Wild Mage & Practiced Spellcaster Combo

[locksmyth]

Hypersmurf is wrong about the casting of the fireball. At I thought you were right but after careful reading I cannot agree.

Wild Magic: A wild mage casts spells differently from any
other arcane spellcaster. She reduces her caster level by 3 for
all spells she casts from now on. However, every time she casts
a spell, her use of wild magic adds 1d6 to her adjusted caster
level. For example, an 8th-level sorcerer/1st-level wild mage
has a base caster level of 6th, not 9th, but her actual caster
level varies from 7th to 12th for every spell she casts. Caster
level affects all level-based variables of a spell, including spell
penetration checks.

(I added the emphasis)

My original thinking was: The Wizard 5/Wild Mage 1 would have an base caster level of 3. And thus if he rolls a 1 has access to only spells that a 4th level caster has access to. This may not be the spirit but it is the RAW. Attempting to cast this spell would produce no result and no penalty. It would be the same as a fighter attempting to cast a cantrip. The player simply forgoes the action.

However this logic also dictates that the caster has to reduce spells per day to that of a 3rd level caster. So upon more careful reading I think it is more appropiately read as:

The adjusted caster level is for the spell which is cast. He still retains access to his spells per day (which is what determines if he can cast them.) Thus the caster level used in determining the variable effects of the spell is CL - 3 +1d6.

that interpretation applied to the OP:

Nigel Yarrow is a 5th level wizard / 1st level wild mage with the Practiced Spellcaster feat:

* What is the Yarrowstaff's base caster level?
* What is the statistical range of his adjusted caster level?
* In your professional opinion, is this prestige class and feat combination broken?

Benefit: Your caster level for the chosen spellcasting class
increases by 4. This benefit can’t increase your caster level
to higher than your Hit Dice. However, even if you can’t
benefit from the full bonus immediately, if you later gain
Hit Dice in levels of nonspellcasting classes, you might be
able to apply the rest of the bonus.

There are obviously two ways to look at this:
1: The Wizard 5/Wild Mage 1 would have a CL of 6, just as he would without the feat.
It increases the caster level of his wizard class by 0 as he has a caster level for each hit die. So the wizards CL goes stays at 6. The Wild Mage's -3 + 1d6 is for the cast spell.
The feat only comes into action when the wizard takes a level that does not increase his existing CL, eg. druid.
2: So the range of the adjusted caster level is 4-10.
3: No. It is not.

 

[Darklone]

My original thinking was: The Wizard 5/Wild Mage 1 would have an base caster level of 3. And thus if he rolls a 1 has access to only spells that a 4th level caster has access to. This may not be the spirit but it is the RAW. Attempting to cast this spell would produce no result and no penalty. It would be the same as a fighter attempting to cast a cantrip. The player simply forgoes the action.

However this logic also dictates that the caster has to reduce spells per day to that of a 3rd level caster. So upon more careful reading I think it is more appropiately read as:
....

You confuse caster level and spellcasting ability. Decreasing the spellcasterlevel does not mean you lose access to your higher level spells.

 

[locksmyth]

You confuse caster level and spellcasting ability. Decreasing the spellcasterlevel does not mean you lose access to your higher level spells.

Kind of the point I was getting at by the whole "I originally thought".

 

[Darklone]

Looks like I misunderstood you.

 

[Hypersmurf]

You confuse caster level and spellcasting ability. Decreasing the spellcaster level does not mean you lose access to your higher level spells.

But a spell has a minimum caster level for a given class.

PHB p171, again. "Mialee... can't cast fireball with a caster level lower than 5th (the minimum level required for a wizard to cast fireball)".

If a 6th level wizard takes the Mage Slayer feat, she has a caster level of 2. She has access to 2nd and 3rd level spells, and has all the 2nd and 3rd level slots of any other 6th level wizard, but her caster level is below the minimum level required for a wizard to cast them.

She doesn't lose the slots; she simply can't cast the spells.

Locksmyth is saying that lowering caster level doesn't mean you use the Spells Per Day line of a lower level caster. I agree completely. He goes on to say that this means your ability to cast higher level spells is unimpaired. Here I disagree, because Mialee can't cast fireball with a caster level lower than 5th (the minimum level required for a wizard to cast fireball).

-Hyp.

 

[tomBitonti]

(Omitted) steps in reasoning ...

If I may,

There seem to be two steps in the reasoning (in regards to wild mage and various effects) that are going unstated.

What I think I am hearing is an underlying premise, perhaps, "The effects of a wild mage's casting is an overall increase in power that has a cost of increased variability of spell effects, and occasions where a spell effect is less than the usual result." This is being taken as a defining characteristic of the class, and any result is automatically conformed to this statement. I don't see any explicit statements in the rules to this effect, rather, this is along the lines of what is the evident intent behind the class.

A second step of the reasons then follows, one which is also omitted, that is, "Well, that a Wild Mage should be able to avoid the penalties built into the class doesn't seem quite right. Lets ignore what is explicitly written, and patch the class to work as it seems was intended. If and when there are additional explicit rulings to further address the matter, we will revisit the issue."

I think what is going on is that the omitted steps are to some completely obvious, and can go unstated, while for others they must be stated.

As an aside, going by the explicit rules in various locations, I cannot disagree with Hyp in that the explicit rules work against the underlying (unstated) premise. As written (and with some authority, as the statements are rather explicit), that how it works out.