Precocious Apprentice

[Necrosnoop110]

1) Would the Precocious Apprentice feat allow me to enter a prestige class earlier than would be typical? e.g. Beguiler 1/ Psion 3/ Cerebremancer 1

2) Secondly, if that is in fact legal, is using the Precocious Apprentice feet to enter a PrC earlier than is typical, a cheesy over the top move?

Thanks,
Necro

[Raineh Daze]

1) Well, they tend to ask for 2nd level spells, but since there's two sides to it... yeah, I think so.

2) Yes. Yes, it would.

[altpersona]

afaik

yes it works

and no its not too cheesy.

[Necrosnoop110]

2) Yes. Yes, it would.

Why too cheesy?

and no its not too cheesy.

Why not too cheesy?

[altpersona]

because a second level spell is minuscule. yes, it might get abused several levels later in some high end builds but its not the feat that is doing the cheese. 

[Necrosnoop110]

because a second level spell is minuscule. yes, it might get abused several levels later in some high end builds but its not the feat that is doing the cheese.

I agree that the feat itself is not too cheesy. What I am specifically asking is if using the feat Precocious Apprentice for early entry into a PrC is cheesy. And if yes or no, why yes or no?  (justify and explain your reasons).

[SorO_Lost]

No.

1. Pursuing your houseruled Wizard is a pointless no-one-cares thought exercise of wasted time.
If you incorrectly interpret requirements to mean, "you need a functional capability to produce or cast a 3rd level spell by any means." you open the door to a Rogue UMDing a Scroll. After all he is casting a Spell and he has this *ability* to cast as you are so called it. No matter what TO/Homebrew thought pattern you came up with the 900gp WBL limit of 2nd level Characters out does it (4th level spells baby!).

2. PA already says no.

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.

Same wording are PrC Requirements, so if you claim PA meets those than PA also meets it's own clause. This is not a Schrodinger's Cat because there is only one observation, any point you claim you have the ability to cast 2nd level spells PA isn't granting the said trait. Obviously, this is against the intent of the Feat so it fails RAW and Intent alike.

3. The official Rules say no.

If a 1st-level character takes the Precocious Apprentice feat, can he cast 2nd-level spells for the purposes of qualifying for a prestige class or meeting the prerequisites of a feat?
In the Sage’s opinion, the Precocious Apprentice feat would not help you qualify for a prestige class or feat because it gives you a chance at casting a 2nd-level spell, not the inherent ability to cast 2nd-level spells.

There is a lesson here, check the FAQ before posting and never, ever, listen to RD or Alt when it comes to rule related questions.

4. Where is SorO going with that green text?
Rules Compendium page 133 and Dungeon Master's Guide page 282 build and establish an inherited rule.
Complete Arcane page 72... Well, it will piss a couple people off.

[Jackinthegreen]

Since when have you played the FAQ as holy text/official, Soro?

[altpersona]

There is a lesson here, check the FAQ before posting and never, ever, listen to RD or Alt when it comes to rule related questions.

yes to this part, always a grain of salt w/ my thoughts.

and i second Jack, the Faq? really? and the sage for that matter...


if your early qaul prc only needs 2nd levels spells, thats exactly what PA gives.

I would call the sacrificing of your lower level spells to induce a higher level spell (some trick iv seen around here) to cheesy.

I would call using PA on a specialist wiz to develop a bunch of extra spells cheesy. specialists get a bonus spell slot for any level they can cast. if you cast lvl2 spells (via PA) then you should get the specialist slot (it should be the same spell, just a second slot). then argue for you bonus spells for high int, thats cheesy.


the text of PA says nothing about prc's, despite soro saying it does.

the 'chance of casting a spell', a fighter has typically a 0% chance of casting a second level spell, a wizard may have a 100% chance... a chance is all anyone has.  thats like saying if you suck at sneak attack (low BAB?) , you wont qual for things that require it.


 

[Necrosnoop110]

No.

1. Pursuing your houseruled Wizard is a pointless no-one-cares thought exercise of wasted time.
If you incorrectly interpret requirements to mean, "you need a functional capability to produce or cast a 3rd level spell by any means." you open the door to a Rogue UMDing a Scroll. After all he is casting a Spell and he has this *ability* to cast as you are so called it. No matter what TO/Homebrew thought pattern you came up with the 900gp WBL limit of 2nd level Characters out does it (4th level spells baby!).

2. PA already says no.

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.

