Using Symbiotes for Prerequisites?

[SorO_Lost]

Maybe it's too early in the morning for me, but can't all this "you don't have the minimum caster level" issue be solved with a few dozen +1 Caster Level Ioun Stones?

A fourth level Paladin could have a CL of ten thousand and that still doesn't mean he can cast 2nd level Spells, or even 1st really.

There are some decent posts in here, read the latest ones to avoid some of the argument.

[snakeman830]

Maybe it's too early in the morning for me, but can't all this "you don't have the minimum caster level" issue be solved with a few dozen +1 Caster Level Ioun Stones?

A fourth level Paladin could have a CL of ten thousand and that still doesn't mean he can cast 2nd level Spells, or even 1st really.

There are some decent posts in here, read the latest ones to avoid some of the argument.

Ignoring the fact the same Ioun stones won't stack, I don't see why a Sorcerer 1/Fighter 3 with Versatile Spellcaster and Practiced Spellcaster who somehow got a spellwurm wouldn't be able to cast a 2nd level spell.  He would need 2 1st level slots to do it, but he has the spell known (spellwurm explicitly does this), he has the caster level (4), and Versatile Spellcaster lets him use two 1st level slots instead of a 2nd level slot to cast it.

I mean, it's a ton of work for no actual benefit (Sorcerer 4 is the same level and meets it without any hoops), but it should work once the caster level reaches 4.

[SorO_Lost]

I don't see why a Sorcerer 1/Fighter 3 with Versatile Spellcaster and Practiced Spellcaster who somehow got a spellwurm wouldn't be able to cast a 2nd level spell.

Maybe but think of it this way. All you have a CL, a Known Spell, an untold means of using VA, and you know for a fact your CL (as in spellcaster level) isn't 4. Likewise you can say a lot of things when it looks like the rules don't seem to say anything at all, but when you really look at it all you have is a statement that has no rules supporting it.

What we do have is context and gray areas. In context you cannot expend what you don't have, Feat/PrC Requirements ignore Feat/Items altering your CL, and in a butchered quote the rules say Classes that use Invocations do not learn anything related to advanced spellcasting and it's impossible for low level casters to learn higher level Spells. So can a Rogue cast 7th level Spells using Scrolls and enter Archmage? Obviously not. But can a Sorcerer 1 / Fighter 3 cast 2nd level Spells using Feats?

Edit - Not really related but thanks for giving me an idea for my next sig.

[snakeman830]

Does Versatile Spellcaster allow you to cast a 2nd level spell out of 2 1st level slots or does it not?

Does a Spellwurm give you a 2nd level spell as a spell known, or not?

Does a Sorcerer 1/Fighter 3 with Practiced Spellcaster have a caster level of 4 or not?

The answer to all three of those is an explicit "it does."  So, given that all prerequisites for casting a 2nd level spell are met (minimum caster level, knowing the spell, and having the spell slots to cast it out of), why wouldn't it work?

And you're also refrencing complete bullshit on "feats/items don't count for caster level for meeting prerequisites" since the actual rules quotes say that yes, you can meet prerequisites via item/feat. 

[SorO_Lost]

And you're also refrencing complete bullshit on "feats/items don't count for caster level for meeting prerequisites" since the actual rules quotes say that yes, you can meet prerequisites via item/feat.

I expected some troll story about how the rules were talking about CLs on Classes that grant SLAs and they totally never apply unless you're one of them and I already rolled my eyes at it. But I forgot I was talking to to you Snakeman, your knowledge of the rules has always been fairly limited so you can't even make it that far before falling on your face and getting stuck in the mud.

CASTER LEVEL
In the context of a feat or a prestige class requirement, a caster level prerequisite (such as “caster level 5th”) measures the character’s ability to channel a minimum amount of magical power. For feats or prestige classes requiring a minimum caster level, creatures that use spell-like abilities or invocations instead of spells use either their fixed caster level or their class level to determine qualification. For example, Craft Wondrous Item has a requirement of caster level 3rd, so both a 3rd-level warlock and a nixie (caster level 4th for its charm person spell-like ability) meet the requirement.

Is there anything else on the side you're failing to argue for that I need to catch you up on?

