Anyspell and qualifying for PrCs

[The_Laughing_Man]

Apologies to you pelzak if you feel that this post is another derailment of your thread.

For a reference here are the complete requirements for dweomerkeeper (web enhancement for complete divine):

REQUIREMENTS
To qualify to become a dweomerkeeper, a character must fulfill all the following criteria.
Skills: Knowledge (arcana) 8 ranks, Spellcraft 8 ranks.
Feats: Any item creation feat and any metamagic feat.
Spells: Ability to cast arcane and divine spells.
Domain: Magic.
Special: The candidate must have created at least one magic item, whether of a permanent nature or not.

Note that the requirement is to have Class Feature: Spells for both arcane and divine spellcasting.

What is spellcasting, ability cast spells and a Class Feature: Spells?

Here are a few descriptions for them.

PHB 24: Class Features: Special characteristics of the class.
When applicable, this section also mentions restrictions and disadvantages of the class. Class features include some or all of the following. ... Spells: Wizards, sorcerers, clerics, druids, and bards use spells. Fighters, barbarians, rogues, and monks do not. Paladins and rangers gain the ability to use spells at 4th level.

PHB 145: Disabled (0 hit points):
A spellcaster retains the spellcasting capability she had before dropping to 0 hit points.

PHB 146: Staggered and Unconscious:
Spellcasters who fall unconscious retain any spellcasting ability they had before going unconscious.

MM1 212: Rakshasas as characters:
If the character takes additional levels of sorcerer, these levels stack with the rakshasa’s base spellcasting ability for spells known, spells per day, and other effects dependent on caster level.

MM1 294: Associated Class Levels:
A spellcasting class is an associated class for a creature that already has the ability to cast spells as a character of the class in question, since the monster’s levels in the spellcasting class stack with its innate spellcasting ability.

MM1 302: Monster Function and Challenge Rating:
Dragons with significant spellcasting ability frequently combine battler, magic user, and special attack user functions.

MM1 305: Alternate Form (Su):, MM1 306 Change Shape (Su):
The creature retains any spellcasting ability it had in its original form, although it must be able to speak intelligibly to cast spells with verbal components and it must have humanlike hands to cast spells with somatic components.

DMG 184 Dragon Disiple Requirements:
Spellcasting: Ability to cast arcane spells without preparation.

Baleful Polymorph:
The target loses all the special abilities it has in its normal form, including its class features.

Magical Training seemingly gives you Wizard or Sorcerer spellcasting Class Feature: Spells. Although it does not explicitly spell it out.

Anyspell does not seem to give you Class Feature: Spells.

[LargePrime]

make a new thread. Take it there ans i'll show you how you are wrong.

[Agita]

make a new thread. Take it there ans i'll show you how you are wrong.

There you go.

[sirpercival]

The requirement is not to have the class feature: spells, it's the ability to cast both arcane and divine spells.  That's why things such as magical training and southern magician work, they allow you to cast both.

The question is whether Anyspell satisfies the requirement, and whether you need to (a) just have it on your spell list, (b) prepare it, or (c) cast it, and whether if you do (c) and cast the arcane spell do you lose access to Dweomerkeeper.

[LargePrime]

The requirement is not to have the class feature: spells, it's the ability to cast both arcane and divine spells.

This.

To address the rest...

There are many posts in the other thread coming up with plenty of schemes to differentiate between having access to requirements and not having access.  While all of these are not RAW they also all seem to imply that a wizard with all spells cast was in the same boat as an Anyspell caster.

[sirpercival]

Would you say that just having Anyspell on your list (from IoM or spell domain) means you can cast arcane spells, even if you don't prepare it? (Assuming of course that you can cast spells of a high-enough level.)

[LargePrime]

Would you say that just having Anyspell on your list (from IoM or spell domain) means you can cast arcane spells, even if you don't prepare it? (Assuming of course that you can cast spells of a high-enough level.)

Since there are no limits at all in the rules, and you can cast arcane anytime you need to (with <24 hours notice) it is hard to argue it does not.

