Author Topic: Arch-Erudite from Hell  (Read 12958 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Azoriel

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 34
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #20 on: February 18, 2011, 10:43:26 AM »
If any of the classes other than Erudite get equal to, or above the Erudite, it loses the 2 powers it gets, from leveling up.

You have this the wrong way around - an "ex-erudite" loses the ability to learn extra powers via research, not the two per level progression.

Mixster

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1642
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #21 on: February 18, 2011, 11:45:54 AM »
What, no spell to power!?
Monks are pretty much the best designed class ever.

JaronK

Meep Meep - Mixster out

Rejakor

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 610
    • Email
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #22 on: February 18, 2011, 02:58:40 PM »
Erudites need to have more class levels than any other psionic class in the build, or they don't get to get new spells from StP or powers from people's heads.

What's the point of going Incantatrix 10 in any case?  With Magic Mantle, Cerebremancer adds to your erudite ML/powers can cast twice per level taken.  If you don't need to go incant 10, you can use cerebremancer to make up some of the difference.

Keep in mind that all psionic powers are psilikes and psilikes can be supernaturally transformed to Su's.  I assume that's where xp-less psyreformation is coming from?  Unique powers per day is kind of trivial with Linked synchronicity.

That said, the only way to break the action economy with Linked spells is by burning pp like an orange with Arcane Fusion (Hustle, Synchronicity) Linked to <Power You Want To Manifest> and is only useful at high levels, or by turning into an Udoroot to cast 2 psilikes with each standard action as an Ex SA, or by being an Ardent 10 with Dominant Ideal ACF Time Mantle(don't expend psifocus when using meta on time domain powers, like, say, Synchronicity).

Erudite 6/Cerebremancer 6/Metaphysical Spellshaper 3/Incantatrix 1/Archpsion 4 gives ML of 26 from classes alone.

Although keep in mind you can totally use Master Spellthief on a Magic Mantle erudite if you feel like it.  Cerebremancer is just the classy way of handling things.

PP regen can be disallowed by DMs who know their stuff.  So, use metamorphic transfer and a brain eater (?) monster from XPH to eat people's int scores for pp.  Get a lackey with binder 1, have him bind naberious, eat his brain on a fairly regular basis.  Bonus points if he's a pixie and you're an elf, and you keep him in a bottle.

Also Soul Crystal from MoI + quintessence let you store pp without magic items for as long as you want.  Plus allows some nice shenanigans with self-targeted spells.

Lycanthromancer

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4003
    • Email
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #23 on: February 18, 2011, 03:08:19 PM »
Actually the 11/Level/Day is RAW, not a thought exercise.  Go read the text concerning how they manifest powers, and remember that text trumps table :D  However, the overall Erudite basically is...what DM would allow a better version of my Warmage Batman?  :P

The 11/day is at Erudite 20 as-written. No PrC advances UP/D RAW, thus you get stuck without that advancement.
Au contraire! Legacy champion!
[spoiler]Masculine men like masculine things. Masculine men are masculine. Therefore, liking masculine men is masculine.

I dare anyone to find a hole in that logic.
______________________________________
[/spoiler]I'm a writer. These are my stories. Some are even SFW! (Warning: Mostly Gay.)
My awesome poster collection. (Warning, some are NSFW.)
Agita's awesome poster collection.
[spoiler]
+1 Lycanthromancer
Which book is Lycanthromancer in?
Lyca ... is in the book. Yes he is.
 :D
shit.. concerning psionics optimization, lycan IS the book
[/spoiler]

Rejakor

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 610
    • Email
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #24 on: February 18, 2011, 03:31:13 PM »
Eurgh, why don't we add some bloodlines onto that too, just for fun.

SorO_Lost

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2355
  • I'll kill you before you're born.
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #25 on: February 18, 2011, 07:29:44 PM »
It's taken someone this long to mix and match psionics with magic based PrCs?
Sorry to say, been there and done that. Only then it was called not understanding the Psionics-Magic Transparency instead of pure bullshit.

The Magic mantle really doesn't add anything new.
Quote
In addition, you always treat magic and psionics as identical. Therefor, powers such as dispel psonics work for both magic and psionics. Most Campaigns already treat them in this manner, so this mantle is most useful in campaigns where they are considered different systems.
Did you catch the last part or are you too busy concentrating on ignoring everything but the opening sentence?