[snakeman830]

And you're also refrencing complete bullshit on "feats/items don't count for caster level for meeting prerequisites" since the actual rules quotes say that yes, you can meet prerequisites via item/feat.

I expected some troll story about how the rules were talking about CLs on Classes that grant SLAs and they totally never apply unless you're one of them and I already rolled my eyes at it. But I forgot I was talking to to you Snakeman, your knowledge of the rules has always been fairly limited so you can't even make it that far before falling on your face and getting stuck in the mud.

CASTER LEVEL
In the context of a feat or a prestige class requirement, a caster level prerequisite (such as “caster level 5th”) measures the character’s ability to channel a minimum amount of magical power. For feats or prestige classes requiring a minimum caster level, creatures that use spell-like abilities or invocations instead of spells use either their fixed caster level or their class level to determine qualification. For example, Craft Wondrous Item has a requirement of caster level 3rd, so both a 3rd-level warlock and a nixie (caster level 4th for its charm person spell-like ability) meet the requirement.

Is there anything else on the side you're failing to argue for that I need to catch you up on?

I fail to see how your quote in any way refutes the statement that feats definitely apply for caster level requirements.

Oh right.  It doesn't reference anything at all for feats or items, or anything at all about modified caster levels.

Let's say you have someone with natively 11 Strength wearing Gauntlets of Ogre Power +2.  Can they take Power Attack?  Of course they can, but if they lost the gauntlets, the feat becomes inactive.

Let's say a level 15 Wizard takes Mage Slayer (who knows why, but it's an example).  Can they still cast level 8 spells, assuming no other caster level boosts?  You've argued before that they cannot in this very thread.  Now, I'm inclined to agree with you on this, but by reverse, that does mean that the caster level restricition of the spell level is not what's restricting the theoretical Sorcerer1/Fighter 3 with Practiced Spellcaster, Versatile Spellcaster, and a spellwurm from casting a 2nd level spell.

So which is it?  Can this combo cast a 2nd level spell, or can you cast an 8th level spell with a caster level of 3?

[SorO_Lost]

Let's say you have someone with natively 11 Strength wearing Gauntlets of Ogre Power +2.  Can they take Power Attack?  Of course they can, but if they lost the gauntlets, the feat becomes inactive.

Fun fact, this isn't in the rules. The PHB uses Ray of Enfeeblement on a Character that already qualified for the Feat to rule they can no longer use it. What you're actually citing is Complete Warrior's statement on meeting Class Requirements on page 16, in which it notes the loss of a Magic Item can result in loss of Class Features. Like for example, the Stonelord PrC in the same book requires you to carry around a gemstone or lose it's SLAs. But again, the passage is based on the Character in question already having previously met the Requirements and isn't actually losing any Class Levels, just the ability to use Class Features.

And interesting enough, your question on Mage Slayer doesn't support you in any way either. The character in question already has the ability to cast 8th level Spells through their Class Levels. They never lose this ability due to any sort of CL penalty and will continue to fill up their 8th level Bonus Slots with 6th level Spells and could continue to benefit from an unused but still Prepared Polar Ray so Winter's Blast deals 8d6, they simply lose the ability to use them in a certain way.

CASTER LEVEL
In the context of a feat or a prestige class requirement, a caster level prerequisite (such as “caster level 5th”) measures the character’s ability to channel a minimum amount of magical power.For feats or prestige classes requiring a minimum caster level, creatures that use spell-like abilities or invocations instead of spells use either their fixed caster level or their class level to determine qualification. For example, Craft Wondrous Item has a requirement of caster level 3rd, so both a 3rd-level warlock and a nixie (caster level 4th for its charm person spell-like ability) meet the requirement.

Is there anything else on the side you're failing to argue for that I need to catch you up on?

Oh right.  It doesn't reference anything at all for feats or items, or anything at all about modified caster levels.

It says you use X, not X+Feats+Items.
And speaking of not referencing anything, does Versatile Spellcaster actually say a 4th level Sorcerer can use it to access 3rd level Spells or did you just add something that wasn't there? 

Is there anything else on the side you're failing to argue for that I need to catch you up on?

[snakeman830]

What exactly are the requirements to cast a 2nd level spell (which is what is being discussed, not 3rd) as a Sorcerer?


