4
\$\begingroup\$

I want to make a Beguiler and take a dip into Rainbow Servant. However, in the Rainbow Servant class it says this:

When a new rainbow servant level is gained, the character gains new spells per day as if she had also gained a level in whatever spellcasting class in which she could cast 3rd-level arcane spells before she added the prestige class. She does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained (improved chance of controlling or rebuking undead, wild shape ability, and so on). This essentially means that she adds the level of rainbow servant to the level of whatever other spellcasting class the character has, then determines spells per day accordingly. ....

Then in the chart, beginning at the second level of Rainbow Servant, it says under "Spells per Day":

+1 level of arcane spellcasting class

So if I take 1 level of Rainbow Servant do I get more spells per day based on my base class or not?

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ That's three different questions; you should ask the Beguiler-6-downsides and Beguiler-Good-domain-spontaneous questions separately. As far as the main question, I suspect some errata may have gotten involved. \$\endgroup\$ – user17995 Nov 25 '16 at 3:15
3
\$\begingroup\$

You gain spellcasting every lv.

There is conflict between the text explaining spell casting progression and the table of the class explaining spell casting progression. Luckily, WoTC covered this.

DMG Dungeon Master's Guide v.3.5 Errata

Errata Rule: Primary Sources When you find a disagreement between two D&D rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct. One example of a primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a table entry

And since the text says you get spell casting every lv, you gain spell casting every lv.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ While technically accurate, I'm certain the asker would appreciate the controversy surrounding the class be addressed (or, at least, an acknowledgement that there is some controversy). \$\endgroup\$ – Hey I Can Chan Nov 25 '16 at 13:29
  • \$\begingroup\$ @HeyICanChan Honestly, personally I have seen little controversy on this point. \$\endgroup\$ – KRyan Nov 25 '16 at 14:10
  • \$\begingroup\$ @KRyan Huh. Okay. Maybe it's just me, but in most discussion I've seen, rainbow servant inevitably raises something like this. \$\endgroup\$ – Hey I Can Chan Nov 25 '16 at 14:23

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.