FrankTrollman at [unixtime wrote:1145901318[/unixtime]]Indeed, the author of the feat said that the fact that it is merely a chance of casting a spell meant that it didn't count as spellcasting for the purposes of qualifying for things. Which is bullshit, but there you go.
If you take both Precocious Apprentice and Arcane Mastery, you have zero chance to fail at casting the spell. Those feats are in the same book. What does Rich have to say about that?
First, he would probably put his fingers in his ears and start singing gibberish to make sure you knew he couldn't hear you. When he got around to answering it at all, he would say that it isn't that you have a chance of failure that makes it not spellcasting, but that you have to make the check at all.
So True Name Bullshit Casting from Tome of Magic doesn't count as spellcasting - even if you get your check result 20+ higher than the DC so that you can "take 1" and still succeed - a check to produce a spellcasting isn't spellcasting for the purpose of spellcasting requirements.
Contrary wise, you could wear banded mail as a wizard, and you'd still count as being able to cast the spell. You cast the spell and then there's a chance that ASF makes your spell not work - but you still cast the spell without a check. Someone could disrupt your spell, or counter it, or make their save, or the the target could have spell resistance - all of this and more could make your spell not work. But you still perform the action "cast a spell" rather than perform the action "make a check to cast a spell".
I'm not saying you have to buy the reasoning, I'm saying that Living Greyhawk DMs are obligated to at least pay lip service to believing that reasoning.