Knowledge of the spell is taken care of.  Slots to fuel the spell are taken care of.  Caster level is taken care of.  Literally every objection you have made to this trick working has been met, causing you to move on to a new one.  Now you're on "He can't do it because he can't cast 2nd level spells." Circular reasoning at its finest.

So why can't he?  He has the slots, the spell knowledge, (assumedly) the Charisma, and even the minimum caster level.  There's nothing left by the rules to stop it from working.

You just confirmed this by saying a level 15 Wizard with Mage Slayer cannot cast an 8th level spell, which means the effective caster level is what matters for the act of casting, not what is given via class.

That is called moving the goalposts.

[SorO_Lost]

What exactly are the requirements to cast a 2nd level spell (which is what is being discussed, not 3rd) as a Sorcerer?

Depends on who you ask.

You defined "the ability to cast x level spells" as the ability to produce an end result, like a Rogue using a Scroll can cast an 8th level Spell (like a sorcerer using a feat & item is really any different). Me and as the rules indicate pretty much everywhere define that term as the granted allowance from a Class. You also, like most people that failed in math/sciences/computers, have no understanding of the difference between zero and nothing. For example if you look at the 13th level of Wizard they don't have zero 8th level Spells, they have nothing. A Fighter has nothing in regards to Spell access and a Versatile Grants nothing in regards to Spell access either. You assume they have 0 level Slots and thus can increase them using Feats and that is a logical error.

You really don't have to go any further than Practical Spellcaster. Everyone's favorite Feat because they cannot read past the first sentence, it's a prime highlight of exactly what I'm talking about.

Choose one 2nd-level spell from a school of magic you have access to. You gain an extra 2nd-level spell slot that must be used initially to cast only the chosen spell. Until your level is high enough to allow you to cast 2nd-level spells, you must succeed on a DC 8 caster level check to successfully cast this spell; if you fail, the spell is miscast to no effect. Your caster level with the chosen spell is your normal caster level, even if this level is insufficient to cast the spell under normal circumstances. When you become able to cast 2nd-level spells, you lose the benefit described above but retain the extra 2nd-level spell slot, which you can use to prepare or spontaneously cast a spell of 2nd level or lower as you normally would. Finally, you gain a +2 bonus on all Spellcraft checks.

If you're you then all you can see is the blue text and assume that you have "the ability to cast 2nd level spells" because, as you incorrectly understand it, you think it means producing an end result. But as the red text indicates, you do not have "the ability to cast 2nd level spells" because the Feat does not grant any actual 2nd level Spell access in the way D&D uses the terminology.

And it's this way across the board,  I didn't move a single goal post. Mage-Slayer does not remove that 15th level Wizard's ability to cast 8th level Spells anymore than a Barbarian standing next to them spamming Attacks of Opportunity does. The Wizard obtained his ability, sic access, and preventing certain uses of it doesn't remove this ability. It's the same with Class Features and Feats, heck even you use the term "inactive" when discussing Power Attack. You can acknowledge the separation between having and using it there, but not when it comes to Spellcasting because you'd be forced to admit you are wrong. So instead you're pulling a JaronK and trying to assemble components together to claim that you can meet the requirements that you've created as proof that you're doing things correctly and then you are using that to argue with.

[snakeman830]

"Cast spell" is an action, not an ability.  One that a 15th level Wizard with Mage Slayer is incapable of in regards to 8th level spells.  Thus, they would not be able to qualify for anything requiring the ability to cast 8th level spells.  They could still fuel Reserve feats with an 8th level spell (as they can still have it prepared), but they can't cast it.

So, yes "ability to cast X level spells" requires the ability to actually cast the spell.  If he "has the ability, but can't use it" well, he doesn't have the ability, now does he?

In my example with Power attack, yes, the character still has the Power Attack feat, but he literally can do nothing with it.  He can't even meet prerequisites with the feat (and any feats or PrC's he has that have Power Attack as a prerequisite immedietly also turn off).  Thus, the ability to actually perform the task is what is being looked for.  This is explicitly spelled out in Complete Warrior.

Percoious Apprentice feat is explicit that it works differently, however.  It's saying that you no longer need to make the Spellcraft check to cast the spell once you get the ability to do it outside the feat.  You are still explicitly able to cast the spell before reaching that point, however.

