Your thoughts on warlocks

[Thanee]

I don't think it does. Some PrC in Complete Arcane specifically mention spell-like abilities (i.e. the Mindbender); it's pretty unlikely, that they made a rule that invocations count as spells in terms of PrC prerequisites, if they do that in the very book they are printed in.

In fact, it actually even says, that they don't count as spells.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Daermon]

I don't think it does. Some PrC in Complete Arcane specifically mention spell-like abilities (i.e. the Mindbender); it's pretty unlikely, that they made a rule that invocations count as spells in terms of PrC prerequisites, if they do that in the very book they are printed in.

In fact, it actually even says, that they don't count as spells.

Bye
Thanee

IIRC, it depends on the wording of Arcane Trickster. Does it say Arcane Caster level 3rd, or does it say must be able to cast an arcane spell of 3rd level or higher?

 

[Thanee]

Spells: Ability to cast mage hand and at least one arcane spell of 3rd level or higher.

Bye
Thanee

 

[was]

I think they're okay.

 

[Daermon]

Bye
Thanee

Huh. Cool.

Actually, by that reading, a Warlock could become an Arcane Trickster, but it requires he be at least 8th level and take 2 Feats. The first would be the Feat that allows you to cast Mage Hand. The Second is Extra Spell from Complete Arcane, which just has Arcane Caster Level 3rd as a pre-req.

 

[AuraSeer]

Isn't the effect of Extra Spell pegged to your existing spellcasting ability? I thought it specified that the new slot must be one level lower than your current highest slot. That'd make it a wasted feat for a warlock, who has no existing slots to peg it to.

Anyway, the other feat you're talking about doesn't let you cast mage hand. It grants it to you as a spell-like ability, which is not quite the same thing.

 

[Scion]

it was made before complete arcane came out so it wouldnt have known to give the other type of requirement instead if it wanted warlocks to also be able to get it. The invocations even have spell level equivalents.

I see no reason not to bend the requirement to 'caster level' instead of 'able to cast some third level spell'. After all, it doesnt call for a specific third level spell, that sounds pretty close to just a caster level requirement to me

 

[Thanee]

As for that... they do have a section about warlocks and prestige classes in Complete Arcane, which would be the right place to say how to evaluate previous publications...

In any case, a DM can surely house rule it, and I don't think it would be broken, or anything.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Scion]

the complete books are rarely complete

Still, with a brief look I didnt find the section you describe, what page is it on?

Edit: ahh, I think I found it. It is seriously lacking in a great variety of ways. Definately not 'complete' ;/

 

[Daermon]

Since Extra Spell uses the same wording that allows Warlock's to take prestige classes (Caster Level) and since it was included in Complete Arcane, I see no reason a Warlock couldn't take it.

And if being able to cast Mage Hand as a spell-like ability doesn't count, then there's no reason Warlocks couldn't take Extra Spel twice. And if that's true, they wouldn't be able to take Arcane Trickster until 13th level, so I hardly think that build would be broken.