Because
Quote
Powerful Build (Ex)
The physical stature of half-giants lets them function in many ways as if they were one size category larger.
I would like to ignore following text in order to gain reach.

Quote
Precocious Apprentice
You gain an extra 2nd-level spell slot that must be used initially to cast only the chosen spell.
Or spells.

Quote
Fighter
Bonus Feats: At 1st level, a fighter gets a bonus combat-oriented feat in addition to the feat that any 1st-level character gets and the bonus feat granted to a human character. The fighter gains an additional bonus feat at 2nd level and every two fighter levels thereafter (4th, 6th, 8th, 10th, 12th, 14th, 16th, 18th, and 20th).
Or maybe to make the fighter more useful by saying they can take metamagic feats.

Anyway. Let's go into this most campaigns treat them as the same system means "must be able to cast 2nd level spells" means 2nd level powers meets the requirements idea again. I don't, you don't, the BG's forums don't, D&D's forums don't, hmm. I'm seeing a flag here. This is OP, not TO. You want to mess with defining most you take the crap out of here. Rule wise, it's pointed out right here: Therefor, powers such as dispel psonics work for both magic and psionics.. Clearly only states powers, not manifesting, interacts with with magic and powers just fine.

It is exactly what the Psionics-Magic Transparency rule stats as well: The default rule for the interaction of psionics and magic is simple: Powers interact with spells and spells interact with powers in the same way a spell or normal spell-like ability interacts with another spell or spell-like ability. This is known as psionics-magic transparency.

So all you've done is ignore the rest of the rules and gone for only a small sentence out of a paragraph (as presented, again I found better uses for said method as usual). You've turned power interaction with magic/powers into a falsified manifester/spellcaster transparency (against the ignored section, against the "default" rules). So my question to you is simple.

Were you just plain bored that day?
Tiers explained in 8 sentences. With examples!
[spoiler]Tiers break down into who has spellcasting more than anything else due to spells being better than anything else in the game.
6: Skill based. Commoner, Expert, Samurai.
5: Mundane warrior. Barbarian, Fighter, Monk.
4: Partial casters. Adapt, Hexblade, Paladin, Ranger, Spelltheif.
3: Focused casters. Bard, Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Martial Adapts, Warmage.
2: Full casters. Favored Soul, Psion, Sorcerer, Wu Jen.
1: Elitists. Artificer, Cleric, Druid, Wizard.
0: Gods. StP Erudite, Illthid Savant, Pun-Pun, Rocks fall & you die.
[/spoiler]

Rejakor

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 610
    • Email
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #26 on: February 18, 2011, 08:20:57 PM »
Yeah, i'm not seeing RAW how 'Most Campaigns already treat them in this manner, so this mantle is most useful in campaigns where they are considered different systems.' has any effect whatsoever on 'In addition, you always treat magic and psionics as identical.'  'most useful' != 'is only useful'.  RAI it's pretty clear what they meant, but RAW it's pretty clear what they WROTE means.

As for the specific example... uh.  Do you REALLY want me to go and dig up all the other partial examples WotC has used?  They do that a LOT.  Again, you're taking it to mean 'cause the example only mentioned a power and the actual ability mentioned more than, clearly, by RAW, it only works for powers, despite WotC using partial examples a fair damn bit, and despite the actual rules text being explicit on what it does and does not affect'.  It says magic and psionics.  Not spells and powers.  It says that this ability will be MOST useful in campaigns without transparency, and that 'most campaigns already treat them in this manner'.  Which means absolutely nothing whatsobloodyever.  For all I know they are saying that 'most campaigns use transparency, so the magic mantle only makes CL = ML for those campaigns, so it's better in non-transparency campaigns where it also lets powers affect spells and powers count as spells and vice versa'.  Note again that 'most useful' is not the same thing as 'only useful'.

RAW, the first sentence explicitly says that for you, psionics = magic.  The third sentence says that most campaigns already treat them in this manner, which means, RAW, fuck all?  It's like saying 'most DMs might not like this'.  It has no rules value whatsoever.  It helps clarify RAI, although to be honest they may have intended for it to work like this (albeit not seeing how it could be broken) and just have been retarded in writing that sentence.  You can also read that it's referring to dispel psionics working on both magic and psionics.  Most campaigns allow that to happen.  Etc etc.

