Complete Arcane - What's in it!!

[Felon]

41 more spells a "slightly larger repertoire"?

41? Oh, I see. You're taking this hypothetical wizard all the way to 20th level. In that case, yes, 41 is only slightly larger, as that 20th-level Wiz will easily be affluent enough to obtain most of those 41 spells on his own.

Learning 2 extra spells per level sounds about right. Certainly any less wouldn't be worth a feat.

 

[Taren Seeker]

I thought split ray only provided one extra ray per spell. To do 24d6, it would need to provide three.

Yup good catch. Scorching would get an extra ray at 4d6.

However single ray spells like Disintegrate and Enervation are cruel and unusual with this feat. Which is good for disintegrate since it really hasn't been the same since 3.5

 

[Psion]

With four magic types, the eight schools, and the various descriptors, I give classes a definition-based spell list rather than an enumeration-based spell list, and all works better. It makes it easier to plug in or out new material.

It sounds like you would dig AU if you don't play it.

 

[Taren Seeker]

Oh, so you basically thought they were capable of rogue damage, eh?

Yeah, that would be broken.

Well, Rogue damage as a touch attack, only defensible by SR and not needing any special conditions...yah that would be broken.

If I misjudged the level of sarcasm in your post then please ignore

 

[Psion]

On this split ray thing:

Isn't the conversion similar to the step between, say, scorching ray and fireball? Similar basic damage, but applied to more targets.

What breaks it, IMO, is being able to target both rays on the same target.

 

[Vecna]

41? Oh, I see. You're taking this hypothetical wizard all the way to 20th level. In that case, yes, 41 is only slightly larger, as that 20th-level Wiz will easily be affluent enough to obtain most of those 41 spells on his own.

Learning 2 extra spells per level sounds about right. Certainly any less wouldn't be worth a feat.

So for you worthy = broken?
Tell me some worthy feat then.

You double your spell known for free (gold and effort).
Some people say that the Wizard doesn't actually know many more spells than a Sorcerer because writing spells costs money, and for you isn't even an issue the money save?

 

[Felon]

Well, Rogue damage as a touch attack, only defensible by SR and not needing any special conditions...yah that would be broken. If I misjudged the level of sarcasm in your post then please ignore

Oh, I was being fairly facetious, but truth is I'd still favor the rogue at that point. He's getting all that sneak attack damage in addition to whatever damage his attacks inflict otherwise, and can probably manage to ramp up to 5 melee attacks per round at that level (with TWF chain), which tops 36d6 handily.

Of course, a high-level warlock is going to have turned his ray into an AoE of some sort. Multiple AoE's in a round would be pretty sick.

 

[Li Shenron]

41? Oh, I see. You're taking this hypothetical wizard all the way to 20th level. In that case, yes, 41 is only slightly larger, as that 20th-level Wiz will easily be affluent enough to obtain most of those 41 spells on his own.

Learning 2 extra spells per level sounds about right. Certainly any less wouldn't be worth a feat.

OTOH, would you think that a feat which doubled (or even give +50%) the spells casts per day by a Sorcerer would not be too much?

 

[Vecna]

OTOH, would you think that a feat which doubled (or even give +50%) the spells casts per day by a Sorcerer would not be too much?

By the reasoning behind the Warlock invocation at will (you however cast a fixed number of spells per day) it wouldn't be so broken, just very strong.
A feat that doubles a sorcerer spells known would be another matter...

 

[Felon]

OTOH, would you think that a feat which doubled (or even give +50%) the spells casts per day by a Sorcerer would not be too much?

Yes, that would be too much. It's not the same, by a long shot. The number of spells a sorcerer can cast per day is designed to have a defnitive limit. The number of spells a wizard can possibly learn is designed to have no hard cap.

In the end, this feat pretty much just saves the wizard some money on going out and buying the spell off the market. If anything, it's weak.