Did Frank & K create The Wish and The Word?

[Cyberzombie]

Because the Ur Priest specifically talks about your levels in spellcasting classes, not your caster level for those spellcasting levels.

Those are the same fucking thing.

No, they're really not and I have no idea why you'd think otherwise, given that the Ur Priest itself has a different number for levels in Ur-Priest and caster level in Ur-Priest.

There's not even a question of this, unless you're going to claim some dude picking up an orange prism ioun stone instantly gains hit dice, BAB and all the other full benefits of gaining a level.

Caster level and levels in a spellcasting class are different things.

[DSMatticus]

12 if cast as a wizard spell, 19 if cast as an Derp Priest spell. 14 for Ur Priest if it were one of those instead of a Derp Priest.

No peeking if you have finished your test yet (for anyone else intending to answer, anyway)!

Nitpick: Eldritch knight doesn't advance spellcasting at first level. Is this why you got 19 instead of 18, and if so, is it by mistake or intention? Edit: Looking a little closer, you got 12 for wizard so I assume it's deliberate.

Fundamental: Eldritch knight does not give spellcasting and is not a spellcasting class, nor does eldritch knight give levels in a spellcasting class. As a class feature for levels 2-10, it allows you to advance spellcasting and gain the corresponding benefits as though you had gained a level in that class. Are you certain it adds to your derp-priest caster level? Can you make a compelling argument why counting as a higher level than you are for the purposes of spellcasting is the same thing as having a level in a spellcasting class? Edit: Or why a class which grants the ability to count as having a higher level in a completely separate spellcasting class is a spellcasting class itself?

[BearsAreBrown]

In the case of the Ur-Priest, the text says, "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." Just as before, the contextual restriction to "caster level" is set by the first instance of "level" and subsequent references to "level" inherit that.

Seriously, it's that simple. It's so simple you probably haven't ever realized that that's how people talk all the time.

Why are you acting like that quote is definitive in any way? It could be shorthanding like you say, or it could be making a distinction between class and caster levels. Nobody is obviously wrong except the editor.

[K]

The thing about 3.X caster level arguments that still amazes me is how quickly all of the problems with stacking, multi-classing, PrCing, and boosting could be corrected by simply saying that your CL from levels is equal to your character level and there are no untyped bonuses.

But hey, even the guys at Paizo don't want a better edition of 3.X, so I guess it doesn't matter.

[Grek]

Eldritch Knight is a spellcasting class because it advances your spellcasting. It's really as simple as that. Every class that improves spellcasting is a spellcasting class. Because Ur Priest (and Derp Priest) ask about your levels in spellcasting classes, not your caster level, you get to add the first level of Eldritch knight.

And yes, saying "Caster Level is always equal to Character Level" would fix everything.

[DSMatticus]

Eldritch Knight is a spellcasting class because it advances your spellcasting. It's really as simple as that. Every class that improves spellcasting is a spellcasting class.

Yes. Making shit up is as simple as it gets. There is literally no answer that could possibly be simpler. Now if only it were helpful to the problem at hand, we'd be going somewhere with this.

Neither "spellcasting class" nor "improves spellcasting" are particularly well-defined game terms (so we can't appeal to game definitions here), and because steroids aren't athletes we know your assertion doesn't have to be (and likely isn't) true. And possibly most damningly: if eldritch knight is a spellcasting class, then another prestige class can advance your spellcasting in eldritch knight, which does... what exactly? And if you only have one level of eldritch knight? If you think you have an answer to those questions, can you find anything that vaguely resembles your answer anywhere in the rules? And if you can't, do you think it's because you're completely in mind caulk territory and not actually dealing with the rules/meaning/intent?

No, 19's not right. That one's pretty easily axed on RAW and RAI, which is more than you can say for a few of the others.

[RadiantPhoenix]

The thing about 3.X caster level arguments that still amazes me is how quickly all of the problems with stacking, multi-classing, PrCing, and boosting could be corrected by simply saying that your CL from levels is equal to your character level and there are no untyped bonuses.

If what you're saying is, "your CL before buffs is always your character level..." that sounds like what I've been thinking.

And then I'd consider going further and trying to remove CL buffs in general.

[Grek]

If some crazy prestige class advances your spellcasting in eldritch knight by X, you gain the spells you would have gained if your eldritch knight level were X higher. Which, as it turns out, gives you the exact same spells as if you applied that prestige class's spellcasting advancement directly to whatever your eldritch knight levels are advancing. Crazy, huh?

If you did something like Wizard 5/Fighter 1/Eldritch Knight 1/Loremaster 5 and choose to have Loremaster advance your Eldritch Knight spells, then your caster level for Wizard spells is 10 and your spells known and spells per day are the same as a 10th level wizard.

