Extra Spell

[Felix]

Fixed.

My answer is clearly that you cannot add a spell not on your class list.

• (From Sorcerer description, SRD)
  A sorcerer casts arcane spells which are drawn primarily from the sorcerer/wizard spell list.

This wording allows that the sorcerer can draw spells from another spell list, or at very least does not prohibit the sorcerer drawing spells from another spell list.

• (From Sorcerer description, SRD)
  He can cast any spell he knows without preparing it ahead of time

This wording means that he is able to cast any Spell Known, regardless of how it came to be on his spells known list.

• (From Extra Spell)
  Thus, a 4th-level sorcerer (maximum spell level 2nd) gains a new 0-level or 1st-level spell known with which to expand her repertoire.

This wording clearly links the terms "learn" with the Sorcerer's "spells known", meaning that any spell learned for him becomes one of his Spells Known.

• (From Extra Spell)
  Benefit: You learn one additional spell at any level up to one level lower than the highest level of spell you can currently cast.

This wording clearly does not prescribe the spell list from which a spell may be selected, allowing that a spell from any list may be selected.


1. Must not necessarily draw spells from the Sor/Wiz list.
2. May cast any Spell Known.
3. A learned spell is a Spell Known.
4. You may learn any spell, not to be restricted by class list.

Even if you disagree with this for whatever reason, how can you say that this wording leads clearly to the conclusion that you must choose a spell from within your class spell list? The only way I can see for it to be clear is if you admit the FAQ, in which case you're talking about "what the rules should be" instead of "what the rules are". A worthy topic, but not something I'd argue with anyone over.

 

[Artoomis]

...Even if you disagree with this for whatever reason, how can you say that this wording leads clearly to the conclusion that you must choose a spell from within your class spell list? The only way I can see for it to be clear is if you admit the FAQ, in which case you're talking about "what the rules should be" instead of "what the rules are". A worthy topic, but not something I'd argue with anyone over.

While it may be possible to read Extra Spell as granting you ANY extra spell (regardless of spell list), for that to be true it should be CLEARLY spelled out as this would be a very signifcicant rule change.

It seems to me, as written, this is primarily a spontaneous caster's feat. They are teh ones who benefit most from an extra spell known.

 

[Felix]

While it may be possible to read Extra Spell as granting you ANY extra spell (regardless of spell list), for that to be true it should be CLEARLY spelled out as this would be a very signifcicant rule change.

Extra Spell
You learn one additional spell at any level up to one level lower...

The underlined is the only description of the spell learned that does not describe the limitation on the level of the spell learned.

"You learn one additional spell..."

This feat does not restrict the origin of the additional spell. The sorcerer's description implies that gaining spells from outside the Sor/Wiz spell list is possible. As written, the only restrictions to the source of the additional spell are user, DM, or FAQ applied. Not that they arn't wholly valid, but their source is not from the feat nor from the PHB.

At very least, not for sorcerers.

It seems to me, as written, this is primarily a spontaneous caster's feat. They are teh ones who benefit most from an extra spell known.

Absolute agreement from me on this opinion.

EDIT (Significant rules change):
This is a red herring. Every new feat is a significant rules change, at least for somebody. If a feat allowed Rogues to sneak attack while blinded then the rules would have been significantly changed from insisting upon a rogue being able to see his opponent to allowing a sneak attack while the rogue cannot see his opponent. Extra Spell changes the rules concerning usual manner in which spells are learned.

EDIT #2 (FAQ):
If the FAQ is a direct gague of what the intent of the feat writer was, then clearly the writer did not intend for the feat to allow sorcerers or anyone to be able to select spells from outside their class spell list. This would be a very good reason why it is not explicitly allowed in the feat.

But regardless, the wording of the feat leads to the conclusion that you can choose any spell. The character's ability to cast the spell may be in quesiton, but what is not in question is that any spell may be chosen for the PC to learn. In the sorcerer's case, there is a clear link thusly: Extra Spell may be any spell --> spell learned --> Spells Known --> unfettered ability to cast Spells Known --> ability to cast spell learned.

