Extra Spell

[Nifft]

IMHO you should just take away wraithstrike, since that's a problematic spell in the hands of ... well, pretty much anyone who would want to cast it. Quickened true strike is a 5th level spell-slot, and that's just for one attack.

Nothing to do with the Extra Spell feat -- wraithstrike should go away.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Rhun]

Nothing in the feat says he can choose a spell that's not in his class list. His class description however does say he is limited.

This isn't a solid argument, though. A lot of the rules don't give specifics. I'm just saying that based on how loosely the feat is written, it can certainly be interpreted to allow a PC to choose a spell from a different class list. I'm not saying I would allow it (although the more I read through this thread, the more I think I would allow a character to do this in one of my games).

This, of course, is where the job of the DM comes in. It is his job to interpret the rules for the game he is running.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Nothing in the feat says he can choose a spell that's not in his class list. His class description however does say he is limited.

You can keep repeating that if you want, but it's not helping. The argument here is not as simple as you seem to think because the real argument is how you read rules in general. Does the lack of a restriction in the feat mean that no restrictions apply or that all restrictions apply as normal? If the latter, can a multiclass spellcaster cast any spells at all or do the restrictions apply to their other classes? Obviously, they can cast spells so an interpretation of "all restrictions apply as normal" cannot also be true.

 

[wildstarsreach]

My guess is, either he is arguing with his DM and trying to justify through semantics an unbalanced character.

Or they are both coming here freely for opinion on how the feat is designed.

For the prior, deal with it, you dont get wraithstrike.
For the latter, read the poll, notice 90%+ say no, you dont get wraithstrike.

As I have told Takasi, I understand that I am in the minority. It doesn't mean that it is wrong but it also doesn't mean that it is right.

Also any time you get more than just 1 ro 2 % not seeing the same thing in wording, that means that the wording is bad and needs to be addressed. So we needed opinions.

Anyway, I can live without wraithstrike. It would be nice in fewer situations where even at the top end of BA you still miss 90 percent of the time with hitting the creature.

 

[SlagMortar]

I don't have the feat in front of me, and do not want to try to get nitty gritty with the rules quotes are intermixed with other comments. Is it possible that the line about a spell the wizard "lacks access to" could mean specialist wizards?

If there is nothing indicating that it is talking about non-specialist wizards, then it is implied that the line is talking about specialist wizards (or similarly restricted wizards such as by PrC) because they are the only wizards that lack access to any spells at all.

 

[takasi]

The entire feat states that. The feat itself is not so restricted.

What does it state that contradicts which spells a class can select from?

The feat mentions wizard. You even quote it in your first post.

You stated:

"The example otherwise makes no sense at all. For example, a wizard has 'access' to every 0th-level spell out there. "

How does the example of a sorcerer make no sense? I do not see an "example" for a wizard, especially anything concerning 0th-level spells.

Just because he's limited to 2 free spells per level does not limit his access in any way. The wizard goes up a level, his 2 free spells can be ANY spell he chooses. There is no limitation on those 2 spells.

There are limitations on the third, and that's what the feat allows.

 

[ainbimagh]

This isn't a solid argument, though. A lot of the rules don't give specifics. I'm just saying that based on how loosely the feat is written, it can certainly be interpreted to allow a PC to choose a spell from a different class list. I'm not saying I would allow it (although the more I read through this thread, the more I think I would allow a character to do this in one of my games).

This, of course, is where the job of the DM comes in. It is his job to interpret the rules for the game he is running.

Wow that is just a ... sad way of thinking.. hell you could interpret cleave to give you a free melee attack if you kill someone with a bow, because it doesnt state that you need to deal enough damage to drop it below 0 with a melee attack.. Besides, unless a feat SPECIFICALLY states you can break/bend another rule.. you cannot and since the feat doesnt state you can cast spells from outside or you class list. You cannot, otherwise there would be no point in other rules if you could just 'interpret' around them.

Cleave: If you deal a creature enough damage to make it drop (typically by dropping it to below 0 hit points or killing it), you get an immediate, extra melee attack against another creature within reach. You cannot take a 5-foot step before making this extra attack. The extra attack is with the same weapon and at the same bonus as the attack that dropped the previous creature. You can use this ability once per round.
SIZE]

 

[EyeontheMountain]

I think that's it

BTW, also ask your friend to think carefully about wanting wraithstrike to actually be available in the game. Has he ever considered what a dragon with wraithstrike can do?

I certainly agree with this. If a player opens he can of worms with this spell or spells like M disjunction and such, then as a DM, I feel free to use it. A dragon with wraithstrike would be just terrible.

 

[Thanee]

Here's the situation, we are 4th level and there are only 5 feats between this and 20th level. If I were to use a feat on this it would have to be important enough to forgo combat feats that may be critical to survival.

Now this is something different to the initial question.

The initial question asks, whether it is allowed by the rules. It is not.

There is also the question, whether it should be allowed (as a house rule, which is certainly a possibility).

My opinion here is, that it should not be allowed, but others have different opinions there.

So, don't argue with your DM about whether it is allowed, but rather argue about whether it should be allowed.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

Also any time you get more than just 1 ro 2 % not seeing the same thing in wording, that means that the wording is bad and needs to be addressed.

Yep, it could be clearer. I wouldn't call it bad, there certainly are worse ones out there (metamagic rods, anyone ), but it is a little misleading.

BTW, if you are looking for feats, that let you hit better, try Arcane Strike (should be possible for the Duskblade to use that one). Not at your current level, though.

Bye
Thanee