Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Practiced Spellcaster feat
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Pax" data-source="post: 1662814" data-attributes="member: 6875"><p>However, as it is intended solely to help ease the expense of <strong>being</strong> a multiclass spellcaster, compariosn <em>to</em> single-class casters is still relevant.</p><p></p><p></p><p> It may seemlike it, but it's not. You are essentially, sans <em>practised spellcaster</em>, already 4 points <strong>behind</strong> everyone else in terms of penetrating SR - as well as in terms of dispelling others' spells, and resisting their attempts to dispel <strong>your</strong> spells.</p><p></p><p> All this, on <strong>top</strong> of the loss of spells-per-day and maximum spell level - in the case of yoru example, that character can only cast spells of 4th level or lower, while his peers are casting fifth and <strong>sixth</strong> level spells- <strong>and</strong> they get more of the 1st-through-4th level spells per day than you do, <strong>besides</strong>.</p><p></p><p> Compare your Roge/Wizard/Twinkster with Practised Spellcaster ... to a Wizard(12) with Spell Penetration (the "other" choice for 12th level, in your example). The single-class wizard has two extra levels of spells, an extra Wizard bonus feat, a much better familiar, and rolls 1d20+14 to penetrate spell resistance. Further, he has slightly more spells of 1st to 4th level to playwith, as well. Meanwhile, the multiclass Twinkster gives those higher spell levels up in return for some sneak attack, uncanny dodge, and evasion; he rolls 1d20+12 to penetrate SR.</p><p></p><p><em>Practised Spellcaster</em> is meant to be useful to multiclassed spellcasters; it's one of <strong>several</strong> <em>options</em> available to allow GMs to make playing a multiclassed spellcaster more tenable/viable.</p><p></p><p> One is to allow such Prestige Classes as the Mystic Theurge, Eldritch Knight, Arcane Trickster, and so on.</p><p></p><p> A second option is to use the Magic Rating rules from Unearthed Arcana.</p><p></p><p> The <em>third</em> option is to permit the <em>Practised Spellcaster</em> feat.</p><p></p><p> And IMO, no GM should ever allow <em>multiple</em> solutions from the above list to be taken. Pick <strong>one</strong>, and onlyone, and <em>stick</em> with it for your campaign.</p><p></p><p></p><p> Okay, so for three <strong>or more</strong> feats, such a character can <em>merely equal</em> what takes the single-classed spellcaster only two feats to accomplish. And they're <em>still</em> down in spells-per-day and maximum spell level castable.</p><p></p><p></p><p>My response to this is ... <strong>so what?</strong> And that's all well and good for <em>mage armor</em>, but you <strong>claimed</strong> the multiclass selection occurred so that the character could cast <em>shield</em>, not <em>mage armor</em>.</p><p></p><p></p><p> Only with such abysmally low innate casterlevels. At caster level 4 (pre-feat), you get the same benefit on X/level duration spells. At caster level 10, you get much less.</p><p></p><p></p><p> That occurred only because Quicken's cost is greater than the un-metamagicked spell level of Haste. IF haste were an 8th level spell ro such, you'd've seen far fewer people prefer haste to Quicken. Similarly, if quicken had cost only +2. *shrug*</p><p></p><p></p><p> And most multiclassed spellcasters that <strong>care</strong> about their spellcasting, will take <strong>both</strong> the metamagics <em>and</em> the <em>Practised Spellcaster</em> feat.</p><p></p><p></p><p> The problem with this assumption is this: Base Attack Bonus.</p><p></p><p> A Fighter who multiclasses into Rogue <em>gets to stack their base attack bonus</em>. Fighter(8)/Rogue(12) doesn't have a lot of "disadvantages" associated with it.</p><p></p><p> But Fighter(8)/Wizard(12) is an emasculated waste of time; can't fight very well, can't cast offensive spells worth <strong>diddly</strong>, and generally isn't worth the levels. Seriously.</p><p></p><p> Give him Practised Spellcaster - even <strong>twice</strong> - and he's still not going to be casting the high-end attack spells the Wizard(20) can pull off. But at least his lower-end spells ar as likely to <strong>connect</strong> despite SR, and at least his lower-level buffs and protective spells won't wear off in just over half the time of the dedicated spellcaster.</p><p></p><p> Trade 7th through 9th level spells for a big BAB increase, more hitpoints, and muchbetter weapon proficiency options? Heck, yeah - <strong>if</strong> my spellcasting will still <em>matter</em>, and <strong>if</strong> multiclassing is the way I want to go with the character.</p><p></p><p> But if doing so makes my ability to cast spells pointless ... no, I'd <strong>never</strong> take that route. Period. End of story.</p><p></p><p></p><p> Ten, twenty, or even FIFTY second-level spells won't equal a SINGLE eighth or ninth level spell, whencompounded by a six-or-more point disadvantage in penetrating SR.</p><p></p><p> Sure, sure, a Cleric(3)/Wizard(3)/Theurge(5) has a LOT more first-level spells than either the Cleric(11) or Wizard(11). But he doesn't have 5th or 6th level spells, <em>and</em> is 3 points behind on SR rolls for <strong>both</strong> "flavors" of magic, as well as having slightly lower per-spell healing potential, slightly less damage per offensive spell (8d6 per fireball, instead of 10d6 (11d6 with the right feat, in fact).