Practiced Spellcaster feat

[Pax]

Multiclassed:
Ranger 11
Paladin 2
Monk 4
Fighter 2
Barbarian 2 (Yes, barb and monk, together at last! With enough ranger levels in between it's easy to come up with a reason. And paladin... well, I didn't say THAT was easy. You gotta give up something there. OK, Fine, drop the paladin or the barbarian, and pick whichever suits your style better)

Hmm, 21 levels, eh? Fine - Epic Wizard(21) to match. First up, a Quickened Forcecage around wherever you're standing, with the Wizard outside of it (7th level spell, metamagiced via a Greater Rod). Then, follow up with a normal Dimensional Lock (yes Lock, not Anchor, so you don't get to claim high Touch AC or Save Bonusses as a negating factor).

After that, *shrug* I've got days to figure out which spells to use to kill you.

That's ranger spellcasting right there. ^_^. Change it to paladin four for two types of spell casting.

Very funny. Now try it with one of the primary spellcasting classes (cleric, druid, sorceror, wizard). You know, folks for whom spellcasitng is their FIRST role, not an afterthought ...?

I've heard plenty such limits so far, tho. Like Freedom of Movement not working (because then Grappling suddenly isn't working anymore), or Combatants not allowed to leave the arena, thus limiting the characters with better movement (aka Teleport ), Mordenkainen's Disjunction nerfed, and so on.

It's debateable wether or not Freedom of Movement should actually render you immune to grappling, anyway. In the Exodus, it provides a +1/level unnamed bonus to resist or escape a grapple - which means a +25 bonus for any dedicated spellcaster who self-casts the spell. Not aninsignificant boost.

Leaving the arena is a forfeit, because it's an arena - and teleport is STILL vastly superior to any other form of movement. The Exodus, for example, uses arenas about 100 feet on a side, on average. Some of them are much bigger.

Mordenkainen's Disjunction was nerfed because, even spellcaster-versus-spellcaster, fights boiled down to who Disjunctioned first. No save, no hope, all your buff spells gone, and make saves for each of yoru magic items ... ? Awfully powerful for a 9th level spell, in and of itself. Then factor in, an Arena does not have the standard-campaign impetus not to drop an MDJ at first sight of hte enemy: in an arena, your rewards/loot are not dependant on the wealth left on your enemy's carcass after you win the fight. And when characters have 2,100,000gp of equipment, those magic items and buffs (potion, rune, scroll, however you get them) constitute a big portion of your personal power.

And again, those are nerfs to especial spells, not to the spellcasting classes themselves. ^_^

 

[ARandomGod]

Hmm, 21 levels, eh? Fine - Epic Wizard(21) to match. First up, a Quickened Forcecage around wherever you're standing, with the Wizard outside of it (7th level spell, metamagiced via a Greater Rod). Then, follow up with a normal Dimensional Lock (yes Lock, not Anchor, so you don't get to claim high Touch AC or Save Bonusses as a negating factor).

After that, *shrug* I've got days to figure out which spells to use to kill you.


Very funny. Now try it with one of the primary spellcasting classes (cleric, druid, sorceror, wizard). You know, folks for whom spellcasitng is their FIRST role, not an afterthought ...?

Yea 21 levels, reason number two to have to drop either the paladin or the barbarian (as suggested)
Although, of course, I chose a non-primary spellcaster on purpose... mainly because the point (that even with the feat, people who would benifit from it are "underpowered" )is pretty plain.

On the other hand, some ppl see a thing and just don't want to playtest it, kneejerk reaction saying it's too powerful. That's the feel I'm getting for this statement that the feat is too powerful, a kneejerk reaction without actual playtesting to experiment.
There are a number of things that will strike a person one way or another, new feats, ideas, potential PrC's or spells that I've seen strike some people as superpowerful, while playtesting on my part (or on other people's part) has shown the concept to be either well balanced or even generally weaker (Like MT). And the people who refuse to test it for themselves can and sometimes will continue to say that it's overpowered... and noone can be made to see that which they won't look at objectively.

 

[Pax]

On the other hand, some ppl see a thing and just don't want to playtest it, kneejerk reaction saying it's too powerful. That's the feel I'm getting for this statement that the feat is too powerful, a kneejerk reaction without actual playtesting to experiment.

I concur, 100%.

There are a number of things that will strike a person one way or another, new feats, ideas, potential PrC's or spells that I've seen strike some people as superpowerful, while playtesting on my part (or on other people's part) has shown the concept to be either well balanced or even generally weaker (Like MT). And the people who refuse to test it for themselves can and sometimes will continue to say that it's overpowered... and noone can be made to see that which they won't look at objectively.

I agree. Origionally, I saw the Vow of Poverty and thought to myself, "no way in the nine hells is that anything but grossly overpowered!"

