Practiced Spellcaster

Mekabar

First Post
Can secondary spellcasters like Paladin, Ranger and Hexblade take the Practiced Spellcaster feat before they attain level 4? The feat description lists spellcraft 4 ranks as the only prerequisite, but technically a character at that level wouldn't have a caster level to improve yet.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Ok thanks. I suppose the requirement "caster level 1" was simply forgotten, since it doesn't make sense to be a practiced spellcaster if you can't cast spells at all.
 

Mekabar said:
Ok thanks. I suppose the requirement "caster level 1" was simply forgotten, since it doesn't make sense to be a practiced spellcaster if you can't cast spells at all.

Well, it might not have been left out accidentally. I mean, you might want it before you get a spellcaster level, in preparation for needing it.
 

I just thought I'd add that I think it is unfortunate that the Paladin needs practiced spellcaster for many of his spells to be worth casting. A house rule that I will use (as soon as someone plays a Paladin) is to use the caster level OR Paladin level when casting spells from the Paladin's spell list. The same thing would apply to the Ranger and ranger spells.
 

Lamoni said:
I just thought I'd add that I think it is unfortunate that the Paladin needs practiced spellcaster for many of his spells to be worth casting. A house rule that I will use (as soon as someone plays a Paladin) is to use the caster level OR Paladin level when casting spells from the Paladin's spell list. The same thing would apply to the Ranger and ranger spells.
For paladins or rangers IMC, I use a caster level of class level - 3. Works very well for me.
 

shilsen said:
For paladins or rangers IMC, I use a caster level of class level - 3. Works very well for me.
I asked my DM for this House Rule, which he allowed, and it hasn't caused any balance issues so far. The Paladin spell list simply isn't prone to abuse, and those spells which are most combat-effective (Divine Favor, for example) are still 3 levels behind the cleric, preserving the "weak spellcaster" feel that, I guess, the designers were going for with the Paladin, while steering clear of "useless spellcaster."

As for Practiced Spellcaster, I don't see a problem with a Paladin taking it at level 1. It wouldn't have any meaning really, since Practiced Spellcaster doesn't increase the speed of spell acquisition, and therefore wouldn't be useful for the Paladin until level 4 anyway. But he could definitely take it in advance, if there weren't any other feats he wanted to take in the meantime.
 

Lord Pendragon said:
As for Practiced Spellcaster, I don't see a problem with a Paladin taking it at level 1. It wouldn't have any meaning really, since Practiced Spellcaster doesn't increase the speed of spell acquisition, and therefore wouldn't be useful for the Paladin until level 4 anyway. But he could definitely take it in advance, if there weren't any other feats he wanted to take in the meantime.
Except that Spellcraft is not a class skill for a paladin (or a ranger, for that matter), so a pure-classed paladin (or ranger) will need to be at least 5th level to meet the prerequisite for Practised Spellcaster, anyway.
 

FireLance said:
Except that Spellcraft is not a class skill for a paladin (or a ranger, for that matter), so a pure-classed paladin (or ranger) will need to be at least 5th level to meet the prerequisite for Practised Spellcaster, anyway.
Good point. I guess the point is really moot, then. Whether or not a paladin has a caster level at lower than 4th-level, a paladin can't take Practiced Spellcaster until 5th, due to the spellcraft skill requirement.
 

Lord Pendragon said:
Good point. I guess the point is really moot, then. Whether or not a paladin has a caster level at lower than 4th-level, a paladin can't take Practiced Spellcaster until 5th, due to the spellcraft skill requirement.
But a Hexblade can, which is why I asked the question in the first place.
 

Remove ads

Top