictory. Which is to say, the FAQ is unreliable because it sometimes conflicts with itself or the actual text. CustServ, on the other hand, is even more unreliable, and conflicts with itself on a large number of occasions (though not quite half) for a sufficiently difficult question.

Well, "official" does not always mean accurate or correct now...