 

[takasi]

• (From Sorcerer description, SRD)
  A sorcerer casts arcane spells which are drawn primarily from the sorcerer/wizard spell list.

This wording allows that the sorcerer can draw spells from another spell list, or at very least does not prohibit the sorcerer drawing spells from another spell list.

That clause is explained in the PHB on page 179. "With the DM's permission" a sorcerer can research spells that aren't on the wizard/sorcerer list.

As I've said before, there is some misleading language in the RAW feat that allows a DM to interpret the rule either way. Does anyone disagree?

The FAQ clarifies the WotC interpretation. Does anyone believe the FAQ contradicts the feat? Does anyone believe that the FAQ "got it wrong"? Is there anything in the RAW of the feat that contradicts the FAQ ruling, and if so what?

Also, please note that the duskblade does not say "primarily", it says spells are drawn from the list. No "primarily". In this case, can those who are arguing about the sorcerer at least agree that, for the duskblade, there is very little reason to interpret this feat as a legitimate method of acquiring non-duskblade spells?

 

[takasi]

But regardless, the wording of the feat leads to the conclusion that you can choose any spell. The character's ability to cast the spell may be in quesiton, but what is not in question is that any spell may be chosen for the PC to learn.

Why do you make this assumption?

What words, specifically, from the feat say that you can choose any spell?

There are classes where there is no "wiggle room" written in their class like the clause for a sorcerer's spell selection. IMO, if there are restrictions on a class then a feat cannot override these restrictions unless the feat specifically mentions it.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Does anyone believe the FAQ contradicts the feat? Does anyone believe that the FAQ "got it wrong"?

This is one case where I think the FAQ got it wrong.

1) The FAQ interpretation is contra the benefits of a nearly identically worded feat, Expanded Knowledge. The only difference is one feat is explicit where another is silent. IMHO, the silent spaces in the rules are meant to be the purview of the DM- if nothing else, they should be interpreted as per their nearest analogue. I would love to see the FAQ rationale for the difference.

2) The FAQ interpretation also seems to be without regard to the Independent Research section of p179. Interpreting Extra Spell like Expanded Knowledge only elminates the necessity of research time and an expenditure of wealth to learn the "off-list" spell- hardly game-breaking.

IMO, if there are restrictions on a class then a feat cannot override these restrictions unless the feat specifically mentions it.

Here, we're just doomed to go in circles. IMHO, the feat can override the restrictions if it is silent especially if similar feats elsewhere are explicit.

My reason for this is that I've seen several examples within the rules where the rules are simply imprecise or even contradictory in the use of language.

 

[Thanee]

Pages 178-179 tell you that a Wizard must have his spellbooks to prepare spells for casting.

But it doesn't say, that the Wizard can cast spells in his/her spellbook.

Between Magic Scrolls and Independent Research, there is no arcane spell outside of a Wizard's reach. With enough time and research, he can add at least some version of any arcane spell to his spellbook.

Only, if the DM creates a new spell for the Sor/Wiz list to allow so.

If you read the section on p56 narrowly: "A wizard casts arcane spells...which are drawn from the sorcerer/wizard spell list..." then the section of the PHB dealing with Independent Research (bolded, above) is essentially meaningless.

Why? Research adds to the class spell list, so it works totally fine.

If, instead, the designers really meant what they wrote in the Independent Research text, giving it full effect means Wizards can clearly cast spells not on the Sorc/Wiz list, if they invest money and take time to research duplicating extant spells from other classes or innovating spells of their own.

This is somewhat correct only... they can cast them *after* they have successfully researched them (pure DM decision, if the spell can be created; it is advised *against* allowing spells like Cure Light Wounds, actually), at which point they are added to the class spell list and then the text works mighty fine.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

Here, we're just doomed to go in circles. IMHO, the feat can override the restrictions if it is silent especially if similar feats elsewhere are explicit.

My reason for this is that I've seen several examples within the rules where the rules are simply imprecise or even contradictory in the use of language.

So, whenever a feat does not say *anything* it can just do whatever you want?

