FrankTrollman wrote:Yes, Sublime Chord refers to "Caster Level" every time. But because the equation is only performed once, it's not infinite or iterative.
But by that reading, the equation can't be performed
at all because the caster level of Sublime Chord is an equation which uses the equation used to calculate itself to calculate itself, thereby promptly disappearing up its own arse in a puff of stupid.
FrankTrollman wrote:So if you do something stupid like get a bonus to all your caster levels (example: Orange Ioun Stone), this actually adds double that to your caster level when you have Sublime Chord.
[...]
But it's not infinite, because the Sublime Chord only checks and sets the one time. You can perform your caster level equation in any order you want, but you can't recalculate any value once you've calculated it.
That's clearly not true: you've just cited an example where the Sublime Chord level checks and sets again!
FrankTrollman wrote:For example: Our Wizard 8/ Bard 1/ Sublime Chord 1 would have a Caster Level (in all classes) of 9.
No he wouldn't, not if we're saying that "level"="caster level". We can't work it out *at all*.
If we say that "level"="caster level for everything other than the first level of Sublime Chord, which we shall declare as a fixed value of 1" we end up with a caster level of 9, granted, but then the wheels fall off.
FrankTrollman wrote:If he had an Orange Ioun Stone, he'd have a Caster Level of 11 (Wizard 8 + 1 added to Sublime Chord 1 + 1 = 11).
Wiz8/Brd1/SC1, caster level 9. Adds an Orange Ioun Stone, prompting caster level recalculations. We're saying now that "level=caster level", yes? Wizard caster level goes up to 10. Bard caster level goes up to 10. Sublime Chord caster level = Sublime Chord caster level (10) + Wizard caster level (10) + Ioun Stone (1), for a total of 21; to which latter value Wizard and Bard are now set.
The description
cannot mean "caster level" on both sides unless you get very selective about how you apply it, which is just hand-waving.
Guest (Unregistered) at [unixtime wrote:1182285869[/unixtime]]I can't claim any expertise in D&D rules, but I'm generally pretty good at understanding and following formalized instructions, and I don't see any way you can make that work.
Neither can I, which was pretty much my point with the examples.
Guest (Unregistered) wrote:According to the earlier quote:
null wrote:A sublime chord's caster level for both her sublime chord spells and the spells she gains from other arcane spellcasting classes is determined by adding her sublime chord level to her level in another arcane spellcasting class.
This seems to be a pretty clear instruction saying that if you want to know a sublime chord's caster level, for any reason, you add "sublime chord level" to "level in another arcane spellcasting class."
SC-CL = SC-L + ASC-L
To me, the only interpretation that works, consistently, is adding "sublime chord class level" to "class levels in another class". However, an ever-increasing number of my players as well as some people here assert that we're talking about caster levels when performing these calculations, which is why I need to arrive at an answer.
Guest (Unregistered) wrote:You want to say that "sublime chord level" means "sublime chord caster level."
SC-CL = SC-CL + ASC-L
Computationally, you're broken right there.
Yes.
Guest (Unregistered) wrote: It's not a question of how many "iterations" you do, it's a question of being able to compute the answer once in the first place. In order to calculate the sublime chord caster level, you first need to determine the sublime chord caster level so that you can plug it into the equation. What do you plug in there?
You simply can't plug anything other than class level in there. Any interpretation that says "you call it class level first time and then call it caster level thereafter" is inconsistent and *still* doesn't work because "your caster level in other arcane spellcasting classes" is always set to be the same as your "Sublime Chord caster level" so all you've done is ducked the problem for a single level.
Guest (Unregistered) wrote:That's not an issue of it becoming infinitely large, it's a problem of being unable to continue with the game because you literally cannot carry out the rules as written.
Agreed. That's the argument I was trying to make, albeit less succinctly.
Guest (Unregistered) wrote:Frank seems to be saying that we should plug in "what the sublime chord's caster level would be if we ignored this rule." That is certainly one way to make the value computable, but I don't see how you could construe the rules as written as actually saying that (if there's some precedent I'm unaware of, feel free to enlighten me).
It can't be caster level, it's not possible.
Guest (Unregistered) wrote:Catharz seems to be saying that "sublime chord level" should in this particular instance be taken to mean "class level" instead of "caster level," regardless of any rules or precedents that would normally apply, because interpreting it as "caster level" makes it impossible to carry out the rules. However, if you're arguing that the same instructions, used to calculate any value except the sublime chord's caster level, would cause "sublime chord level" to be interpreted as "sublime chord caster level," then it seems to me that you're revising the rules, not interpreting them, with that position.
