Newfeatitis

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

I see a lot of great house rules on this board, but I see way too many rules implemented as new feats. Why? What's wrong with actually changing a game mechanic instead? Don't get me wrong, feats have their place, but if a character had to take all the feats put forward as rule changes, they'd need 10 feats per level! (*extreme hyperbole*)

My rule of thumb is this: if the change to be made is an enhancement (i.e. something a character can live without, but is nice to have) it's a feat. If it plugs a gap in the rules, or fixes something 'broken', it's a rule change.

One example of this, although far from the worst one, is the Practised Spellcaster feat. This feat gives +4 to your caster level (max caster level is your character level). The idea is that it fixes the game mechanics problem of multiclass spellcasters being nerfed because their spell DCs are too low. Note that this feat only increases caster level for purposes of determining spell effects (spell DC, range, damage, etc.).

A far superior fix in my opinion, is one I've seen either on these boards or the WOTC boards, and which has since appeared in Unearthed Arcana (although this implementation is inferior to the original system I saw on the boards) is this: caster level is a stat like BAB. Like BAB, caster level has good, average, and poor progressions (+1, +3/4, +1/2).

For example:

Fighters, Barbarians, Rogues: poor (+1/2 caster level for every two levels)
Rangers, Paladins, Monks: (+3/4 caster level)
Bards, Wizards, Sorcerers, Druids, Clerics: good (+1)

So a level 4 Rogue, level 5 Sorcerer would have spells per day, spells known, and class abilities of a 5th level Sorcerer, but his caster level would be 7.

A level 4 Wizard, level 4 Druid would have spells per day, spells known, and class abilities of a 4th level Wizard and of a 4th level Druid, but his caster level would be 8 for either class.

 

[Geoff Watson]

Spell DC isn't affected by caster level, so your main premise is incorrect.

Adding a feat is easier than changing a rule. Changing rules may be better, but is more likely to confuse players, especially if some have the errata and others don't.

Anyway, if they want to use the rule, it's in UA anyway.

Geoff.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

Spell DC isn't affected by caster level, so your main premise is incorrect.

Adding a feat is easier than changing a rule. Changing rules may be better, but is more likely to confuse players, especially if some have the errata and others don't.

Anyway, if they want to use the rule, it's in UA anyway.

Geoff.

Oops about the spell DC, that's a house rule of mine. Doesn't affect my point though.

I don't understand your second paragraph. I was talking about house rules.. why do you mention errata?

The rule in UA is carp (is this masking? ). You get +1 caster level for every four Fighter levels? Gee, thanks, and it isn't even my birthday!

cheers

 

[Ferret]

You get +1 caster level for every four Fighter levels? Gee, thanks, and it isn't even my birthday!

Thats what you get for swinging round a shiny piece of metal. What do you suggest it was changed to?

 

[Geoff Watson]

I don't understand your second paragraph. I was talking about house rules.. why do you mention errata?
cheers

I thought you wanted WotC to change the rules(ie errata) rather than introduce new feats.

Geoff.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

Thats what you get for swinging round a shiny piece of metal. What do you suggest it was changed to?

Check out the first post in the thread.

Edit: I suggested the same progression as BAB. What's good for the goose is good for the gander: Wizards get +1 BAB for every two levels, so Fighters get +1 caster level for every two levels.

If you're only going to give +1 per 4 levels.. meh.. why even bother? Eleven levels of Fighter gets you 2 caster levels?!?!