[SorO_Lost]

So, yes "ability to cast X level spells" requires the ability to actually cast the spell.  If he "has the ability, but can't use it" well, he doesn't have the ability, now does he?

Again we're talking about to different things and I've pointed out such. He never loses the ability to cast Spells, only his ability to take the "Cast A Spell" Action as you've so put. Oh and by the way you still haven't answered my question, does Versatile Spellcaster actually say a 4th level Sorcerer can use it to access 3rd level Spells or did you just make up a conclusion your self?

He can't even meet prerequisites with the feat ... This is explicitly spelled out in Complete Warrior.

Yep, just like I said before he doesn't meet the Prerequisites to take the Feat in the first place while the PHB deals with Feats & the CW deals with Classes and both of their examples are based on characters that already met the prerequisites, they don't actually support one of your assumed details. And again, case and point as that entry does state, if you no longer meet a PrC's Requirements you still have those Class Levels and continue to benefit from the HD/BAB/Saves from them. They are never lost until you replace them even if you no longer qualify and it's the same with Feats in the PHB and I'm telling you it's the same with Spellcasting as well. You're still not listening and dumb enough to continue talking about a Class entry that disagrees with you.

Percoious Apprentice feat is explicit that it works differently, however.

Nope, works the same as everything else and it's not subject to your rebuttal of an overwhelming exception fallacy which couldn't hold up on it's own anyway. I could always throw something else at you, say an Artificer is not a Spellcaster even through his Spell Storing Infusion can be used to Cast any 4th level Spell or lower, and you'll just have to come up another dumb excuse to ignore it too.

You need to stop using the word "ability" as if it were the "means to produce" when the rule books are checking if you have a direct rule giving you the "granted skill or talent". But of course, if you do that you'd admit you were wrong and I wouldn't have to sit here repeating my self.

[snakeman830]

So, yes "ability to cast X level spells" requires the ability to actually cast the spell.  If he "has the ability, but can't use it" well, he doesn't have the ability, now does he?

Again we're talking about to different things and I've pointed out such. He never loses the ability to cast Spells, only his ability to take the "Cast A Spell" Action as you've so put. Oh and by the way you still haven't answered my question, does Versatile Spellcaster actually say a 4th level Sorcerer can use it to access 3rd level Spells or did you just make up a conclusion your self?

Show me where I made such a claim about 4th level Sorcerers and 3rd level spells.  Go ahead, I'll wait.  Oh right, it was you making a strawman argument.

All I claimed was that you can use 2 1st level spell slots to fuel a 2nd level spell, which is explicitly what the feat does.  I never claimed it gave a 2nd level spell to cast, just the effective spell slot for one.

Now, can a 4th level Sorcerer with Versatile Spellcaster cast a 3rd level spell?  Of course not.  He doesn't know a third level spell and has a caster level too low to do so.  Naturally, I assume Charisma is a non-factor here.

He can't even meet prerequisites with the feat ... This is explicitly spelled out in Complete Warrior.

Yep, just like I said before he doesn't meet the Prerequisites to take the Feat in the first place while the PHB deals with Feats & the CW deals with Classes and both of their examples are based on characters that already met the prerequisites, they don't actually support one of your assumed details. And again, case and point as that entry does state, if you no longer meet a PrC's Requirements you still have those Class Levels and continue to benefit from the HD/BAB/Saves from them. They are never lost until you replace them even if you no longer qualify and it's the same with Feats in the PHB and I'm telling you it's the same with Spellcasting as well. You're still not listening and dumb enough to continue talking about a Class entry that disagrees with you.

No, the entry agrees with me.  Yes, you keep HD/BAB/Saves, but you do lose all the class features.  Since you can't perform the requested action, you no longer qualify.  Thus, the ability to perform the action is what is looked for.

Percoious Apprentice feat is explicit that it works differently, however.

Nope, works the same as everything else and it's not subject to your rebuttal of an overwhelming exception fallacy which couldn't hold up on it's own anyway. I could always throw something else at you, say an Artificer is not a Spellcaster even through his Spell Storing Infusion can be used to Cast any 4th level Spell or lower, and you'll just have to come up another dumb excuse to ignore it too.

