D&D FAQ gets it wrong?

[Legildur]

My Nov 2004 Complete Arcane says (page 82):

Choose a spellcasting class that you possess. Your spells cast from that class are more powerful.
Prerequisite: Spellcraft 4 ranks.
Benefit: Your caster level for the chosen spellcasting class increases by 4. This benefit <snip stuff about hit die limitation, example of such, must choose only one spelllcasting class, does not affect spells per day/known, etc>

The wording on p84 of my May 2004 Complete Divine is ever so slightly different, but I don't believe that it changes the effect of the feat.

<edit> Nevermind. I see events have overtaken me....

 

[wildstarsreach]

Here's the problem. You only need core to play the game. You can add supplements to expand and make richer the game. I look at first that core is the rule. Not the supplements. Caster level would be equal to spellcaster level under core. Look at all the classes and match them up.

Now you begin to add supplements, look at the benefits. PS offers well more than most feats without giving that is now makes your caster level 5 in the case of wiz 1/ftr 4 for qualifying for acolote of the skin.

As I said before, RAW and FAQ may add clarifications but it is still my job as DM as the final arbitrator to look at balance of allowing things in my game.

People have said that I am making a house rule, I then say yes it is. I ask how many use exactly the rules as printed without any exceptions. We all have our lines and house rules as you say. PS has plenty of benefit without adding more.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Here's the problem. You only need core to play the game. You can add supplements to expand and make richer the game. I look at first that core is the rule. Not the supplements. Caster level would be equal to spellcaster level under core. Look at all the classes and match them up.

Now you begin to add supplements, look at the benefits. PS offers well more than most feats without giving that is now makes your caster level 5 in the case of wiz 1/ftr 4 for qualifying for acolote of the skin.

As I said before, RAW and FAQ may add clarifications but it is still my job as DM as the final arbitrator to look at balance of allowing things in my game.

People have said that I am making a house rule, we then yes. I ask how many use exactly the rules as printed without any exceptions. We all have our lines and house rules as you say. PS has plenty of benefit without adding more.

That's cool, then--I think everyone, even here, will respect your decision if you identify it clearly as a houserule as you did

 

[wildstarsreach]

One other thing, unless you are playing a specific campaign world, rules outside of core are optional. They are not required. You sould say that allowing anything outside of core is a house rule. Therefore, no matter which way is ruled, they are all house rules. Your read, my read and or interpretation.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Caster level would be equal to spellcaster level under core. Look at all the classes and match them up.

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.

-Hyp.

 

[irdeggman]

Pg 72 of Complete Arcane (which is where the specific version of PS is located) talks about the difference between "caster level" and "spellcasting level".

They are not the same.

 

[irdeggman]

With acolyte of the skin it does say Caster level. This prestige class is in the Complete Arcane. It really should by intention be open to wizards. There really should not be 4 levels of fighter with one level wizard and PS allowing this PrC to be taken. I feel based on where this is found to be violating the spirit. WotC rarely thinks of all the perverted wonky class combos the full ramifications of their decisions.

Or a warlock, specifically listed in table 2-1 (Complete Arcane) as a class that the Prestige Class is good for.

Warlocks have no spellcaster level but do have a caster level.

And since warlocks are the the same book it is logical to assume that the two were "designed" to work together.

 

[irdeggman]

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

So a warlock can never create magic items?

The Complete Arcane says otherwise.

Warlocks have no spellcaster level (since they can't cast spells) but they don have a caster level.

The Imbue Item class ability (at 12th level warlock) is pretty clear on this. "although he must know the applicable item creation feat".

 

[Plane Sailing]

But since none of us here are the actual designers, who are we to determine what the "intent" is? This is the RULES forum after all, not the INTENT forum. We look at the Rules as Written and go from there. It is not up to us to decide "oh, well they probably mean this..." when reading ambiguous rules. At least, not on the rules forum. That is alright to do in your own home campaign of course.

Rigamortus, this kind of posting has got people banned in the past and can do so in the future too.

This forum is for discussing possible intent just as much as the grammar and spelling in which rules are written.

Do not make such assertions again, please.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Dude, she (I think 'she'--the custserve e-mail said it was responding to 'Kelly') already did that in post 42

He. How could you assume such based on Kelly and Vyvyan?

In comment to the "cheesy" quote above:

Everything is a trade-off. A Wiz1/Brb4/AotSkin x is less focused on spell power and more focused on combat prowess, while going straight wizard would give you higher level spells. You can't enter the PrC any earlier with PS than you could with just a straight wizard. I proposed this idea to my DM (after investigating the legality by RAW through CustServ) with a demon warrior background story, his rage not coming from a cultural place, but instead from his demonic heritage. He liked the idea and if I get a chance to play the character I will (although I usually DM for our group and have many character concepts come and go without ever getting to play them). The hardest prerequisite to meet for AotS is peaceful contact with an evil outsider and I might not get into the PrC when planned due to this caveat. If I actually put this PC in play I would work closely with my DM to figure out how this could occur.

Edit: Received following response from CustServ further trying to clarify the difference between Spellcaster Level and Caster Level:

Subject
RE: Prestige Class Requirements and Practiced Spellcaster [Incident: 060825-000128]

Discussion Thread
Response (Zephreum H.) 10/16/2006 07:45 AM
Kelly,

Spellcaster level 5th means 5th level spellcaster not Caster level 5th. The FAQ entry is referring to a requirement of being a 5th level spellcaster not being able to cast spells at an effective caster level of 5. Yes the wording is possibly a bit misleading, but this has been reported to R&D.

Take Care!
We would appreciate your feedback on the service we are providing you. Please click here to fill out a short questionnaire.

To login to your account, or update your question please click here.

Zephreum.
Customer Service Representative