A spellcasting class means a class that casts spells. That is the only thing it could mean. A class that lets you cast spells is a spellcasting class. Any class that gives you spells is a spellcasting class. It isn't mind caulk to say that, it's basic English grammar. If you have some other definition for what "spellcasting class" might mean, I would love to hear it. And then point and laugh at you.

[DSMatticus]

I don't think you're getting the basic English grammar of this case as well as you think you do. A class that improves your spellcasting is no more a class that casts spells than a drug that improves your 100 meter sprint is a drug that runs the 100 meter sprint. That's complete and total gibberish.

You don't have an appeal to rules, which I'm asking for and not receiving, and your appeal to language is laughably bad. You are actually appealling to your common sense ("well, clearly, advancing your eldritch knight spellcasting advances the spellcasting that eldritch knight advances, even if you only have one level of eldritch knight and it doesn't advance any fucking spellcasting at all because you don't even get the class feature that advances spellcasting until level two"), but there's no precedence for that anywhere to be found other than how much sense it makes to you inside your brainspace. Which is pretty much the definition of mind caulk.

[Grek]

Eldritch Knight still counts as a spellcasting class at level 1 for the same reason Druid still counts as a spellcasting class if you have a wisdom of 3. A class is a spellcasting class because it can give you spellcasting at all, not because it is giving you spellcasting right now.

[erik]

There is no such thing as EK casting, or an EK spell. EK just has a class feature that for some levels increases a previously held spellcasting class's abilities.

+1 EK caster level doesn't mean anything. It is gibberish.

If spellcasting class is to have some useful meaning then it should refer to a class that has a spellcasting list along with a defined mode of spellcasting progression. EK has neither.

[DSMatticus]

Eldritch Knight still counts as a spellcasting class at level 1 for the same reason Druid still counts as a spellcasting class if you have a wisdom of 3.

Do you have any idea what the fuck you're saying?

A druid with a wisdom of 3 has a spellcasting class feature. You will note the the wisdom requirement for casting spells is detailed inside the description of that very class feature, and you literally cannot say that a druid with a wisdom of 3 can't cast spells without admitting that they have that very spellcasting class feature to be limited by.

Eldritch knight at no point gets any class feature at all which grants spellcasting. An eldritch knight does not have a spell list, a spells per day, a caster level, or a casting stat, or any of that bullshit. A level one eldritch knight does not even have a class feature which advances the spellcasting of a separate class, in the same way a level 1 rogue does not have evasion.

The point of this is to illustrate that not only are you arguing that "advancing another class's spellcasting is the same as being a spellcasting class," you are arguing that "advancing another class's spellcasting advancement is the same as advancing another class's spellcasting." There is nothing that looks like that anywhere in any text in any book I am aware of, it doesn't follow from the language, and it also breaks down in a pretty hilarious way: wizard 3/cleric 3/warlock 3/mystic theurge 1/eldritch disciple 1/eldritch theurge 1.

You're just making this shit up. Stop it.

[Username17]

Because the Ur Priest specifically talks about your levels in spellcasting classes, not your caster level for those spellcasting levels.

Those are the same fucking thing.

No, they're really not and I have no idea why you'd think otherwise

Yes. Yes they are. The fixed term "level in a spellcasting class" is used interchangeably with the shorter term "caster level" throughout the game. It has always been such. Even the core rules uses the terms interchangeably. "Level in a spellcasting class" is simply the indeterminate form. There has never ever been a distinction between those two terms.

In D&D, "Level" means a whole lot of things. There are class levels, character levels, spell levels, encounter levels, adjusted character levels, dungeon levels, and caster levels. Expansion systems and optional systems add even more such as manifester levels and wound levels. So when a part of the game talks about "level" they necessarily have to use additional words to describe exactly what they mean. The fixed term "level in a spellcasting class" means caster level. That's what it fucking refers to. That is what it has always meant. That's why the Eldritch knight that people are ranting about says that it adds "to whatever other arcane spellcasting class the character has" rather than actually ever using the words "caster level." It doesn't have to use the words "caster level" because it used words that mean exactly the same thing.

-Username17

[Grek]

Question for Frank:

If Caster Level and Level in a Spellcasting Class are the same thing, can a 10th level Wizard with an Orange Ioun Stone cast Disintegrate?

E: For DSM

it also breaks down in a pretty hilarious way: wizard 3/cleric 3/warlock 3/mystic theurge 1/eldritch disciple 1/eldritch theurge 1.

I'm not seeing it.