Basically, if people WERE ignoring the third sentence, you would have a valid point.  But they're not.  It doesn't say what you are saying it says.

Azoriel

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 34
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #27 on: February 18, 2011, 09:03:34 PM »
Right - magic mantle does not open up any spellcasting prestige classes to manifesters.  To assume it does is incorrect.

(Modified to remove unnecessary information.)
« Last Edit: February 18, 2011, 09:11:02 PM by Azoriel »

Rejakor

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 610
    • Email
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #28 on: February 18, 2011, 10:03:49 PM »
Why?

Azoriel

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 34
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #29 on: February 18, 2011, 11:05:27 PM »
Ah, I thought we were all in agreement.  Here we go...

From the description of Magic Mantle (in Complete Psionic):
Quote
...you always treat magic and psionics as identical.  Therefore, powers such as dispel psionics work for both magic and psionics.  Most campaigns already treat them in this manner, so this mantle is most useful in campaigns where they are considered different systems.
(emphasis mine)

This particular rule only changes things to the way most campaigns already are (the default).  Since psionic characters do not normally qualify for spellcasting PrCs, it is clear that the RAI is not to allow for such.

The RAW does not allow for this either.  Powers = Magic is not the same thing as Powers = Spells.  Thus, there is no RAI or RAW to support the idea that magic mantle lets psionic characters take spellcasting PrCs.

Even you houseruled magic mantle to say as much, you would still have one more hurdle to jump: "psionic spellcasting" is neither stated to be arcane nor divine.  You still wouldn't qualify for anything that required "able to cast 3rd level arcane spells" or anything of that nature.  If you took Southern Magician (from Races of Faerun) to get around this restriction, you'd still be screwed, because most spellcasting PrCs give something like "+1 level of existing arcane/divine spellcasting class", which levels of erudite/psion/ardent/etc would be neither.

SorO_Lost

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2355
  • I'll kill you before you're born.
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #30 on: February 18, 2011, 11:54:08 PM »
Southern Magician was ruled by the Sage not to allow an arcane caster to meet divine spell requirements.
And if you want to be egotistic & argumentative, it was printed into the FAQ as well.

Also very excellent point Azoriel.
Tiers explained in 8 sentences. With examples!
[spoiler]Tiers break down into who has spellcasting more than anything else due to spells being better than anything else in the game.
6: Skill based. Commoner, Expert, Samurai.
5: Mundane warrior. Barbarian, Fighter, Monk.
4: Partial casters. Adapt, Hexblade, Paladin, Ranger, Spelltheif.
3: Focused casters. Bard, Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Martial Adapts, Warmage.
2: Full casters. Favored Soul, Psion, Sorcerer, Wu Jen.
1: Elitists. Artificer, Cleric, Druid, Wizard.
0: Gods. StP Erudite, Illthid Savant, Pun-Pun, Rocks fall & you die.
[/spoiler]

Azoriel

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 34
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #31 on: February 19, 2011, 12:16:24 AM »
Southern Magician was ruled by the Sage not to allow an arcane caster to meet divine spell requirements.
And if you want to be egotistic & argumentative, it was printed into the FAQ as well.

(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.

Also very excellent point Azoriel.

Thanks!  ;)  I suppose I should've credited you for saying the same thing earlier - sorry about that.

SorO_Lost

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2355
  • I'll kill you before you're born.
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #32 on: February 19, 2011, 01:23:28 AM »
(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).
Tiers explained in 8 sentences. With examples!
[spoiler]Tiers break down into who has spellcasting more than anything else due to spells being better than anything else in the game.
6: Skill based. Commoner, Expert, Samurai.
5: Mundane warrior. Barbarian, Fighter, Monk.
4: Partial casters. Adapt, Hexblade, Paladin, Ranger, Spelltheif.
3: Focused casters. Bard, Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Martial Adapts, Warmage.
2: Full casters. Favored Soul, Psion, Sorcerer, Wu Jen.
1: Elitists. Artificer, Cleric, Druid, Wizard.
0: Gods. StP Erudite, Illthid Savant, Pun-Pun, Rocks fall & you die.
[/spoiler]

Azoriel

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 34
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #33 on: February 19, 2011, 02:50:07 AM »
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 (we?) 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.
(emphasis mine)

(1) Don't put words in my mouth.  (When did I say I wanted to change official rules, or make a house rule of any sort?  When did I say I dislike Skip Williams?)  That's bad form.