Again, agreed.
My position is this: it's "actual class levels" on BOTH sides of the equation, except when explicitly stated otherwise.
Guest (Unregistered) wrote:Of course, Amra, your challenge to see how quickly the game breaks isn't really interesting if you rule that the RAW is inherently self-contradictory and can't be followed in the first place; if you do that, then it has nothing to do with the players' choices at all.
That's absolutely not what I'm trying to do. I want an interpretation that works, consistently, and I don't care what that interpretation is.
A Wiz8/Brd2 who adds a level of Sublime Chord takes his class level in an arcane spellcasting class - 8 - and adds it to his Sublime Chord level - 1 - to determine his caster level in all classes, which will now be 9. The computation is revisited every time
class level changes, not caster level.
Catharz wrote:Before you've calculated the sublime chord's caster level, its caster level is undefined. That's not the same as being equal to zero. So you must use the class level, which is a fixednum.
Yes, absolutely.
Catharz wrote:You then add your class level in another arcane spellcasting class. I'm willing to admit that there is epistemological uncertainty as to whether you're adding the "caster level" or the "class level," but I think that in this case it's safest to assume that you're adding the same thing for both classes.
Absolutely.
Catharz wrote:
Of course, this calculation is to determine a characteristic of spellcasting, so you add the "level used to determine spellcasting ability" for both classes. The "level used to determine spellcasting ability" for a wizard 6/Eldritch Knight 4 is 9. The "level used to determine spellcasting ability" for an Eldritch Knight 2/Loremaster 1 is 3. This is not the same as caster level. Caster level is a quantity derived (in part) from this number.
I was with you right up to that point. I'm still having trouble with this, but let us say that if it's class level, it's class level. A Wizard 6/Eldritch Knight 3/Bard 2 who takes a level of Sublime Chord has to use one arcane spellcasting class to determine his caster level. He'll choose Wizard and add one from his Sublime Chord levels to end up with a caster level of 7 in Bard and Sublime Chord.
However, he has 3 levels of Eldritch Knight (goodness knows why). This gives him 2 levels of spells per day and caster level for purposes of Wizard spellcasting. How do we apply the Sublime Chord effect?
I believe it's not unreasonable to say that when the SC level is taken, his Wizard caster level is set to 7. His Wizard class level and spells per day remain unchanged at this point.
Then we apply the effect from Eldritch Knight: after all, we derived the SC level from his Wizard level before counting EK, so we should apply the SC caster level effect before counting it too.
Thus, the Wiz6/EK3/Brd2/SC1 gains spells per day as an 8th-level Wizard but casts them as a 9th-level caster. He gains spells per day as a 2nd-level Bard but casts them as a 7th-level caster. He gains spells per day as a 1st-level Sublime Chord, and casts them as a 7th-level caster.
Yes, it makes taking levels in another PrC before Sublime Chord a sub-optimal choice, but... so what?
Now we add in Ur-Priest and we keep to the same interpretation. Wiz6/EK3/Brd2/SC1/UP1 has exactly the same arcane casting ability as above, plus gains spells per day as a 1st-level Ur-Priest. Ur-Priest caster level suffers from all the same arguments as those offered previously in the thread for Sublime Chord:
"To determine the caster level of an ur-priest, add the character's ur-priest levels to one-half of his levels in other spellcasting classes."
If we're talking about adding "character's ur-priest caster levels" to "one-half of his caster levels in other spellcasting classes", the equation is (thank you, Guest!) computationally impossible. If we're saying it's "class levels in ur-priest" to "caster levels in other spell-casting classes" we are, as a wise person once said, revising the rules rather than interpreting them.
So, the Wiz6/EK3/Brd2/SC1/UP1 character's Ur-Priest caster level is:
1+0.5(6+2+1) = 5.5, or "5".
If the character hadn't been quite so hopelessly awful to begin with and had taken Wiz9/Brd1/SC1/UP1, his Ur-Priest caster level would have been:
1+0.5(9+1+1) = 6.5, or "6".
In terms of Spells Known / Caster Level, this character is:
Wizard 9 / 10
Bard 1 / 10
Sublime Chord 1 / 10
Ur-Priest 1 / 6
This also means no "double effect" from a Karma Bead or Orange Ioun Stone as class levels are unaffected and therefore no level recalculation is performed for Ur-Priest or Sublime Chord. I think this resolves it for me, unless someone can show me a reason why this interpretation can't be applied consistently.
Cheers folks!