I believe the Complete Warrior example is STR 13 Fighter taking Str damage, and thus losing access to everything because he no longer meets the prerequisites for Power Attack.  Whether it's a loss of Gauntlets of Ogre Power or  STR damage is frankly irrelevant in this case because it shows that the immediate ability to meet the prerequisites is what is important.  A Wizard with a caster level of 11 cannot cast an 8th level spell (or 7th level), so they fail to meet the requirements of anything that requires being able to cast a 7th or 8th level spell (so they would immedietly lose access to the Archmage PrC, if they had levels in it).

You need to stop using the word "ability" as if it were the "means to produce" when the rule books are checking if you have a direct rule giving you the "granted skill or talent". But of course, if you do that you'd admit you were wrong and I wouldn't have to sit here repeating my self.

So where is the "to cast spells" ability?  I see "spellcasting."  The fact is "ability" gets used in multiple ways even in the rules text.  "Ability to X" =/= "have this ability."  One is asking for the ability to perform an action, the other is a true/false statement.

[SorO_Lost]

All I claimed was that you can use 2 1st level spell slots to fuel a 2nd level spell, which is explicitly what the feat does.

Which is built on the assumption that you can cast 2nd level Spells to begin with and according to the Sorcerer Class & Ability Scores he cannot. This isn't a strawman, it's simply a continued observation of your assumptions.

No, the entry agrees with me.  Yes, you keep HD/BAB/Saves, but you do lose all the class features.  Since you can't perform the requested action, you no longer qualify.  Thus, the ability to perform the action is what is looked for.

I guess it's impossible to enter most PrCs then since there is no Action to use Weapon Proficiency or various other abilities that are a constantly 'on' ability. Is there anything else you'd like to destroy on your table top with your houserules?

I believe the Complete Warrior example is STR 13 Fighter taking Str damage,

And I believe in Complete Warrior, page 92, it says Snakeman should read the book before commenting on what he assumes might be in there but I guess you'll never know huh. 

So where is the "to cast spells" ability?

You mean besides the one under Level Advancement? I love the Paladin one.

Spells: Beginning at 4th level, a paladin gains the ability to cast a small number of divine spells (the same type of spells available to the cleric, druid, and ranger), which are drawn from the paladin spell list (page 191). A paladin must choose and prepare her spells in advance.

Fun fact, at the 4th level the Paladin gains 0 Slots per day, moving him from nothing to zero but he still can't cast anything. So I guess you'll claim the text assumes every 4th level Paladin has twenty of more Wisdom for the Bonus Slots.

[snakeman830]

All I claimed was that you can use 2 1st level spell slots to fuel a 2nd level spell, which is explicitly what the feat does.

Which is built on the assumption that you can cast 2nd level Spells to begin with and according to the Sorcerer Class & Ability Scores he cannot. This isn't a strawman, it's simply a continued observation of your assumptions.

It may be assuming as such, yes, but it does not say "if you can already cast these spells anyway."  It lacks that qualifier, so it is more open.

No, the entry agrees with me.  Yes, you keep HD/BAB/Saves, but you do lose all the class features.  Since you can't perform the requested action, you no longer qualify.  Thus, the ability to perform the action is what is looked for.

I guess it's impossible to enter most PrCs then since there is no Action to use Weapon Proficiency or various other abilities that are a constantly 'on' ability. Is there anything else you'd like to destroy on your table top with your houserules?

If it was presented as "ability to attack with a longsword," yes.  But "weapon proficiency" is a true/false statement.  "Ability to X" is in direct reference of an action.  "Proficiency" is not.

So where is the "to cast spells" ability?

You mean besides the one under Level Advancement? I love the Paladin one.

Spells: Beginning at 4th level, a paladin gains the ability to cast a small number of divine spells (the same type of spells available to the cleric, druid, and ranger), which are drawn from the paladin spell list (page 191). A paladin must choose and prepare her spells in advance.

Fun fact, at the 4th level the Paladin gains 0 Slots per day, moving him from nothing to zero but he still can't cast anything. So I guess you'll claim the text assumes every 4th level Paladin has twenty of more Wisdom for the Bonus Slots.

1. The ability is called "spells" not "to cast spells".  Yeah, I'm being a prick on this.
2. And you quote the exact text that supports what I say about "ability to" being different from "ability (the game rules term)."

