Wizard Feats

[Mon]

Couple of thoughts. First I echo other's concerns about this on multi-target spells.

The OP specified that it only works on spells that target one creature.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I don't think I've ever seen a wizard not take Resilient or War Caster in a game, unless they took fluffy feats like Linguist and Keen Mind, instead...

That said, I like mecha's idea of giving a Sorcery Points feat.

I also like the idea of a feat that gives a boost to cantrips of a given broad category, like Spell Sniper.

Lastly, I'd consider a feat that lets you choose an Arcane Focus to specialize in, and gain benefits when using it, that would basically function like Fighting Styles, for casters. Include the Tome in that, because Tomes should be an arcane focus. It could let you change a prepared spell as part of a short rest, and maybe some other minor thing. If you don't prepare spells, you prepare one spell from your class spell list that you don't already know. During a short rest, you can change which spell is prepared in this way.

needs iteration, some kind of spell level restriction, etc, but the basic concept is sound.

Maybe the tome one could be separate from the Focus Specialization feat?

 

[5ekyu]

Truthfully, if i were gonna launch a feat series, it would be ones that gave used for HD other than HP at short rests.

These could be class specific or broader.

Feat
Quick Healer - You may spend one HD for healing whenever you receive magical healing.

Feat Sorcerous Reserve
Req Sorcerer
You may spend HD during short rests to regain 1 sorcery point per HD spent.

Feat Empathic Healing
Req Ability to magically cure HP on others
When you magically restore HP to someone else you may use your bonus action to spend HD to increase the healing done to one creature by the amount rolled on the spent HD.

 

[trentonjoe]

Thanks for the input. I don't want to seem argumentative but i wanted to work through some of your points, mostly so it makes sense to me

A 6th-level wizard casts a fire bolt at a fleeing enemy 100 feet away, swaps out both damage dice to restrain the target. The flames deal no damage but...uh... somehow wrap around the target and bind it in place. Huh, that seems a little weird narratively – fire ensnaring a creature? and dealing no damage while wrapped around them?

1. That's actually the narative I am trying to create. Fire wraps arounds the legs of the goblin freezing him in place. Or a magical fire helmet drops on the giants head restricting his vision to inches...stuff like that.
2. I specifically added the part about damage needed to be taken for the secondary effect to happen for that reason.

But wait! How long does the restrained condition last on the target? Is it concentration, up to 1 minute (which is typical)? Then we've just allowed out wizard to replicate entangle (a 1st level spell) at a greater range than entangle itself can accomplish using only a cantrip!

1. Yes. It should be a concentration, save at the end of your turn type rule.
2. Mechanically, this is what I am struggling with. To me this is effectively allowing 2 spells to be cast at the same time and thats the balance issue I am struggling with. I am talking myself through this so bare with me

At 1-4, it isn't a big deal. You can't use it on cantrips (they don't have enough damage dice) so you could only use it on spells like Chromatic Orb, Ray of Sickness, , and stuff like that. I don't think this is an optimal choice, personally, I think it's interesting but not optimal.

At 5-8, it's more useable. You still can't use it on cantrips (still not enough damage dice) but you have enough single target damage spells and enough spell slots that you can use the versalilty frequently. This is where the Chromatic Orb becomes a 1 person entangle with 1d8 damage. IMO, that just isn't a big deal. I am not sure if there is a single target damage spell at 4th level but if there is you could make it into Hold person that does a little damage? I don't know, I don't think that is to powerful. My players probably still take the +2 Int to get to 20 INT at 8th level.

At 12+ it might get to powerful. That's when you can use it on cantrips but I don't play that level very high. I can't think of a combo that is utterly broken but i might be missing something. [/QUOTE]

Upon attaining 7th-level, the wizard learns and casts wall of fire in a battle against a solo villain, hoping to trade out 4 of the damage dice when a creature passes through to blind it. However, because the wall of fire doesn't have a target, this feat cannot be used with that spell. Even though the narrative makes perfect sense.

I don't see how it doesn't makes sense narrative wise with fire bolt but does with wall of fire. Balancing mechanics and narrative is tricky in my opinion. In this case I felt allowing AoE spells would make it to powerful. Maybe there could be a second feat that used for multi target spells. [/QUOTE]

I feel like this falls into the trap may homebrew feats do: the story behind it doesn't serve to further clarify the character's theme/personality/style.

I mean vaguely it's a "control" mage, but "control" really doesn't correspond to anything in the fiction.

I prefer to write mechanics and have individual players adapt it to their own narrative but i see your point.