Then I built Demetian, an epic-level Ascetic Druid/Warshaper/Shifter in the Exodus. And learned that, really, the Vow is potentially a bit underpowered in some key ways. At first, you see, I'd stripped out the bonus feats entirely - on the basis of "ix-nay on the wishing for more wishes", IOW, "no feat should give you more feats later".

I've put the bonus feats back in, slightly watered down (only one bonus feat per five levels, starting at 5th level), and added inherent bonusses ('cause it's an arena, and tomes/manuals are a "goes without question" staple anyway). At present, it's balanced enough that in most campaigns, I'd have no problem with the feat as I've slightly reworked it.

Or for simplicity's sake, I'd also happily let a player use the version in the BoED, as-printed, without too much worry about it being unbalanced.

IOW ... as you suggest, playtesting disproved that first impression. The Vow of Poverty is (surprisingly enough) reasonably well-balanced for the average, by-the-book campaign.

And being, now, a multi-year veteran of GMing Arena style campaigns DOEs give me one advantage, IMO, when it comes to evaluating most feats, spells, etc: I'm accustomed to seeing the worst possible abuses of things, the first time I look at them.

In the case of PRactised Spellcaster, the WORST abuse I can see is the splash-of-spellcasting model [Fighter(x)/Spellcaster(1 or 2)], or the Cleric(5)/Wizard(5)/Mystic Theurge(10) with dual Practised Spellcaster feats, one per "type" of spellcaster ...

... and neither of those "abuses" strikes me as especially, well, abusive. Useful, yes. Desireable, yes. Must-have, you're-an-idiot-if-you-don't-do-this?

Hardly.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Besides which, a single-classed Fighter(20) can drink a Potion of True Strike ...

Come now, you know better than that.

"Spells with a range of personal cannot be made into potions."

-Hyp.

 

[Thanee]

I agree. Origionally, I saw the Vow of Poverty and thought to myself, "no way in the nine hells is that anything but grossly overpowered!"

...

Or for simplicity's sake, I'd also happily let a player use the version in the BoED, as-printed, without too much worry about it being unbalanced.

Heh. Yeah, you've been quite adamant about the Vow being overpowered back then.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

Come now, you know better than that.

That was surely a suggestion.

“Here drink this, it's a pois... uhm... potion of de... uhm... true strike!”

Bye
Thanee

 

[Pax]

Come now, you know better than that.

"Spells with a range of personal cannot be made into potions."

-Hyp.

Which limitation I have never truly understood. *shrug* Then again, some of the designers have even said there's no balance reason not to be able to make a potion of any first-to-third level spell - regardless of target.

Oil of Fiery Burning, a la 1E/2E? A "Potion of Fireball", simple enough.

Oil of Slipperiness? A "Potion of Grease", also simple enough.

*shrug*

 

[Hypersmurf]

Which limitation I have never truly understood.

Fair enough. Nevertheless, it means the Potion of True Strike isn't an option for the fighter, though his Ring of Lesser Spell Storing still works.

-Hyp.

 

[ARandomGod]

Fair enough. Nevertheless, it means the Potion of True Strike isn't an option for the fighter, though his Ring of Lesser Spell Storing still works.

-Hyp.

True. No potions. By the rules you'd need a ring of spellstoring, a wonderous (or other) item of X castings of true strike per day... an **elixer** of spellcasting. All those would be viable options. But no potions By core rules.

Of course, by core rules you're a fool for ever taking create potions with it's arbitrary restrictions. After all, an elixer of cure light wounds costs the same to make as a potion of the same, and you can also make all kinds of other nifty items with the same feat. And all within core rules.

 

[Pax]

All too true.

Me, IMC ... I allow any first-to-third level spell to be made in "potion" form. And I don't count metamagiclevels towards that (so, yes, you canget a potion of maximised cure moderate wounds, though it'll be pricey).

Not only that, but "potion" doesn't have to mean "drinkable liquid in a tiny vial". A pill/pastille, a packet of powder to add to a cup of water or wine, a salve or ointment ... whatever seems appropriate, fits the player's desires, and so on. Themechancis of use remain the same - though the packet of powder logically would take more time to get ready and then use, so I *might* give it a small price discount and/or other benefit - say, 10% and, sans supply of liquid(s), half normal encumbrance for carrying it. Useful for post-battle healing potions, perhaps. ^_^

If the spell is hostile in nature, you throw the "potion" at your intended victim (think "tanglefoot bag" / "alchemist's fire" / &c), and make a ranged touch attack to get the potion to have effect.

Thus, "potion of magic missile" wouldn't be very useful ... but a "potion of melf's acid arrow" might be ... an acidic, longer-lasting, truly magical version of alchemist's fire.

But anyway ... I'll stop this threadjack right now. If anyone else wants to banter with me about the relative merits of Brew Potion in RAW versus "Pax's way" forms, just post in House Rules, and drop a pointer here in this thread so I'll know you've done so. ^_^