Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sezarious" data-source="post: 6728018" data-attributes="member: 6792106">With respect OP, I'm all about looking at RAW and RAI and seeing where the game can be stretched where it shouldn't.  I'm primarily a DM though, so I don't actually try to exploit loopholes etc, but sometimes I read through and question certain rules for fun.Looking at your post, I am going to ascertain you are a paladin player, or soon wish to be.Let's look at the hypothetical benefits if we rule that a spell slot comes with the feat if you're a paladin:-An extra 6 potential spell slots for a 20th level human paladin-The ability to cast some non-paladin spells unconventionally (albeit each once per day, as per (post #2) PnPgamer's reference to sage advice (yeah, Official by the way)).  Spells of use such as faerie fire, Goodberry and shield (on top of shield of faith, could be used in a pinch to save a paladin's butt) are the initial ones that pop into my head.-Last, but not least, an extra 12d6, or 72 potential points of damage per day, 144 points if you're a paladin who likes to try and smite only on a crit.No, I'm afraid that according to RAW, I cannot see any reference to you gaining a spell slot as a result of spending a feat.  Gaining an extra spell slot for a feat was not a problem in 3.5, but that is not the case here.To want to have a RAW discussion, then try to argue something based on inference is just not working for your argument.They definitely did not leave out the spell slot thing by accident.  Spell slots are gold, especially for a paladin.  I've no doubt they would have discussed the possibility of a feat that grants a spell slot, but the feat is actually worded very carefully to prevent that.Sorry mate.  Like I said, I love looking for loopholes in the RAW.</blockquote>

Verification