An opposing example would be back in the playtest that had "implement feats" (IIRC one was called Golden Wyvern Adept or something) which were to spellcasters kind of what like Crossbow Expert, et cetera, are to warriors.

There's also a red flag right there in your title: Enhanced Spellcasting. Who wouldn't want Enhanced Spellcasting? So many characters in this game have spellcasting ability. This would be so hugely attractive that it would start to edge into that territory of "must take." And that's something to be avoided in feat design.

EDIT: Not to leave with just a critique, but to contribute something positive, I'd suggest starting with the story first...

For example, let's say True Names play a significant role in your game – not just of fiends but of other fey and other spirits. You might devise a True Namer feat that grants the PC benefits to spellcasting when it knows a creature's True Name, and conversely can be used to help a friendly creature whose True Name is known to the caster shake off charm/possession/shapeshifting effects.

Another example, let's say you have a player who loves to blow stuff up with magic – I've heard those types of players are out there. You might create a Concussive Magic spell that allows them to upcast evocation spells in a way unique to the feat, forcing Strength/Constitution saves to remain standing and not be pushed backward and/or knocked prone. You could even include bits about dealing extra damage to untended objects to simulate blowing stuff up. Possibly give them a reaction feature to absorb kinetic energy that would knock them prone/push them, requiring the expenditure of spell slots to use.

Thanks, that's something to think about.

 

[trentonjoe]

Being able to paralyze anytime you cast a reasonable damage spell in exchange for 21 (or even just 15) damage is not really balanced. I would *always* do that when casting any single target damage spell of 6 dice or more.

You'd also need to specify how the blind/paralyze/etc... ends.

I think this would be better handled by not introducing a feat, but instead introducing spells they can prepare that do these things. For example, a 3rd level spell that deals 2d6 damage, and continues to do a d6/ round and paralyzes certain types of creatures on a failed save (save ends both) would be reasonable.

Can you give an example? This is the type of situation I am trying to avoid but I don’t know the high level version of the game well enough to anticipate.

 

[trentonjoe]

Also, don't forget as a balancing mechanic that you don't have to give away the farm in a feat; you can always say, "+1 to {STAT} and plus the following effects:" That way, you can limit the scope of the extra powers a bit more and not feel like you have to give tons of abilities to make a feat worthwhile.

Thanks. That may be the answer I am looking for. Do you think going +1 int and one of the theee abilities makes it interesting, balanced and attractive?

Something like this:

Binding Spellcasting


Skilled in manipulating eldritch forces, you can replace some of the damage dice from a spell and use the mystical power to restrain the target.

Benefits:

• +1 to WIS, INT or CHA
• When you cast a spell with an instantaneous effect that causes damage and targets one creature you can swap out 2 dice of damage for the ability to restrain the target of the spell (spell DC to negate). The target can make a svaing throw at the end of it's turn to end the effect.

The target of the spell must take damage for the secondary effect to occur and maintaing the restraint requires concentration.

 

[TallIan]

Personally I think that the feat put forward by the OP offers way too much flexibility to an already very flexible group of classes. 5e's prepared/known spell mechanic really offers caster the opportunity to be prepared for any situation.

If I were to offer feats that were specific to casters I would try to emulate the feats offered to martial characters, along the lines suggested by 5ekyu in post 5.

Things I would also think are more interesting.

Extra Spell slots this closely emulates Magic Initiate, which offers cantrips and one spell slot. So I would offer 2 level 1 spell slots. I think this would balance against MI by not having the cantrips and being from your own spell casting list. You could possibly allow this feat to be taken a second time to get one level 2 spell slot. Overall I think this is a REALLY powerful feat though, possibly unbalanced (looking at you variant human), so should probably be gated to level 5.

Extra Spells Prepared/known Much like Krachek's Expanded Mind idea. I think this could be a really good feat for classes with limited spells known but is reigned in by limited spell slots - you still can't cast any more spells.

Boost Spell Save DC Much like Krachek's Magic Sharpness idea. This could be a little OP but is kind of in line with the archery fighting style (+2 to hit) but more powerful than an ASI (+1 to save DC) since it almost gives you two ASI at once less the other benefits of your casting stat (like better saves for you).