Does the text assume?  Possibly.  Or maybe it's using the more general language since it's guaranteed to apply for the next 15 levels of Paladin and is potentially possible to apply right away.

Would I allow a Paladin 4 with 11 Wisdom to qualify for something requiring the "ability to cast 1st level Divine spells?"  No, I wouldn't, actually.  Because he doesn't have the spell slot to cast any.  He can use wands and such of Paladin spells, sure, but he cannot cast a 1st level spell.

[SorO_Lost]

It may be assuming as such, yes, but it does not say "if you can already cast these spells anyway."  It lacks that qualifier, so it is more open.

Actually Chapter 1 of the PHB says "In addition to having a high ability score, a spellcaster must be of high enough class level to be able to cast spells of a given spell level. (See the class descriptions in Chapter 3 for details.)" so yes the rules do check to see if you already have the ability to cast them or not. But what's important and the point I'm making here is you have nothing supporting you. Without rhyme or reason I can disagree and there is nothing you can do to prove your side or disprove mine.

1. The ability is called "spells" not "to cast spells".  Yeah, I'm being a prick on this.

Oh I know you're being a prick about all of this you didn't have to tell me of that. But irregardless of the Class Feature's title it states they gain the ability to cast spells so if you want to be a prick to anyone just do it to your self since the Action only allows you to cast one spell at a time anyway so it doesn't even meet your criteria of casting spells.

Also, speaking of the Action. Starting to Cast for Spontaneous Casters requires you to first select a Spell you Know, have the appropriate Spell Slot available, and be capable of casting spells of that level or higher. That last one is pretty fickled if you're relying on the incorrect circular logical of claiming you have the capability if you were actually allowed to fully finish casting the Spell.

2. And you quote the exact text that supports what I say about "ability to" being different from "ability (the game rules term)."

Of course, well sort of. I mean it's pretty stupid to claim the text means "the dexterity to cast spells" using the PHB's Glossary entry on "ability" but at this point I seriously think you'd try arguing for it. On the positive side through, claiming a Samurai can totally have the wisdom to cast spells at least moves you off of the agenda of relaying on the Action and as far as houserule balance it also doesn't nerf partial casters and argue for full-casters getting early entry.

Is there anything else on the side you're failing to argue for that I need to catch you up on? Because I'd like to post your rebuttal to a comment you made before.

Does Versatile Spellcaster allow you to cast a 2nd level spell out of 2 1st level slots or does it not?
Does a Spellwurm give you a 2nd level spell as a spell known, or not?
Does a Sorcerer 1/Fighter 3 with Practiced Spellcaster have a caster level of 4 or not?

Versatile Spellcaster doesn't actually give you a Spell Slot.

Would I allow a Paladin 4 with 11 Wisdom to qualify for something requiring the "ability to cast 1st level Divine spells?"  No, I wouldn't, actually.  Because he doesn't have the spell slot to cast any.  He can use wands and such of Paladin spells, sure, but he cannot cast a 1st level spell.

[snakeman830]

Does Versatile Spellcaster allow you to cast a 2nd level spell out of 2 1st level slots or does it not?
Does a Spellwurm give you a 2nd level spell as a spell known, or not?
Does a Sorcerer 1/Fighter 3 with Practiced Spellcaster have a caster level of 4 or not?

Versatile Spellcaster doesn't actually give you a Spell Slot.

Would I allow a Paladin 4 with 11 Wisdom to qualify for something requiring the "ability to cast 1st level Divine spells?"  No, I wouldn't, actually.  Because he doesn't have the spell slot to cast any.  He can use wands and such of Paladin spells, sure, but he cannot cast a 1st level spell.

I never said it did give you a 2nd level slot.  I sad Versatile Spellcaster lets you use two 1st level slots in place of a 2nd level slot.  It doesn't give you a slot, it gives you an alternative to the slot that can be used for casting a spell.  Again, this is absolutely explicit.  It's what the feat does.  To say it doesn't is to say the feat doesn't do anything at all.

Actually Chapter 1 of the PHB says "In addition to having a high ability score, a spellcaster must be of high enough class level to be able to cast spells of a given spell level. (See the class descriptions in Chapter 3 for details.)"

There, now was that so hard?  If this were brought up first, the whole thing would have been over several posts ago, since this is black and white on the issue.

I will readily admit that the trick does not work now.