Versatile Spellcaster feat from Races of the Dragon

[Thanee]

Clerics don't actually know ANY spells. They have the ability to prepare and cast any spell on their spell lists, but they still don't KNOW them.

They learn spells, though (see Hyp's quote above), and learning a spell is rather synonymous with knowing it afterwards.

Bye
Thanee

 

[IanB]

Thanee's logic appears to be impeccable on this one, I don't see any grounds for letting it work across class boundaries.

On the wizard example, it seems fairly clear that the intent is that this is a feat to be used only with spontaneous casters, but they failed to build the prerequisite into the effect.

In any case a wizard has very little to gain by using it, I think. You'd have to take a level of a spontaneous caster in order to qualify for the feat, and if you had just taken that level of wizard, you'd be getting to cast your 2nd level spells at the same level anyway. So, it is a badly worded rules loophole that doesn't really allow any sexy effects, so it isn't really harmful.

 

[Hypersmurf]

In any case a wizard has very little to gain by using it, I think. You'd have to take a level of a spontaneous caster in order to qualify for the feat, and if you had just taken that level of wizard, you'd be getting to cast your 2nd level spells at the same level anyway. So, it is a badly worded rules loophole that doesn't really allow any sexy effects, so it isn't really harmful.

The Signature Spell feat (PGtF) would allow the wizard to qualify with no spellcasting level cost.

-Hyp.

 

[Mistwell]

Common sense?

Bye
Thanee

What's that?

 

[RigaMortus2]

Well, I guess no matter how you look at it, the feat is too vague. Either way, they could have stated either (a) When swapping out lower level spell slots for higher level spells in this way, you may choose any spell that you know (which is 1 level higher) from any spontaneous caster class that you know or (b) When swapping out lower spell slots for higher level spells in this way, you may only cast spells from the same class.

Probably not worded perfectly, but you get the gist. If they added something like that, we would know without a doubt.

Now regarding the feat as written... I don't think their intent was to specifically allow you to use spell slots from one class to cast spells from another. However, I think they purposely made it vague so they can leave it up to the reader to decide how they want to interpret it. It makes multiclass casters more versatile (I wouldn't necessarily say more powerful, just more versatile), which I think is a good thing.

 

[KarinsDad]

Now regarding the feat as written... I don't think their intent was to specifically allow you to use spell slots from one class to cast spells from another. However, I think they purposely made it vague so they can leave it up to the reader to decide how they want to interpret it. It makes multiclass casters more versatile (I wouldn't necessarily say more powerful, just more versatile), which I think is a good thing.

I doubt it.

I do not think they purposely made it vague.

They just did not think of the ramifications. Cross class did not even enter their minds, hence, the example in the feat.

If they had intended for it to be cross class (a very unusual game element), they would have mentioned it. They did not mention it because it was not their intent.

Occam's Razor.

 

[RigaMortus2]

I doubt it.

I do not think they purposely made it vague.

They just did not think of the ramifications. Cross class did not even enter their minds, hence, the example in the feat.

If they had intended for it to be cross class (a very unusual game element), they would have mentioned it. They did not mention it because it was not their intent.

Occam's Razor.

We can only speculate one way or the other. Obviously you have less faith in the designer's intent than I do.

BTW, what book is that spell in, Occam's Razor?