(2) I'm not going to cite sources like I'm writing some kind of doctor's thesis just to provide an opinion.  I only stated that Mr. Williams was known for making questionable calls during his tenure as the Sage for 3rd Edition - if you want to take a position that he may or may not have made, that's cool, but be aware that the word of the Sage (and by extension the FAQ) may not universally be respected as official by all gamers.  Yes, I know the FAQ is released by WotC, and that the Sage is a WotC employee - this is a caveat to your FAQ citation, not a refutation.  If you want to disregard this, that's cool, too; just saying.

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).

Agreed; any concepts along these lines are moreorless hosed.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2011, 03:10:09 AM by Azoriel »

BeholderSlayer

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1258
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #34 on: February 20, 2011, 01:13:55 PM »
Just because you treat magic and psionics as identical doesn't mean that when you are manifesting powers you are actually casting spells.

You're still manifesting powers.

Therefore, using spellcasting prestige classes, metamagic feats, etc. just plain doesn't work.
Hi Welcome
[spoiler]
Allow me to welcome you both with my literal words and with an active display of how much you fit in by being tone deaf, dumb, and uncritical of your babbling myself.[/spoiler]

Rejakor

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 610
    • Email
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #35 on: February 21, 2011, 12:27:27 PM »
Meh.

I really hate it when people start backslapping each other for yelling loudly until an entire thread of discussion dies.

When something clearly says it does something and then alludes to doing something else under a loose definition of what it means... generally, RAW, it does what it says it does.

Confusion about the term 'you treat magic and psionics as identical' is fair enough.  Saying that because it says that this mantle is more useful in campaigns without transparency than those with means that all it gives is transparency and nothing else is idiotic, not supported by the text, and essentially an excuse to get up on your high horse about how dnd works fine if you just stop 'bending the rules' and listen to everything skip 'contradicts self in same sentence' 'flip-flop' williams says as if it came from the mouth of god himself.

The person writing that mantle either had no idea what he was doing, or did it by accident.  Guess what.  That doesn't change the fact that RAW it works.  Yell as loudly as you can and make as many logical fallacies and ad hominem attacks as you want, doesn't change the fact that logically and linguistically you are wrong.

BeholderSlayer

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1258
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #36 on: February 21, 2011, 02:02:56 PM »
Yell as loudly as you can and make as many logical fallacies and ad hominem attacks as you want, doesn't change the fact that logically and linguistically you are wrong.
Yes, you are wrong, logically and linguistically.

Whine and flail about it all you want.
Hi Welcome
[spoiler]
Allow me to welcome you both with my literal words and with an active display of how much you fit in by being tone deaf, dumb, and uncritical of your babbling myself.[/spoiler]

Lycanthromancer

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4003
    • Email
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #37 on: February 21, 2011, 02:55:32 PM »
The mantle says that it makes magic and psionics identical, which is more than standard transparency allows.

However, it doesn't force psionics to be treated as divine or arcane.

So yes, it allows you to do things you couldn't normally do even in a 'standard magic/psionics transparency' campaign, but it doesn't allow you to take levels in PrCs that require arcane or divine spellcasting, take feats that require the same, or allow for similar benefits when arcane or divine casting is involved.

There may be feats that mitigate this (Southern Magician? Not sure on that one, since I don't have the feat on hand), but the mantle is a bit more limited than some would like, if not as limited as others insist.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2011, 02:57:21 PM by Lycanthromancer »
[spoiler]Masculine men like masculine things. Masculine men are masculine. Therefore, liking masculine men is masculine.

I dare anyone to find a hole in that logic.
______________________________________
[/spoiler]I'm a writer. These are my stories. Some are even SFW! (Warning: Mostly Gay.)
My awesome poster collection. (Warning, some are NSFW.)
Agita's awesome poster collection.
[spoiler]
+1 Lycanthromancer
Which book is Lycanthromancer in?
Lyca ... is in the book. Yes he is.
 :D
shit.. concerning psionics optimization, lycan IS the book
[/spoiler]

SorO_Lost

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2355
  • I'll kill you before you're born.
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #38 on: February 21, 2011, 10:18:21 PM »
There may be feats that mitigate this (Southern Magician? Not sure on that one, since I don't have the feat on hand), but the mantle is a bit more limited than some would like, if not as limited as others insist.
As noted the FAQ says no.