Its a dick move if that's not the game you play.

[sirpercival]

So, a swordsage who knows assassin's stance but isn't using it still qualifies for a prestige class that requires Sneak Attack?

[LargePrime]

So, a swordsage who knows assassin's stance but isn't using it still qualifies for a prestige class that requires Sneak Attack?

Not familiar with it.  But compare it to what we assume does work, A Wizard.
Do we not assume a wizard with all spells spent qualifies as an arcane caster?  In this case the Wizard has to Rest, then Memorize, to be able to cast again.  How is this discernibly different than, what I assume is assuming a stance?

[sirpercival]

Alright, then another example.  Does a person who owns a ring of evasion but isn't wearing it qualify for a PrC that requires evasion?

[LargePrime]

Alright, then another example.  Does a person who owns a ring of evasion but isn't wearing it qualify for a PrC that requires evasion?

So given we have the rules in front of us, what do you say, and, more importantly, why do you say it?

[sirpercival]

I say no, because even though they have the potential for having that class feature, they do not actually have it.

I'm not saying this is a perfect analogy to the Anyspell situation, I'm just exploring the parameter space.

[LargePrime]

I say no, because even though they have the potential for having that class feature, they do not actually have it.

I'm not saying this is a perfect analogy to the Anyspell situation, I'm just exploring the parameter space.

Lets explore the space.
Firstly you said "class feature", and that has nothing to do with this right?
Do my comments about the wizard make sense?  Are the "steps away" form casting arcane spells relavant?
Do you see the rules reference to "loss" of access, and agree the list seems to suggest things inflicted upon you?

[sirpercival]

No, it's still relevant because "evasion" is the prerequisite for whatever prestige class, say fochlucan lyrist.  The dweomerkeeper's prereqs are worded in a more vague way, so talking about the "evasion" class feature gives us a baseline for determining what it means to qualify for a prestige class.

Once we have a baseline, I'll be able to evaluate your wizardly comments.

In terms of "steps away", I think that's an irrelevant argument, but what matters is the difference between the potential for meeting a prerequisite, and actually meeting that prerequisite, which is what whoever it was was garbling.

BTW, I may agree with you that a wizard who has cast all his spells no longer qualifies (I'm not convinced yet).

[LargePrime]

No, it's still relevant because "evasion" is the prerequisite for whatever prestige class, say fochlucan lyrist.  The dweomerkeeper's prereqs are worded in a more vague way, so talking about the "evasion" class feature gives us a baseline for determining what it means to qualify for a prestige class.

but why are you talking about the class feature.  We could just discuss an item that grants evasion.  or both.
Again, why are you stuck on class features as some sort of guideline?

BTW, I may agree with you that a wizard who has cast all his spells no longer qualifies (I'm not convinced yet).

I am saying the opposite.  I thought that WE ALL THINK the wizard does NOT loose access.  Perhaps I am wrong?
And I was extrapolating from that assumption to show things like putting on a ring is much less than what the wizard has to do.

[sirpercival]

OK, let's move away from evasion.  Can we agree on the following axiom?

Axiom 1: The potential for meeting a prerequisite does not count as meeting the prerequisite.

[LargePrime]

Nope.  Where does that leave the presumed always qualified wizard who is out of spells?

And why are we creating axioms, when we has da rules right there?

[Halinn]

And why are we creating axioms, when we has da rules right there?

Because the rules do not cover all situations. Example: the dead condition does not say that you can't move.

[LargePrime]

And why are we creating axioms, when we has da rules right there?

Because the rules do not cover all situations. Example: the dead condition does not say that you can't move.

So you are looking at creating a FAQ/Eratta/guideline to cover the spots WoTC did not bother to?

And do you mean for it to FIX things and bring balance, or to cover stupid obvious things like "when dead, you cannot move"?

[The_Laughing_Man]

make a new thread. Take it there ans i'll show you how you are wrong.

There you go.

Why thank you, Agita, for my first thread in this forum!
Imagine my surprise when I initially saw it.

LargePrime, please do.