Extra Spell

[ainbimagh]

*sighs* Its things like that, that make me happy I play with rules lawyers, they may try to get the best of me.. but they do so by explicitly following the rules to the letter, rather than assuming that something is possible because the skill does not say it is not.

 

[Mort]

Isn't swift casting and then arcnae channeling as part of an attack casting 2 spells. Isn't this expressly forbidden unless you have one of the exceptions?

What other exceptions? Quickened and swift spells are exceptions.
There's absolutely nothing against casting a swift spell and a standard spell in the same round (heck that's the main reason swift and quickened spells exist - one of the most common wizard combos is quickened true strike followed by disintigrate).

[edited for clarity]

 

[Rhun]

You can submit it through the website to cust serv, but the feat is not badly worded, the desire to abuse semantics to bend rules is the issue. WoTC cant change that.

Oh, please. I'm a DM 90% of the time, and I have no interest in abusing the feat. It IS badly worded, and can be interpreted multiple ways. Just because one person was hoping to get Wraithstrike out of it does not mean everyone is out to bend the rules.

 

[wildstarsreach]

Oh, please. I'm a DM 90% of the time, and I have no interest in abusing the feat. It IS badly worded, and can be interpreted multiple ways. Just because one person was hoping to get Wraithstrike out of it does not mean everyone is out to bend the rules.

Here's the thing. I'm not asking for this now. We are at 4th level. If my interpretation was correct, then this would have been possible around 9th level. I'm not trying to abuse the rules or blindside the DM. I'm informing them of my intent and trying to find out if it was possible. Thank you above for sticking up for me.

 

[Thanee]

However, the feat does EXPLICITY say "For classes such as wizard that have more options for learning spells, Extra Spell is generally used to learn a specific spell that the character lacks access to and would be unable to research."

Emphasis is mine.

I emphasised another part there...

'Is generally used' clearly implies, that this sentence is not a rule, but rather an explanation for a rule (which is in the first sentence (only)).

Is it possible, while not allowing spells from other class lists to be learned, for wizards to use the feat to aquire a spell they lack access to and would be unable to research? Yes it is (especially when the DM highly restricts how many spells wizards can learn apart from their free level up spells; the feat allows them to learn another spell of their choosing without the need of a scroll or a teacher or the time and money to do research). And that's all there is to it.

It's an explanation (attempt) why a wizard would maybe choose this feat, even though it makes little sense for a wizard to choose this feat, because the benefit is extremely small. It's certainly not a good explanation.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Rhun]

Here's the thing. I'm not asking for this now. We are at 4th level. If my interpretation was correct, then this would have been possible around 9th level. I'm not trying to abuse the rules or blindside the DM. I'm informing them of my intent and trying to find out if it was possible. Thank you above for sticking up for me.

Not a problem at all. I get sick of everyone yelling "Abuse, abuse!" It's a game, after all, and IMHO, any DM that can't prevent player abuse shouldn't be a DM. I've been playing over 20 years, and never had to rely on a FAQ or anything else to clarify the rules for me. 'course, my players have always been cool with whatever I decide too, so I guess I am blessed in that aspect.

 

[Rhun]

Is it possible, while not allowing spells from other class lists to be learned, for wizards to use the feat to aquire a spell they lack access to and would be unable to research? Yes it is (especially when the DM highly restricts how many spells wizards can learn apart from their free level up spells; the feat allows them to learn another spell of their choosing without the need of a scroll or a teacher or the time and money to do research). And that's all there is to it.

It's an explanation (attempt) why a wizard would maybe choose this feat, even though it makes little sense for a wizard to choose this feat, because the benefit is extremely small. It's certainly not a good explanation.

Perhaps, but I am of the opinion that this would truly be a lousy feat for a wizard to take if that is the case. Of course, I rarely put restrictions on what spells they have available to learn. Again, I'm not arguing that you are wrong, I'm just saying that the way the feat is written, it could be interpreted either way.

How 'bout this though...if Dara wants to take this feat in my ToEE game, she can choose the spell from any spell list she wants.

 

[Terath Ninir]

I say yes, because the feat is completely useless even for sorcerers if you only get a piddly lower level spell from your own spell list.

That said, I wouldn't let a wizard take a spell that is only on the bard, ranger, or paladin list. A 9th level wizard shouldn't be able to get holy sword. But cure critical wounds would be fine. If you want the spell bad enough to blow a feat on it, why not?

 

[Thanee]

Perhaps, but I am of the opinion that this would truly be a lousy feat for a wizard to take if that is the case.

Definitely. That's - IMHO - also the reason why this sentence is there in the first place.
They should just have left it out, which would have made things much easier and clearer.

Of course, I rarely put restrictions on what spells they have available to learn. Again, I'm not arguing that you are wrong, I'm just saying that the way the feat is written, it could be interpreted either way.

The feat alone... yes. The feat in context of the remaining rules... no.

How 'bout this though...if Dara wants to take this feat in my ToEE game, she can choose the spell from any spell list she wants.

You think we need the extra healing?

Bye
Thanee

 

[wildstarsreach]

I say yes, because the feat is completely useless even for sorcerers if you only get a piddly lower level spell from your own spell list.

That said, I wouldn't let a wizard take a spell that is only on the bard, ranger, or paladin list. A 9th level wizard shouldn't be able to get holy sword. But cure critical wounds would be fine. If you want the spell bad enough to blow a feat on it, why not?

I would rule that if he is an arcane caster, then it's is only arcane spells. If it is divine, then they would only be able to get divine spells. There are many domain spells that a cleric doesn't get in their general spell list.