So I can just pick up Extra Spell once, and then learn every spell in existance, since it only says, I can learn one spell (totally non-restrictive statement there; i.e. when I learn two spells I also learn one spell), but is silent whether I can also learn another spell and another spell and another spell... ?

It's also silent about raising my BAB to 1,000. I think it does that, too?

Or how about Extend Spell?

Benefit: An extended spell lasts twice as long as normal. A spell with a duration of concentration, instantaneous, or permanent is not affected by this feat. An extended spell uses up a spell slot one level higher than the spell’s actual level.

It doesn't say there, that my Sorcerer has to use a full-round action to apply this feat, since feats overrule all general rules that are not repeated, it can just be used like this? Can it be used at all? It certainly doesn't say how it is used...



Sorry, but I certainly agree, that there are cases, where the language is contradictory, but that doesn't mean, that in *all* cases, when something is not spelled out twice or thrice, you can just ignore written rules, especially when they are not contradicted in the slightest.

This is especially true, when a reading of a feat *does* contradict written rules, as opposed to another that does not.

Bye
Thanee

P.S. Besides, when a Wizard can learn any spell with Extra Spell (within the given spell level and school limits, but not within the class list limits), then a Wizard can do so already without the feat and the rule for casting spells does not really apply and does not limit them in the slightest, since the normal rules for learning spells do not say anything at all about the class list either. And then, in turn, Extra Spell does not allow them to learn any spell at all, since it is generally used by Wizards to learn spells they cannot research, which by your definition rules out all spells (existing and non-existing), anyways.

The question then remains... why is there a Wizard spell list in the first place?

For activating wands, maybe...

 

[Thanee]

I find it interesting that the most vehement defenders of Extra Spell allowing you to add spells outside of your spell list simultaneously argue for strict literal interpretation...

Not sure why you put this under a quote of mine, but I am certainly not saying, that you can use Extra Spell to add a spell that is not on your class list already. In fact, I'm saying the exact opposite... you can only learn spells from your class list.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

So, whenever a feat does not say *anything* it can just do whatever you want?

Of course not. You look first to similar feats for clarification. If none exists, you check with WotC (FAQ/Eratta/CustServ). You then examine whatever you find in those sources and make a ruling for your campaign...and I do mean campaign. I can reasonably forsee running different campaigns with slightly different rules interpretations in order to fit the demands of the campaign setting. After all, 2Ed did just that by nixing spells for Clerics in Dragonlance.

Here, we have a clearly analogous feat, nearly as similar to it as Practiced Spellcaster is to Practiced Manifester. As yet, I've seen no convincing reason why 2 feats so similar should be adjudicated so differently when the main difference is explicitness vs silence.

(And, for the record, Extra Spell isn't silent as to how many spells you get to learn. It closes by saying that you may take the feat multiple times, each time for a new spell- just like Expanded Knowledge works with psionic powers.)

And then, in turn, Extra Spell does not allow them to learn any spell at all, since it is generally used by Wizards to learn spells they cannot research, which by your definition rules out all spells (existing and non-existing), anyways.

Its not my rule- the research rules are in black & white on pg 179 of the PHB.

1) As has been pointed out by others, the costs of time and gold are not trivial, and may in fact hinder a PC from learning a spell.

2) Despite expending time and GP, the wizard may fail his Spellcraft check, rendering him unable to research the spell at that time. If he deems the spell vital enough, he may see burning a Feat to learn it as a valid option. There may also be campaign-specific reasons why a spell cannot be learned through the process delineated on pg 179.

For example- I ran a campaign in which the party was marooned on a deserted island for their first 5 levels. The island was a hunting preserve, with the party as the prey du jour. Without a lab, a library, any gold or time for research, the PC turned to learning how to fight (he took Ftr levels). Had he considered it, Extra Spell could have broadened his arsenal a bit.

The question then remains... why is there a Wizard spell list in the first place?

To reduce options right out of the gate, thus providing initial form to spellcasting classes, and, of course, to continue to restrict the spell access of those PCs that don't take advantage of the research rules (for whatever reason).