Warmage and Extra Spell

[Thanee]

I'll just stick with what the feat says for now.

Ok, let's pretend, that a wizard could actually learn a cleric spell with that feat.
Let's say the wizard learns Cure Light Wounds.

Now, please quote the rule, which allows a wizard to cast this spell.


And no adding in words that arent there...



Here's the quote, that clearly say, that the wizard cannot:

A wizard casts arcane spells which are drawn from the sorcerer/wizard spell list.

A simple fact: Cure Light Wounds is not on the sorcerer/wizard spell list:

Cure Light Wounds
Conjuration (Healing)
Level: Brd 1, Clr 1, Drd 1, Healing 1, Pal 1, Rgr 2

So, how does it suddenly pop up there, so that our wizard can actually cast it, and did not just totally waste that feat?

Bye
Thanee

 

[Arbiter of Wyrms]

I guess my question would be, if a 4th level sorcerer wanted to learn a Cleric spell (say, Cure Light Wounds), how would this feat qualify him to do that? Sorcerer's cast Sorcerer/Wizard spells, not Cleric spells. A 4th level Sorcerer can cast up to 2nd level Sorcerer spells, not 2nd level Cleric spells, right? Since a Sorcerer can't cast 2nd level Cleric spells (nor can it cast 1st or 0-level Cleric spells) it wouldn't qualify for that spell. Or am I missing something?

I don't think you're missing anything. I think that you're reading in something that isn't there, specifically, I think that you are (understandably) reading in a restriction to spells on the characters class list. While such a restriction may have been intended by the designers, no such restriction is explicated in the feat's description. Lower level spells are not a prerequisiste for taking the feat, nor is membership in a spellcasting class. In theory, a fighter could take this feat and gain knowledge of any previously-unknown spell of level -1 or lower. As no such spells exist, this feat would grant a fighter no benefit.

EXTRA SPELL
Benefit: You learn one additional spell at any level up to one lower than the highest level of spell you can currently cast. Thus, a 4th-level sorcerer (maximum spell level 2nd) gains a new 0-level or 1st-level spell known with which to expand her repertoire. For classes such as a 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.
Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Each time, you learn a new spell at any level up to one lower than the highest level of spell you can cast.

 

[Scion]

Ok, let's pretend, that a wizard could actually learn a cleric spell with that feat. Let's say the wizard learns Cure Light Wounds.

Is there anything that says you cannot cast any spells that you know?

Going back to the feat lets see.

Is cure light wounds a spell? yes
Is it a spell at least one level lower than the ones you can already cast? it could be, if you can cast 2nd level spells or higher.

Does this mean you can learn it? yes.

Can you cast spells that you know? Sure.

There is some info missing of course, but there is info missing no matter which way you read the feat. I'd rather go with the one that makes the feat actually 'do' something, and makes more sense with the text after the first line for that matter.


You can only learn spells on your spell list, this feat allows you to learn any spell (even if it isnt on your spell list, after all, it doesnt say that the 'any spell' needs to be on your spell list and the last part says that you can get spells that you would normally not be able to research, which fits perfectly here. After all, the only spells you cannot research are ones that would not normally be allowed on your spell list).

Seems fine by the wording of the feat to me.

 

[Thanee]

Is there anything that says you cannot cast any spells that you know?

Of course, I have quoted it above.

Besides, if it would work the way you say, then wizards can already learn cleric spells, even start out with some at 1st level.

A wizard begins play with a spellbook containing all 0-level wizard spells (except those from her prohibited school or schools, if any; see School Specialization, below) plus three 1st-level spells of your choice. For each point of Intelligence bonus the wizard has, the spellbook holds one additional 1st-level spell of your choice.

See? Only 0-level spells are limited to being wizard spells!

Bye
Thanee

 

[Arbiter of Wyrms]

Ok, let's pretend, that a wizard could actually learn a cleric spell with that feat.
Let's say the wizard learns Cure Light Wounds.

Now, please quote the rule, which allows a wizard to cast this spell.

And no adding in words that arent there...

Here's the quote, that clearly say, that the wizard cannot:

A simple fact: Cure Light Wounds is not on the sorcerer/wizard spell list:

So, how does it suddenly pop up there, so that our wizard can actually cast it, and did not just totally waste that feat?

Bye
Thanee

If you were my DM, I would argue this point with you until you relented or until you made this arguement.

I will concede that this feat only allows the wizard to learn the spell, not to cast it. As dumb as that is, I will admit that, outside of one presitge class, the Eldritch Master, I've never seen a way for wizards to learn to cast divine spells, though I do still contend that with Extra Spell, they can at least learn them.

I'll have to make it clear to players in my campaign that the feat allows their wizard characters to both learns AND cast the spells they acquire, as a house rule.

 

[Thanee]

You can only learn spells on your spell list, ...

There is, funny enough, actually no rule about preventing a wizard to learn non-wizard spells.

The only written limitation is the one I quoted, which prevents them to cast non-wizard spells.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Scion]

Of course, I have quoted it above.

::sighs:: out of context descriptive text, you will have to do 'much' better than that ;/

Can you find any actual rules about it?

Until then, I will just assume that any spell you know you can cast. There are rules about what you can normally learn, and you have to be careful about the core books assuming that since it doesnt allow you to normally get them that it can use the two wordings interchangeably. This feat changes that.

The only requirements I see are if it is a spell and the spell level. Nothing else.

 

[Thanee]

I will concede that this feat only allows the wizard to learn the spell, not to cast it. As dumb as that is, ...

The whole problem comes from that part... as you see in my other replies to Scion, there is no rule (that I know of), which actually limits wizards to learn only spells from their own list, even if you only look at the PHB. It's only implied (by the limit set to casting the spells).

But it should be obvious enough, with a little common sense, that wizards can only learn (and cast) wizard spells.

The feat does not change this in any way, therefore, while it's fine and probably balanced (Arcane Disciple gives a precedent) to allow it as a house rule (tho, you should allow it to spontaneous casters as well... or even especially... then), it's simply not a viable reading of the official feat, regardless of what way you look at it.

I also highly doubt, that it is meant to allow that.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

Scion is funny, isn't he?

How is a quote, that directly states the matter out of context!?

Ah, wait, I know... "out of context" = "doesn't agree with you" ... yeah, I can see that.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Hypersmurf]

Ahem.

Play nice, children.

-Hyp.
(Moderator)