Same wording are PrC Requirements, so if you claim PA meets those than PA also meets it's own clause. This is not a Schrodinger's Cat because there is only one observation, any point you claim you have the ability to cast 2nd level spells PA isn't granting the said trait. Obviously, this is against the intent of the Feat so it fails RAW and Intent alike.

3. The official Rules say no.

If a 1st-level character takes the Precocious Apprentice feat, can he cast 2nd-level spells for the purposes of qualifying for a prestige class or meeting the prerequisites of a feat?
In the Sage’s opinion, the Precocious Apprentice feat would not help you qualify for a prestige class or feat because it gives you a chance at casting a 2nd-level spell, not the inherent ability to cast 2nd-level spells.

There is a lesson here, check the FAQ before posting and never, ever, listen to RD or Alt when it comes to rule related questions.

4. Where is SorO going with that green text?
Rules Compendium page 133 and Dungeon Master's Guide page 282 build and establish an inherited rule.
Complete Arcane page 72... Well, it will piss a couple people off.

Ok. Thanks.

1. No idea what you are saying.

2. Makes sense.

3. Good find. This seems like a closed case here, especially if one holds the FAQ in regard.

4. Again no idea what you are saying.

Peace,
Necro

[linklord231]

Interestingly, the Scrolls description doesn't use the word "cast" to refer to using a scroll.  Instead, it uses the word "activate" or "use", presumably to avoid the idea that "casting" a spell from a scroll would let you qualify for prestige classes. 

I don't see anything conclusive on RC 132 or CArc 72.  Perhaps SorO was referring to the clause that says you can't qualify for PrC's that require spellcasting with spell-like abilities, or that you can't lower your Caster Level beyond the smallest CL necessary for you to cast the spell?  DMG 282 is about creating magic items. 

[Raineh Daze]

3. The official Rules say no.

If a 1st-level character takes the Precocious Apprentice feat, can he cast 2nd-level spells for the purposes of qualifying for a prestige class or meeting the prerequisites of a feat?
In the Sage’s opinion, the Precocious Apprentice feat would not help you qualify for a prestige class or feat because it gives you a chance at casting a 2nd-level spell, not the inherent ability to cast 2nd-level spells.

There is a lesson here, check the FAQ before posting and never, ever, listen to RD or Alt when it comes to rule related questions.

The other lesson is to never, ever pay attention to SorO on a rules related thread because the concept of 'politeness' apparently goes out the window.

3. Good find. This seems like a closed case here, especially if one holds the FAQ in regard.

Bear in mind that ruling seems to cause you to lose access to all casting PrC's if you get hit by arcane spell failure or, as a wizard, lose your spellbook (and if you have high enough spellcraft--AKA INT 16 at level 1--it's no longer a 'chance')

[Sleepyphoenixx]

By the RAW it works. You can cast a 2nd level spell, you qualify. The FAQ says it doesn't, but the FAQ isn't official rules, it's opinion.
A lot of DMs don't allow it. Most people refer to it as "Early Entry Cheese" so yes, it is cheesy in most peoples opinion.
On the other hand it makes dual progression classes like Mystic Theurge and Arcane Hierophant a lot more viable, because they suck otherwise.

Those are the facts. Make of them what you will. In the end it comes down to "ask your DM". It depends on your campaigns power level if it's OP or not.

[Necrosnoop110]

The FAQ says it doesn't, but the FAQ isn't official rules, it's opinion.

I'm not so sure. They are called the Official Game Rule FAQ. And in the description they are called [rule] "additions or major corrections" not opinions or options. How do you know they are not official?

 

[SorO_Lost]

Since when have you played the FAQ as holy text/official, Soro?

Since prior to Gleemax.

Also "holy" is a strong word there when combined with the word "play" since we both know I'm in favor of a gentleman's agreement and allowing any houserules that allow people to play together happily. FAQ is part of the official rules and it doesn't matter if you disagree or agree with D&D's rules, your opinion will never change that fact and that is all there is to it.

I don't see anything conclusive on RC 132 or CArc 72.  Perhaps SorO was referring to the clause that says you can't qualify for PrC's that require spellcasting with spell-like abilities, or that you can't lower your Caster Level beyond the smallest CL necessary for you to cast the spell?  DMG 282 is about creating magic items.

You got the RC/DMG quotes right, there is a minimum CL.  However, you looked at Spellcaster Level in CA which isn't definitive (SLAs are not arcane, invocations are not Spells). These two pages have something in common.