</p><p></p><p> Also keep in mind, IMO, the Theurge class should <strong>not</strong> be allowed in the same campaign as <em>Practised Spellcaster</em>. Disregarding that, however, Spell Penetration woudl STILL be the preferable spell for them to select ... since it'd benefit BOTH spellcasting classes, where Practised Spellcaster would benefit only one.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p> And I disagree - at least as regards the <em>Practised Spellcaster</em> feat.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Pax, post: 1662814, member: 6875"] However, as it is intended solely to help ease the expense of [b]being[/b] a multiclass spellcaster, compariosn [i]to[/i] single-class casters is still relevant. It may seemlike it, but it's not. You are essentially, sans [i]practised spellcaster[/i], already 4 points [b]behind[/b] everyone else in terms of penetrating SR - as well as in terms of dispelling others' spells, and resisting their attempts to dispel [b]your[/b] spells. All this, on [b]top[/b] of the loss of spells-per-day and maximum spell level - in the case of yoru example, that character can only cast spells of 4th level or lower, while his peers are casting fifth and [b]sixth[/b] level spells- [b]and[/b] they get more of the 1st-through-4th level spells per day than you do, [b]besides[/b]. Compare your Roge/Wizard/Twinkster with Practised Spellcaster ... to a Wizard(12) with Spell Penetration (the "other" choice for 12th level, in your example). The single-class wizard has two extra levels of spells, an extra Wizard bonus feat, a much better familiar, and rolls 1d20+14 to penetrate spell resistance. Further, he has slightly more spells of 1st to 4th level to playwith, as well. Meanwhile, the multiclass Twinkster gives those higher spell levels up in return for some sneak attack, uncanny dodge, and evasion; he rolls 1d20+12 to penetrate SR. [i]Practised Spellcaster[/i] is meant to be useful to multiclassed spellcasters; it's one of [b]several[/b] [i]options[/i] available to allow GMs to make playing a multiclassed spellcaster more tenable/viable. One is to allow such Prestige Classes as the Mystic Theurge, Eldritch Knight, Arcane Trickster, and so on. A second option is to use the Magic Rating rules from Unearthed Arcana. The [i]third[/i] option is to permit the [i]Practised Spellcaster[/i] feat. And IMO, no GM should ever allow [i]multiple[/i] solutions from the above list to be taken. Pick [b]one[/b], and onlyone, and [i]stick[/i] with it for your campaign. Okay, so for three [b]or more[/b] feats, such a character can [i]merely equal[/i] what takes the single-classed spellcaster only two feats to accomplish. And they're [i]still[/i] down in spells-per-day and maximum spell level castable. My response to this is ... [b]so what?[/b] And that's all well and good for [i]mage armor[/i], but you [b]claimed[/b] the multiclass selection occurred so that the character could cast [i]shield[/i], not [i]mage armor[/i]. Only with such abysmally low innate casterlevels. At caster level 4 (pre-feat), you get the same benefit on X/level duration spells. At caster level 10, you get much less. That occurred only because Quicken's cost is greater than the un-metamagicked spell level of Haste. IF haste were an 8th level spell ro such, you'd've seen far fewer people prefer haste to Quicken. Similarly, if quicken had cost only +2. *shrug* And most multiclassed spellcasters that [b]care[/b] about their spellcasting, will take [b]both[/b] the metamagics [i]and[/i] the [i]Practised Spellcaster[/i] feat. The problem with this assumption is this: Base Attack Bonus. A Fighter who multiclasses into Rogue [i]gets to stack their base attack bonus[/i]. Fighter(8)/Rogue(12) doesn't have a lot of "disadvantages" associated with it. But Fighter(8)/Wizard(12) is an emasculated waste of time; can't fight very well, can't cast offensive spells worth [b]diddly[/b], and generally isn't worth the levels. Seriously. Give him Practised Spellcaster - even [b]twice[/b] - and he's still not going to be casting the high-end attack spells the Wizard(20) can pull off. But at least his lower-end spells ar as likely to [b]connect[/b] despite SR, and at least his lower-level buffs and protective spells won't wear off in just over half the time of the dedicated spellcaster. Trade 7th through 9th level spells for a big BAB increase, more hitpoints, and muchbetter weapon proficiency options? Heck, yeah - [b]if[/b] my spellcasting will still [i]matter[/i], and [b]if[/b] multiclassing is the way I want to go with the character. But if doing so makes my ability to cast spells pointless ... no, I'd [b]never[/b] take that route. Period. End of story. Ten, twenty, or even FIFTY second-level spells won't equal a SINGLE eighth or ninth level spell, whencompounded by a six-or-more point disadvantage in penetrating SR. Sure, sure, a Cleric(3)/Wizard(3)/Theurge(5) has a LOT more first-level spells than either the Cleric(11) or Wizard(11). But he doesn't have 5th or 6th level spells, [i]and[/i] is 3 points behind on SR rolls for [b]both[/b] "flavors" of magic, as well as having slightly lower per-spell healing potential, slightly less damage per offensive spell (8d6 per fireball, instead of 10d6 (11d6 with the right feat, in fact). Also keep in mind, IMO, the Theurge class should [b]not[/b] be allowed in the same campaign as [i]Practised Spellcaster[/i]. Disregarding that, however, Spell Penetration woudl STILL be the preferable spell for them to select ... since it'd benefit BOTH spellcasting classes, where Practised Spellcaster would benefit only one. And I disagree - at least as regards the [i]Practised Spellcaster[/i] feat. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Practiced Spellcaster feat
Top