One level in Mystic Theurge advances your Cleric casting by 1 and either your Wizard casting or Warlock invocations by 1. One level in Eldritch Disciple advances your Warlock invocations by 1 and does nothing for your divine casting. Eldritch Theurge advances your Warlock invocations by 1 and does one of the following:
A] Advance Wizard casting by 1 directly.
B] Advance both your Wizard casting and Cleric casting by 1 indirectly by way of Mystic Theurge.
C] Advance your Warlock invocations and Cleric casting by 1 indirectly by way of Mystic Theurge.
D] Advance your Warlock invocations and Cleric casting by 1 indirectly by way of Eldritch Disciple.

Is the problem that you can fuck yourself by being a Mystic Theurge and choosing not to advance your Cleric casting? Because you can do that anyways by being a Cleric 3/Wizard 4/Mystic Theurge 1 instead of a Cleric 3/Wizard 3/Mystic Theurge 2.

[DSMatticus]

can a 10th level Wizard with an Orange Ioun Stone cast Disintegrate?

Devil's advocate: how did he learn it, and out of what spell slots did he cast it? Even if you believe levels in a spellcasting class <=> caster level, you don't have to think that increasing that number (whatever you call it) will grant the class features associated with it. Can you think of any examples where a character is clearly meant to gain new spells and spell slots but isn't explicitly granted them (as is the case with prestige classes) that would make this interpretation suspect?

it also breaks down in a pretty hilarious way: wizard 3/cleric 3/warlock 3/mystic theurge 1/eldritch disciple 1/eldritch theurge 1.

I'm not seeing it.

Eldritch disciple is an invocation-using class because it advances a class which uses invocations. It is a valid target for eldritch theurge. Eldritch theurge is an invocation-using class because it advances a class which uses invocations. It is a valid target for eldritch disciple. Mystic theurge is an arcane spellcasting class and divine spellcasting class because it advances a class which casts arcane spells and it advances a class which casts divine spells. It is a valid target for both eldritch disciple and eldritch theurge.

Eldritch disciple and eldritch theurge advance one another, and the spare advancement goes to mystic theurge, wizard, or cleric with every iteration.

[Grek]

Devil's advocate: how did he learn it, and out of what spell slots did he cast it? Even if you believe levels in a spellcasting class <=> caster level, you don't have to think that increasing that number (whatever you call it) will grant the class features associated with it. Can you think of any examples where a character is clearly meant to gain new spells and spell slots but isn't explicitly granted them (as is the case with prestige classes) that would make this interpretation suspect?

That is the entire point. Gaining bonus to your caster level clearly does not give you more spells known and spell slots, but gaining a level in a spellcasting class does. Since gaining a level in a spellcasting class gives you things that gaining a bonus to your caster level does not, gaining a bonus to your caster level cannot be the same thing as gaining a level in a spellcasting class.

Eldritch disciple and eldritch theurge advance one another, and the spare advancement goes to mystic theurge, wizard, or cleric with every iteration.

Eldritch Theurge and Eldritch Disciple can be used to advance the invocations of the other, not the spellcasting of the other. This is because the invocation advancement and the spellcasting advancement are from different features. You don't get anywhere by recursing it repeatedly either: the final form looks like:

"You gain new invocations known and an increase in caster level as if you had also gained ...

...a level in a class that gives you new invocations known and an increase in caster level as if you had also gained x1000...

...a level in warlock."

which is the same as:

"You gain new invocations known and an increase in caster level as if you had also gained a level in warlock."

[Username17]

Grek: stop being retarded. Like the first thing anyone asked when Mystic Theurge came out was whether they could take a level of it and then bug out to a class that raises caster levels while also getting class features of some kind. The answer of course was no. And the reason that is the answer is because Mystic Theurge isn't a spellcasting class.

If Caster Level and Level in a Spellcasting Class are the same thing, can a 10th level Wizard with an Orange Ioun Stone cast Disintegrate?

No they can't. They can't because those are the same thing. Getting a 6th level spell slot isn't a feature of your level in spellcasting (which is your caster level), it's a class feature of your class level in Wizard.

-Username17

[Grek]

I think I get it now. You literally mean that levels in a spellcasting class is a synonym for caster level and is not a synonym for your class level in a class that lets you cast spells. Practiced Spellcaster gives you up to four levels in a spellcasting class, an Orange Ioun Stone gives you one level in a spellcasting class, but neither of them effect your class level. And with the Ur Priest, you're supposed to add your caster levels in all of your other spellcasting classes together, divide by two and then add that to your Ur Priest level when determining the caster level of an Ur Priest's spells.

That's a really unnatural way to read it, but it is internally consistent. I can respect that.