I'll give you a hint. The topic deals with something that can ambiguously mean two different things, if we ever had anything that tilted the balance towards one or the other, people would explode. Screaming over what rules you're supposed to ignore (answer: none of them), which are wrong, which apply, and so on.

I agree it's not the strongest point unto it's self (spellcasting isn't a feat/prc!) which is why I'm playing suggestive educator, but if you're pursing intent it is a consideration that section I speak of will have you reopening the PHB/DMG to reread the minimum CL areas a second time. And when you do, you may or may not hear me echoing one of my common sayings. Requirements are not effects.

It's why I've been on the defensive side of the fence for years now. Versatile Spellcaster is the only thing I can learn any support in, and that is due to the FAQ supporting it and me struggling with the empathized 'is'. Which may seem ironic, but I really do my best to stay neutral and follow the rules where they go. To me, intent is a puzzle that needs worked out and that's what holds my interest, not intentionally misreading things and slapping additional zeros to numbers or other similar bullshit.

[kitep]

By the RAW it works. You can cast a 2nd level spell, you qualify.

Actually, somebody pointed out that by RAW it doesn't work.  Since RAW requires spellS (plural), and PA only allows spell.  Maybe if the PC takes it twice...

A lot of DMs don't allow it. Most people refer to it as "Early Entry Cheese" so yes, it is cheesy in most peoples opinion.

I agree with that.  The feat istself is not so cheesy, but many consider using it for early entry to be Chedderiffic

[FlaminCows]

SorO's argument doesn't hinge on the FAQ ruling, though the FAQ ruling is valid. Even if you choose to ignore the FAQ, the other point he made should still be enough. If Precocious Apprentice counted towards meeting "must be able to cast 2nd-level spells" prerequisites, then it would also count towards meeting the the requirements of its own fifth sentence. Precocious Apprentice does not treat itself as being "When you become able to cast 2nd-level spells," so clearly having Precocious Apprentice does not count as "being able to cast 2nd-level spells".

As for ignoring the FAQ, that is just a silly forum idea. The reasoning for ignoring the FAQ (that it sometimes contradicts itself, that it overwrites rules as in the books, that it is written my different authors with their own views, etc) would be exactly the same reasoning as you can give for ignoring any rulebook, because all those things apply to them too. Wizards of the Coast has always treated the FAQ as official (it even says so in the title), and so have the individual designers of the rules, some of whom are the same people who give answers in the FAQ.

The only reason people choose to ignore the FAQ is that they don't like it very much; it takes effort to find a ruling in it, and when they find it it often hamstrings a ruling they built a character on. This does not make the FAQ any less valid.

Maybe if the PC takes it twice...

You cannot take Precocious Apprentice twice. A feat can only be taken once, unless the feat's description says otherwise.

[linklord231]

By the RAW it works. You can cast a 2nd level spell, you qualify.

Actually, somebody pointed out that by RAW it doesn't work.  Since RAW requires spellS (plural), and PA only allows spell.  Maybe if the PC takes it twice...

This interpretation leads to the absurdity that a Sorc 4 can't cast 2nd levels spells, because he only gets one spell known.

[ksbsnowowl]

By the RAW it works. You can cast a 2nd level spell, you qualify.

Actually, somebody pointed out that by RAW it doesn't work.  Since RAW requires spellS (plural), and PA only allows spell.  Maybe if the PC takes it twice...

As pointed out above, the feat cannot be taken twice.

However, what I've often seen:
Precocious Apprentice alone does not qualify you for early entry.
Precocious Apprentice + Focused Specialist ACF does qualify you for early entry.

The reasoning is that Focused Specialist causes you to lose the conditional spell slot you get from Precocious Apprentice, and replaces it with two unconditional spell slots of your specialization school.

[phaedrusxy]

By the RAW it works. You can cast a 2nd level spell, you qualify.

Actually, somebody pointed out that by RAW it doesn't work.  Since RAW requires spellS (plural), and PA only allows spell.  Maybe if the PC takes it twice...

This interpretation leads to the absurdity that a Sorc 4 can't cast 2nd levels spells, because he only gets one spell known.

Yeah... basically the only reason PA doesn't work is because the FAQ says it doesn't. If you get into contorted logical arguments against it, you wind up ruling out low Int wizards and low level sorcerers from qualifying for things that they obviously should be able to...

So in this case, you're better off just going with RAI (i.e. the FAQ) and not over-analyzing the RAW.