>>47994518
I have a beguiler who just got access to evocation because of plot and I also became a red wizard, so I am wondering just how this works.

Should I just pick a specialization (evocation because of plot) now, sacrifice a school and be done with it or does it become complicated since I dont have a specialization to enhance to begin with?

>>47994518
>In 3.5
I don't understand.

>>47994801
DnD 3.5 ed

>>47994816
Huh? D&D 3.5?

>>47994518
>>47994581
By the rules, you can't get that Prestige Class without specialization. You clearly get this class by your GM's will, so only your GM can answer this question. Sorry.

>>47994860
It says specifically that some sorcerors also get this PrC, so it must be possible. But yeah, I get the argument and that is what left me puzzled

>>47994888
"While it is possible for a sorcerer or bard
to become a Red Wizard, such misfits are ridiculed in their homeland
and are incredibly rare." page 193 DMG

>>47994518
Bro, that's not possible.
>One of the requirements for Red Wizard is Tattoo Focus feat.
>Prerequisite for Tattoo Focus is "Specialized in a school of magic"

Beguilers aren't able to specialize their magic, you are (purposefully or not, I don't care) breaking the rules.

>>47994927
see
>>47994925

>>47994925
>>47994946
I don't care about what was obviously half-thunk fluff that the writers wrote without checking with the crunch-makers.

That's. Not. Possible.

>>47994946
>>47994997
It's possible - wiz dip, take feat, progress beguiler, enter prestige, continue to progress beguiler (take another prohib.school as a wizard)

>>47994888
IIRC, red wizards doesn't like sorcerers much (in fluff).
Anyway, strictly speaking, you can dip wizard to get specialization. And then progress your beguiler class with that prestige. But you'll lose a level, ofc. Also, there are another instances, where prestige specifically speak about "prepared" spells. So, if you get that class from GM - resolve this issue with your GM.

>>47994925
Nice cutting out the most important part, dumbass.

"All Red Wizards have some skill as a specialist wizard, and most follow that path exclusively, but a few dabble in other sorts of learning (such as combat or divine magic)."

You have to multiclass at least one level of wizard to be a Red Wizard. Always.

>>47995052
>>47994997
>>47995026
Thanks for setting it straight. If I for plotreasons became a red wizard anyway, what would be the logical way to solve the Enhanced Specialization part? Just pick a specialization and restriction now and only have 1, or completely disregard it? It kinda removes a large chunk of the class, to not have the Enhanced Specialization, since it interlocks with so many other features

3.5 is shitty and obsolete, why would you ask about it?

>>47995087
Honesly its because our DM has been our DM for 15 years and he set his eyes on 3.5 back when it came out and never bothered wanting to learn better systems. We are basically forcing him to try 5e as a player, in the hopes of giving him interest in something less shit.

>>47995079
You dip one level of Wizard.
I'm pretty sure that if you Specialize in a school that's the same as your Wizard specialization, it'll apply to the same school spells in Beguiler.

>>47995141
Fuck, I worded that shit...
If Wizard specializes in transmutation, then I'm pretty sure it applies to any Sorcerer Transmutations too...

>>47995141
not an option to dip into wizard first, because of plot and stuff.

>>47995087
Why would you go into the thread about a system you hate? Have you nothing better to do with your time?

>>47995079
Well, if we'll say "fuck the system", then I'd say you to select one school to prohibit and one to specialize (but only for this class, no additional slots\spells per day). Ofc, then you should take school (to prohibit) that you're actually have spells from as a beguiler.

>>47995174
Aye, so dropping out, say Transmute, and specializing in Evocation (again, plot reasons for evocation)

That said, the rules say that you can use any spell from the extra prohibited school that you already know, but you can never learn new ones. That should mean that this Enhanced Specialization should only affect new spells I get right? So if I choose Abjuration for intance, I can still use Mage Armor because I learned it at level 1 (and we are level 13 now)

>>47995173
Why would plot say you aren't allowed to multiclass?

You aren't just refusing to split because you don't want to lose caster levels are you?

>>47994518
> In 3.5, how does Enhanced Specialization work when a beguiler (spontaneous caster with limited spell selection) become a red wizard of thay
I don't have book at the moment, but I'm pretty certain spontaneous casters can't go Thay RAW.

>>47995213
Except that's going off the assumption that you are going into it as a wizard. Since Beguilers know all their spell list, I'd say the tinkered version of the PrC should just have you lose all prohibited spells.

>>47995220
They theoretically could. There's no prepared or spontaneous restriction on the PrC actually. The real problem is that it requires a class that can specialize like how a wizard does.

>>47995219
Wizard is something you only become if you are part of the enclave
The enclave is a bunch of doods who chase and kill any non-wizards/non-cleric/non-paladin casters they find because they think it is dangerous. Think an SS level of surveliance.

I happen to be a beguiler, chased by the enclave and without too much time to study anything at all. Even if I could, all wizard-learning-books are only found in enclave hands so unless I want to fight the entire enclave, Im not going to get that option any time soon.

>>47995213
>Enhanced Specialization should only affect new spells I get right?
Yes.
Again, as a GM, I'd probably say that you lose all %school_name% spells from spell list. From spell level X and above. Where X - is spell level that you'll get in the future.

>>47995283
> The enclave is a bunch of doods who chase and kill any non-wizards/non-cleric/non-paladin casters they find because they think it is dangerous. Think an SS level of surveliance.
Is the enclave called Red Wizards of Thay?

>>47995283
Oh, one of those story lines.

Just give up, the game will die in bloated infancy or the fate of the world has already been determined.

>>47995313
No. Its a special option I got on the spot because we woke a mcguffin who happens to be the source of 25% of the magic in the world, she was pissed and needed someone to throw fireballs for her. That is, obviously the extremely short version.

>>47995353
Its a world we have been playing in for 15 real time years. Homebrew, got gradually expanded to ludicris levels and it is amazing to see how different campaigns expand and evolve the world, unfolding it as we play and have fun together as old friends. You dont have to like it. Its not someting you will ever experience anyway, so on that level, I guess we are both happy. I just know that I have been playing 54 times a year for 15 years with old friends and we still laugh when someone botches "that super important roll" or does that amazing thing you know

>>47995531
So you come here for what exactly?

You could have asked your gm your op question and had it answered by him in less time then it took to type out this thread?

Did you come here to keep slowly dripping information so we can not help you? Was it to make sense of your oh so special world you and your friends have apparently crafted? Would it be that you have no fucking clue what is going on and your trolling or did you come to brag about games of make believe?

>>47995603
I came here to get a baseline for what the rules would say on a level where neither he nor I could participate. He will most likely fudge the details but the underlying structure is still being used and if there was unforseen consequences, it would be nice to know before we just started out doing whatever seemed right in the first second

>>47995734
If he and you have been playing for 15 years, you should have been able to figure it out with out an electronic peanut gallery.

>>47995079
The most logical way (assuming your DM lets you not dip wizard, which they seem to have) would be to abandon a school you can actually use (since you're neglecting the study of part of your skillset in favor of another part of it).
But you've ventured into hombrew, so the correct answer is "whatever your DM says". Quit asking us and go talk to your DM.

>>47995174
>Why would you go into the thread about a system you hate? Have you nothing better to do with your time?
Man, don't you have better use of your time than spending hours playing a famously awful ruleset? This isn't like someone hating on GURPS for having too many options or anything, 3.5 is simply bad. I mean, if you've never played anything else and think it's fine because of that, then at least try 5E, which is a much better D&D edition.

>>47995112
Hope it works out for you.

>>47997125
Oh great, you fucks are here.

Abandon thread.