(No need for assumptions about other people's characters here - we can discuss things without unpleasantries, yes?) As a side-note, I do remember when the Sage said this; if I recall correctly, this was when we still had Skip Williams as the Sage, who was known for frequently going off into left field, well outside of both RAW and RAI. As such, I've a tendency to take his rulings with a grain of salt (as well as anything based off of them), but that he said this is indeed worth noting.
A. Got facts saying Skip was working as the Sage then?
B. Quote the source that only one guy at a time ever handled Sage rulings.
C. Now prove the guy(s) in charge of publishing the FAQ are one in the same.
D. Next, why that has any relevancy to the official FAQ and official rulings.
E. And finally. Your personal opinion isn't going to change the official rules. So in that regard, in a discussion based in official rules, why should waste time off on a tangent about bashing someone you dislike in order to gain support for your house rules?
And that's my thoughts on the matter.
Also very excellent point Azoriel.
Thanks! I suppose I should've credited you for saying the same thing earlier - sorry about that.
Actually mine never touched on arcane/divine separations.
I pointed out the fallacy of quoting a single sentence out of context and ignoring following text about it, and of course had to take some time to think of a few absurd showcases that use that concept to achieve better results. Then I debunked the "most" in "Most Campaigns" shoving into the TO area rather than here. Finally I touched on a combination of the second and third sentences.
The
default rule, the one that is likely addressed as in most campaigns, does not include a manifester/spellcaster transparency rule allowing a Psion to take levels in say Archmage. This is backed up by the context of stating dispel psionics work for magic or psionics.
That isn't an example, this isn't a poorly written NPC created by a failing elementary student. It uses the word
therefore, making it a factual statement, and states
powers before it names an example. If Rejakor wants to run off on some stupid examples don't mean anything tangent, he can only pick at the power choice Dispel Psionics which is the example. And what is the example at heart? It is an example of the previously stated Psionics-Magic Transparency rule. It alludes to the rule, focuses on power interaction, and it never oversteps creating a manifester/spellcaster transparency.
You added in with another note worthy point. The Incantatrix requires
arcane spellcasting and advances
arcane spellcasting. Even if everything was overlooked it still gets hung up on manifesting not being either arcane or divine thus cannot qualify for either. My addition to that is
officially there is no arcane/divine conversion utility printed in the rule books (that I know of).