Wizard Prestige Classes & Spell Acquisition

[Beretta]

Hi all,

The DM and I are having a disagreement with respect to Prestige Classes and the two free spells a wizard gets to add to their spellbook at every level.

The DM believes that if a wizard takes a Prestige Class (specifically, a PrC that has spell progression), then they do not get the two free spells to add to their spellbook when they add levels in a spellcasting Prestige Class (such as Loremaster). He claims that it is a Wizard's special ability, and that Prestige Classes specifically state that they do not gain class benefits. So taking levels in Loremaster or Eldritch Knight (from 2nd level onward for the EK) means that no new spells are added to his spellbok for free.

I disagree for the following reasons:

I can’t find any information about how many spells prestige class spellcasters know. I am going on the presumption that those that gain bonus spells per day of their existing class (such as loremaster and spellsword) do not automatically add additional spells to their spellbook as they gain levels.

They do add spells to their lists. For example, a wizard/loremaster gains 2 spells for her spellbook when using a loremaster level to increase spellcasting. A sorcerer/loremaster would learn more spells as well. Adding spells to your
spellbook or personal repertoire is part of spellcasting.

Also:

"At each new sorcerer level, he gains one or more new spells, as indicated on Table: Sorcerer Spells Known."

"At each new wizard level, she gains two new spells of any spell level or levels that she can cast (based on her new wizard level) for her spellbook."

Now, the DM claims that the FAQ is wrong. Not much I can say to that except to say that I think he's the one who is wrong.

As to the other point I raised, in comparing the two quotes between sorcerer and wizard, I haven't gotten any feedback except to say that he hasn't made a ruling on sorcerer's since there isn't one in the party. I bring up the quote in support of my argument, in that if we used his interpretation for the sorcerer as he has done for the wizard (since the wording is almost identical), it would mean that a sorcerer taking a level in a Prestige Class would not gain any Spells Known (though they would increase in Spell Progression). If that were the case then you would never see any sorcerer's taking a Prestige Classes. If he were to rule it the other way, then he'd be guilty of a double-standard since sorcerer's would gain Spells Known as a sorcerer even though they chose to advance a level in a Prestige Class.

The DM believes that the rules are unambigious in supporting his argument; obviously I hold a different opinion and am hoping that some of you out there might tell me which side of interpretation you weigh in on.

Thanks!

 

[Deadguy]

Stepping quickly past the trite "what your DM says is obviously going to be right in his campaign", I think you have the right of the matter in the sense of the intended meaning of the rules. However, I don't hold out much hope of you reversing that position since he rejects the FAQ. In which case, as a "Wizard-Prestige Class" character you might have to just suck it up!

You make a good point of equivalency in the Sorcerer versus Wizard comparison, and I think your DM should be pressed as far as you dare to consider the matter.

Bluntly, though, the reason that Wizards get their 2 spells per level by player choice is simply to stop the game being soely dependent on found spellbooks and scrolls. As I have seen, it's sometimes the only way for a Wizard to get spells if the DM is: (i) mean with money; or (ii) doesn't allow any downtime for scribing (or both!).

 

[Thanee]

The rules are not clear, that's why they have included it in the FAQ.

It is meant like you say.

Wizards get new spells per day, caster level and get to add 2 new spells into their spellbook.

Sorcerers get new spells known, spells per day, caster level and also can swap out spells at every even caster level.

All these benefits are tied to the caster level and not the class level!
Therefore it is irrelevant, whether the caster level was gained in the original class or in a PrC, that advances spellcasting ability.

The ability to add these 2 spells is simply to display a wizard's research during the downtime, which he surely continues, even if he advances his spellcasting ability in a slightly different direction (PrC).

Maybe you can convince your DM by telling him, that the 2 free spells of the wizard essentially are the equivalent of the sorcerer's spells known. He surely doesn't want to argue, that they do not get these from an effective spellcasting level increase via a PrC.

EDIT: Oops, havn't seen, that you already said that...

I can only guess, that your DM thinks, wizards are too powerful and therefore is so stubborn... or is such a rules-lawyer, that he is going by the precise wording, not the meaning of it.

When a new loremaster level is gained, the character gains new spells per day (and spells known, if applicable) as if she had also gained a level in a spellcasting class she belonged to before she added the prestige class.

It does say, that spells known are gained... it does not say anything about free wizard spells, alth it's pretty clear, that they are equivalent and should be treated like spells known... well, to me at least.

Bye
Thanee

 

[mikebr99]

Hi all,

Now, the DM claims that the FAQ is wrong. Not much I can say to that except to say that I think he's the one who is wrong. Thanks!

He is fully within his rights to do this... however it is a houserule to do so. Wizards get the 2 spells per level within PrCs, just like they would if they stayed in the Wizard class.


Mike

 

[Olive]

Does your DM not let sorcerors who take PrCs get new spells known either?

 

[Beretta]

Thanks all.

I just wanted to quell the small doubt I had that I was wrong.

As it is I decided to walk from the campaign. Trivial perhaps, but the double-standard with having a different interpretation for *exactly* the same rules with a sorcerer really ticked me off.

I don't think a little consistency in rulings should be too much to ask for.

the trite "what your DM says is obviously going to be right in his campaign

I agree that it is trite. In areas where rules issues can bog down play, such as combat, I can agree to roll with the punches and forge ahead. But in areas like this where discussion can happen outside the game, the DM isn't always right and if they want to stick with a houserule then fair enough. But scribing spells is expensive/time consuming enough already without regressing to rules that are even worse than those presented in the 3.0 rulebooks.

 

[Old Gumphrey]

I don't blame you for walking at all. Playing with hardheads who won't listen to reason is no fun at all, and you play D&D to have fun. If he was such a pain with something as minor (and obvious) as this imagine what it would be like to actually game with the guy?

 

[hard head]

I am the DM in question.

Beretta fails to mention that he was not playing a wizard, and that the wizard's player independently agreed with the ruling. We were playing the game based on reading the plain meaning of the books we had at the table (PHB and DMG in particular).

I undertook to consider whether or not I should allow 2 spells per level if I thought the player would be unduly penalised.

That wizard's player has since told me that he does not think he will be penalised.

I confess that I dug in my position against Beretta because I did not appreciate being over ruled in the game I ran by a player that was not affected by the ruling, with reference to rules that were somewhere out there in the ether.

I wouldn't play with me either.

No hard feelings Beretta. C'ya round.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Beretta fails to mention that he was not playing a wizard, and that the wizard's player independently agreed with the ruling. We were playing the game based on reading the plain meaning of the books we had at the table (PHB and DMG in particular).

Wow. I can only guess that he didn't understand what he was agreeing to, OR you're a particularly fair and even GM who gives his wizards plenty of scrolls and spellbooks and time to scribe from them.

 

[Olive]

What an insane thing to a) rule, and b) agree to as a player.