Trade probable success for stronger effect something along the lines of -5/+10 offered by GWM and SS. A little harder to do for spells because of the varied effects, but you could do something along the lines of -2 save DC to upcast the spell with a lower spell slot. eg cast fireball with 9d6 damage from a 3rd level slot, but the targets all get a lower save DC. -2 seems a little low but -5 seems a little high and I'm always reluctant to have different modifiers to a d20 roll in 5e

 

[Henry]

Thanks. That may be the answer I am looking for. Do you think going +1 int and one of the theee abilities makes it interesting, balanced and attractive?

Something like this:

Binding Spellcasting


Skilled in manipulating eldritch forces, you can replace some of the damage dice from a spell and use the mystical power to restrain the target.

Benefits:

• +1 to WIS, INT or CHA
• When you cast a spell with an instantaneous effect that causes damage and targets one creature you can swap out 2 dice of damage for the ability to restrain the target of the spell (spell DC to negate). The target can make a svaing throw at the end of it's turn to end the effect.

The target of the spell must take damage for the secondary effect to occur and maintaing the restraint requires concentration.

I like it! Not too powerful, and offers some variant tactical choice. Two corrections: It's missing the type of saving throw. WIS, perhaps? Maybe (if you want to give it some interesting flavor), perhaps it's a save of the same type as the ability increase picked? In my opinion, there are too few abilities which target INT or CHA, so that might be fun.

Finally, I would say "At the end of each of its turns, the target may make another {STAT} saving throw. On a success, the restrained effect ends on the target." This makes it more in line with the wording from spells such as Hold Person.

On the down side:
1) if the damaging spell has a save, is it two saves that need to be made? Will that overly complicate the ability?
2) what happens if the spell does not have two dice of damage to swap (as in the case of the firebolt cantrip at 4th level)?

 

[MechaTarrasque]

Personally I think that the feat put forward by the OP offers way too much flexibility to an already very flexible group of classes. 5e's prepared/known spell mechanic really offers caster the opportunity to be prepared for any situation.

If I were to offer feats that were specific to casters I would try to emulate the feats offered to martial characters, along the lines suggested by 5ekyu in post 5.

Things I would also think are more interesting.

Extra Spell slots this closely emulates Magic Initiate, which offers cantrips and one spell slot. So I would offer 2 level 1 spell slots. I think this would balance against MI by not having the cantrips and being from your own spell casting list. You could possibly allow this feat to be taken a second time to get one level 2 spell slot. Overall I think this is a REALLY powerful feat though, possibly unbalanced (looking at you variant human), so should probably be gated to level 5.

Extra Spells Prepared/known Much like Krachek's Expanded Mind idea. I think this could be a really good feat for classes with limited spells known but is reigned in by limited spell slots - you still can't cast any more spells.

Boost Spell Save DC Much like Krachek's Magic Sharpness idea. This could be a little OP but is kind of in line with the archery fighting style (+2 to hit) but more powerful than an ASI (+1 to save DC) since it almost gives you two ASI at once less the other benefits of your casting stat (like better saves for you).

Trade probable success for stronger effect something along the lines of -5/+10 offered by GWM and SS. A little harder to do for spells because of the varied effects, but you could do something along the lines of -2 save DC to upcast the spell with a lower spell slot. eg cast fireball with 9d6 damage from a 3rd level slot, but the targets all get a lower save DC. -2 seems a little low but -5 seems a little high and I'm always reluctant to have different modifiers to a d20 roll in 5e

For extra spell slots, you could have a prerequisite of being able to cast a 2nd level spell. That would keep it out of the variant human's hands until level 4 like all other races. That would end up delaying it for rangers and paladins. Also, I am not sure how it fits with warlocks--it seems like those 1st level spell slots would eventually become 5th level spell slots. That would be a pretty substantial benefit compared to other classes.

 

[TallIan]

For extra spell slots, you could have a prerequisite of being able to cast a 2nd level spell. That would keep it out of the variant human's hands until level 4 like all other races. That would end up delaying it for rangers and paladins. Also, I am not sure how it fits with warlocks--it seems like those 1st level spell slots would eventually become 5th level spell slots. That would be a pretty substantial benefit compared to other classes.

That's actually a good fix to the problem of low level casters and 1/2 or 1/3 casters getting a huge boost. I hadn't really thought about the level 5 gate, I just kind of threw it in there. For most casters that would mean waiting the level 8 ASI, but the eldritch knight could pick it up at 6 so probably not the best option.

Your second point about the warlock spells does require some thinking. These weren't really well thought out and I would not allow them as they. They definitely need a lot more thought and specific wording. They were meant as general examples to give the OP something to work with. I don't like just telling people' "you're idea is bad." I like to give them some inspiration on getting improving their idea.