Critique this house rule - blank spell slots

[der_kluge]

I was thinking about this, and thought it might make a fine Feat, but then I thought - why not just make it a house rule and give it to all spellcasters?

But, it might work better as a Feat. It's kind of powerful.

Thoughts?

I don't have a clever name for this
Blank spell slots can be prepared without preparation.
Benefit: As a swift action, you can fill a blank spell slot with any spell you know or are able to cast. The spell can not be of a higher level than the slot (though it can be lower). You can only fill one blank spell slot per spell level in this way. This feat can not be taken multiple times.
Normal: Filling a blank spell slot takes 10 minutes per spell level to fill.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The name part? How about "Tabula Rasa?"

Tabula rasa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As for the mechanics...doesn't this make every spellcaster essentially a sorcerer? Or near enough?

Bah- never mind- I missed the part about "only fill one blank spell slot per spell level."

As I recall, there is one for Sorcerers that lets them prep a spell as per a Wizard, so I don't see an issue there.

In addition, I don't see a problem with being able to take this feat multiple times, considering how feat-starved spellcasting classes are. (IOW, don't make it a Metamagic or Reserve Feat, or any other Feat type a Wiz can take with his bonus feats.)

 

[Hawken]

I see what you're wanting to do and I like it from a player perspective since wizards are screwed when it comes to magic. But from a DM perspective, I have to say there's no way I'd allow it.

It basically allows the wizard to whip out any spell they need on the fly and takes away their class distinction of having to prepare spells. It may not sound like a big deal, but in the upper levels, its pretty damn dangerous for a wizard to be able to whip out any 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th level spell they need at a moment's notice. And by high levels, they are going to have dozens of spells to choose from.

One rule I used is similar to Elements of Magic, in that my players select the spells they prepare for the day. Those spells can be cast as a standard action. If they need to cast a spell that is not prepared but is in their spellbook, it takes two full round actions to cast, then they lose one of their prepared slots.

Its not too far off from what you're proposing but they still have to prepare and there are still consequences if they do not prepare well. Your method eliminates the issue of preparing altogether. With an average of 4-6 encounters before resting, even a mid level caster can cover any lack of preparation by relying on those empty slots.

 

[thedmstrikes]

I can definitely see Hawkins point. In an effort to avert the overpoweredness he suggests, I submit that the new ability be a feat with the following prerequisite added:

Prerequisite: Arcane spellcaster that prepares spells as a wizard

The description should also be ammended to state that using a blank spell slot with metamagic is a full round action, same as it is for sorcerors who use metamagic with their spells. Likewise, if you think this is not hard enough on the wizard, then make using a spell slot instead of a prepared spell a full round action, instead of a standard action and applying metamagic is not possible without an additional feat of some sort.

Further, I suggest that it break down into three seperate feats titled, minor open slot, lessor open slot, and major (or greater) open slot. For minor, the spells are limited to 2nd level and below (including cantrips) and has prerequisite of 3rd level arcane caster. For lesser, it includes 3rd to 5th and includes the minor slot feat as a prerequisite, as well as, a caster level requirement comensurate with the minimum to cast a 5th level spell. The final one being just as harsh as the lesser one in prerequisites.

This will slower the usefulnes of the ability as well as restrict its wide usage and abuse. Further, its high cost in feats will require the wizard to practically specialize in this type of spellcasting in order for it to be useful to the advantage suggested by Hawken. One last note, if you do not htink that this is restrictive enough then you can make the benefit restricted to a single spell slot within the level range instead of one per level. All of this put together should keep the run of the mill NPCs from being stacked with this particular ability.

Honestly, I like the idea for the same reason Dannyalcatraz suggests (sorcerors can act like wizards sometimes too) and I would definitely consider this tree for my games.

 

[Hawken]

Yeah, I know Sorcerers can take the feat to prepare 1 spell. This is considerably more powerful than that. Also the wizard still has an incredible advantage in freeing up a slot vs. a sorcerer being able to "fill" a slot. That being that the wizard has a hell of a variety of spells to choose from to put into that freed slot. Any spell in their books! So, this feat is still way more "powerful/useful" than the inverse corresponding feat for sorcerers.

At the VERY least, I would say doing something like this should be limited to 6th level or lower spells--Limited Wish and Wish are already basically a "free slot" spell since they can duplicate any lower level spell. If you go with the gradations, you could break down Minor into 2nd or lower, Moderate into 3-5, and Major for 6th only.

I wouldn't make it a swift action to do so either. Make it a move action or even a standard action to select the spell for the slot--or maybe require the wizard to crack his book and find the spell (full round action).

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I wouldn't make it a swift action to do so either. Make it a move action or even a standard action to select the spell for the slot--or maybe require the wizard to crack his book and find the spell (full round action).

I mostly agree with you, but feel the need to point out that swift actions are actually more costly than move actions for any character, but especially a spellcaster. He could use that swift action on a quickened spell. The move action? Bah, that's junk. Just 5 ft step if you're in melee. I do like the idea of the full round action to crack open the spellbook. Though, most of my wizards keep said books in bags of holding or the like, so taking it out would take even more actions. Further, as a player, I think I would feel rightly paranoid that pulling out the spellbook in the middle of combat is like putting a big "steal/destroy the only thing keeping me from being a peasant!" sign out for the DM...

 

[theshard]

As an alternative, you could only let specialist take the feat and the spell has to be from their specialized school of magic. This would bring it back in line sorcerer feat.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Another alternative- keep the "per level" mechanic, but make the prepared arcane caster choose 1 particular spell per level he can swap out per taking of this feat.

IOW, that slot becomes kind of like the cures/harms of clerics.

 

[der_kluge]

Another alternative- keep the "per level" mechanic, but make the prepared arcane caster choose 1 particular spell per level he can swap out per taking of this feat.

IOW, that slot becomes kind of like the cures/harms of clerics.

That kind of defeats the purpose. To me, it's a useful ability for a cleric, say, to swap out a blank slot for something they wouldn't normally memorize like Walk on Water, or something like that.

Maybe I should just limit it to prepared casters, and 1 full round action to swap it out might make it more balancing. And I agree that it does tread pretty heavily on wish/lw at the high levels, but limiting it to 6th level or lower spells seems kind of contrived, IMHO.

 

[concerro]

I mostly agree with you, but feel the need to point out that swift actions are actually more costly than move actions for any character, but especially a spellcaster. He could use that swift action on a quickened spell. The move action? Bah, that's junk. Just 5 ft step if you're in melee. I do like the idea of the full round action to crack open the spellbook. Though, most of my wizards keep said books in bags of holding or the like, so taking it out would take even more actions. Further, as a player, I think I would feel rightly paranoid that pulling out the spellbook in the middle of combat is like putting a big "steal/destroy the only thing keeping me from being a peasant!" sign out for the DM...

That quickened spell is countered by the +4 level adjustment to the cast spell. There is no cost for this blank spell. Wizards already have enough power.

If someone is close enough to take your spell book they are close enough to hit your wizard, and with d4 hp you need to be trying to recreate a gap between you and your opponent.