[Kaelik]

That's a really unnatural way to read it, but it is internally consistent. I can respect that.

That is literally the only natural way to read it. As can be determined by the fact that you literally had to tell us that a Cleric 3/Wizard 3/Mystic Theurge 1/Divine Companion 10 has Cleric 14 and Wizard 14 casting even though everyone ever knows that is not the case.

[Grek]

Only if the Divine Companion class advances arcane casting, which I very much doubt it does.

[Kaelik]

Only if the Divine Companion class advances arcane casting, which I very much doubt it does.

You just fucking told us that giving spellcasting class levels is exactly like levels in the class, then you told us that eldritch knight 1 is a spellcasting level. It naturally follows that Mystic Theurge 1 is a spellcasting level, and mystic theurge 2 is a spellcasting level. It does not follow that Mystic Theurge 2 is two different spellcasting levels.

The fact that you are now making up another completely bullshit distinction that makes no sense and isn't anywhere reflected in the rules to cover for the inadequacies of your previous bullshit distinction that makes no sense and isn't anywhere reflected in the rules is a sign that your are not actually correctly talking about the rules.

Because absolutely nowhere in any rules does it say that mystic theurge is half a spellcasting level, nor does that concept exist or even make sense.

So either:

Divine Companion does not advance Mystic Theurge because Mystic Theurge is not a spellcasting class.

or

Divine Companion does advance Mystic Theurge, all of it, because Divine Companion advances Mystic Theurge casting by one level, and one level of Mystic Theurge is both.

And by the way, your completely stupid attempt to distinguish Arcane Spellcasting from Divine as if you can't get both from the same class is also fucking stupid, because there already exist in the rules like eight different ways to get Arcane and Divine casting on the same fucking class by feats, so Wizard can be Divine spellcasting to be advanced by Divine casting increasing PrCs.

[Username17]

Not to mention that there are a fuck tonne of classes that simply advance a spellcasting class and don't give a shit whether it's arcane or divine. The idea of Mystic Theurge being a spellcasting class is frankly absurd. That would be wholly unworkable, and in any case has been repeatedly and precisely ruled against numerous times online and in print.

-Username17

[echoVanguard]

They can't because those are the same thing. Getting a 6th level spell slot isn't a feature of your level in spellcasting (which is your caster level), it's a class feature of your class level in Wizard.

Except that Ur-Priest does not refer to"your levels in spellcasting", it refers to "your levels in spellcasting classes", which is the difference between "the size of Maine" and "the size of Maine Lobsters".

Unfortunately, I suspect this whole conversation is a waste of time. If Frank admits that he's incorrect, he invalidates his work on the Wish and the Word authoritatively - and that's preserved, for all time, on the internet. Thus, logically, he has no incentive to ever do so - as long as he insists that we're all wrong and he's right, the Wish and the Word can never be definitively discredited. He can insist that all clarifying language discussing caster level is actually modifying language, and vice versa, for any reference we can find. And if we find authoritative rulings from WotC, he'll just insist that those rulings are irrelevant because optimization is a RAW-centric subset of TTRPG play. It's a pointless exercise.

echo

[Username17]

They can't because those are the same thing. Getting a 6th level spell slot isn't a feature of your level in spellcasting (which is your caster level), it's a class feature of your class level in Wizard.

Except that Ur-Priest does not refer to"your levels in spellcasting", it refers to "your levels in spellcasting classes", which is the difference between "the size of Maine" and "the size of Maine Lobsters".

Well, "levels in a spellcasting class" is the actual literal wording in the fucking glossary entry of "caster level" in the Player's Handbook. You can fuck all the way off.

-Username17

[Cyberzombie]

So you said this...

If Caster Level and Level in a Spellcasting Class are the same thing, can a 10th level Wizard with an Orange Ioun Stone cast Disintegrate?

No they can't. They can't because those are the same thing. Getting a 6th level spell slot isn't a feature of your level in spellcasting (which is your caster level), it's a class feature of your class level in Wizard.

And also this...

The fixed term "level in a spellcasting class" means caster level.

Lets assume the above statements you made are true.

A single classed wizard 10 picks up an ioun stone. We know by your definition that +1 caster level means he's gaining a class level in some spellcasting class. Since we know that the caster level he ends up with is 11, not 1, we also know that it must be adding to a class that already has 10 levels. The only class he possesses is the wizard class and it has 10 levels, so it logically follows that the "level in a spellcasting class" he's gaining must be in the wizard class. And since wizard levels give you hit dice, base attack bonus, save bonuses and spell slots, then the wizard should be able to cast disintegrate.

However, in the first statement I quoted, you said he couldn't cast disintegrate. That's a logical contradiction.