But even if you ignore that, see bolded text.

Quote
ability to casts 2nd-level spells
Benefit: Once per day per two spellcaster levels, you can cast a divine spell as an arcane spell, or vice versa. This enables you to bypass arcane spell failure due to armor, or gain additional benefit from spell that functions differently for a divine caster instead of an arcane caster, such as true seeing or magic weapon.
<snip>
The actual source of the spell's power doesn't change, nor does its means of preparation. You are merely weaving the strands of magic together in an unconventional way that makes the spell behave somewhat differently.
As for the red text. Part 1 being the rules rather than opening statement never state you qualify for arcane/divine casting for feats/PrCs (see powerful build makes me large). And part 2 further emphasizes that you're not really casting divine spells with your arcane spellcasting abilities.

But hey, who cares. Screw reading the feat for our selves, Sage is wrong by default. Timmy says Southern Magician says you can be a Lord of the Waste as a Sorcerer and by saint Pelor he must be right! Oh and this random posters says we're all supposed to jump off a bridge tomorrow at 2pm in your local time. Don't be late. Oh and sorry, me and Lycanthromancer won't be attending.
Tiers explained in 8 sentences. With examples!
[spoiler]Tiers break down into who has spellcasting more than anything else due to spells being better than anything else in the game.
6: Skill based. Commoner, Expert, Samurai.
5: Mundane warrior. Barbarian, Fighter, Monk.
4: Partial casters. Adapt, Hexblade, Paladin, Ranger, Spelltheif.
3: Focused casters. Bard, Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Martial Adapts, Warmage.
2: Full casters. Favored Soul, Psion, Sorcerer, Wu Jen.
1: Elitists. Artificer, Cleric, Druid, Wizard.
0: Gods. StP Erudite, Illthid Savant, Pun-Pun, Rocks fall & you die.
[/spoiler]

Lycanthromancer

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4003
    • Email
Re: Arch-Erudite from Hell
« Reply #39 on: February 22, 2011, 12:09:57 AM »
There may be feats that mitigate this (Southern Magician? Not sure on that one, since I don't have the feat on hand), but the mantle is a bit more limited than some would like, if not as limited as others insist.
As noted the FAQ says no.

But even if you ignore that, see bolded text.

Quote
ability to casts 2nd-level spells
Benefit: Once per day per two spellcaster levels, you can cast a divine spell as an arcane spell, or vice versa. This enables you to bypass arcane spell failure due to armor, or gain additional benefit from spell that functions differently for a divine caster instead of an arcane caster, such as true seeing or magic weapon.
<snip>
The actual source of the spell's power doesn't change, nor does its means of preparation. You are merely weaving the strands of magic together in an unconventional way that makes the spell behave somewhat differently.
As for the red text. Part 1 being the rules rather than opening statement never state you qualify for arcane/divine casting for feats/PrCs (see powerful build makes me large). And part 2 further emphasizes that you're not really casting divine spells with your arcane spellcasting abilities.

But hey, who cares. Screw reading the feat for our selves, Sage is wrong by default. Timmy says Southern Magician says you can be a Lord of the Waste as a Sorcerer and by saint Pelor he must be right! Oh and this random posters says we're all supposed to jump off a bridge tomorrow at 2pm in your local time. Don't be late. Oh and sorry, me and Lycanthromancer won't be attending.
Yes, thank you, SorO. Just...don't hurt yourself, please.
[spoiler]Masculine men like masculine things. Masculine men are masculine. Therefore, liking masculine men is masculine.

I dare anyone to find a hole in that logic.
______________________________________
[/spoiler]I'm a writer. These are my stories. Some are even SFW! (Warning: Mostly Gay.)
My awesome poster collection. (Warning, some are NSFW.)
Agita's awesome poster collection.
[spoiler]
+1 Lycanthromancer
Which book is Lycanthromancer in?
Lyca ... is in the book. Yes he is.
 :D
shit.. concerning psionics optimization, lycan IS the book
[/spoiler]