Complete Divine: Feats & Spells

[Kalendraf]

There have been a number of threads concerning various aspects from the Complete Divine book since it's debut. Now those postings seem to have quieted down - a casual search found none in the last 10 days. I'm considering introducing some of the material from the book into one of my campaigns. I'm not interested in the prestige classes at this point, and I am primarily looking at the Feats and Spells. I remember seeing some discussion about missing wording or something to that degree concerning a few of them: Divine Metamagic not making it clear whether you need the metamagic feat you're trying to perform, and Miasma not listing a Fort save.

Now that folks have had more time to digest, test and re-evaluate the Feats and Spells, are there any that I should be aware of as being potentially unbalanced? Right now, the campaign is using just the Core 3.5 rules, Complete Warrior and a couple druid/divine spells from R&R/R&R2.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Divine Metamagic is bad if (a) you don't require that the user possess the metamagic feat desired and/or (b) you allow Persistent Spell (which isn't in the books you're using anyway). Otherwise, I think it's balanced fine. You should certainly require that the user possess the feat he desires to apply; otherwise, clerics just got the metamagic edge in spades over wizards.

Miasma: Yeah, not so good. I'd avoid this one.

Among PrCs, the ur-priest is notoriously problematic because you can combine it with classes that offer +1 spellcasting level progression, and it gives 9 levels of spells out over 10 levels. A bit broken, perhaps.

The Radiant Servant of Pelor is balanced high, but probably not totally overpowered. Being better at healing AND turning makes this class more powerful than the standard cleric, but you might actually be fine with that, since the benefits of the class apply as much to the party as a whole than to the PC himself.

The spells that confer fast healing instead of curing are arguably a bit more powerful, but perhaps not so.

 

[Liquidsabre]

http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=254154

Here's just a few official clarifications on the WotC board, note Miasma receieves a Fort save negates btw.

 

[Crothian]

The fast healing ones are nice, but since they cannot be cast spontaniously like the Cure X Wounds they are not as useful. Plus they give Druids a little extra healing power which very good.

 

[Liquidsabre]

The fast healing ones are nice, but since they cannot be cast spontaniously like the Cure X Wounds they are not as useful. Plus they give Druids a little extra healing power which very good.

And plus the Vigor spells make excellent wands, providing double the healing for the same cost as the cure wands. :\

 

[sledged]

Among PrCs, the ur-priest is notoriously problematic because you can combine it with classes that offer +1 spellcasting level progression, and it gives 9 levels of spells out over 10 levels. A bit broken, perhaps.

I thought that too at first, but it must not be too problematic, if at all, because (a) the Ur-Priest was orignally in the BoVD, it's not likely it would have made its way into the CD if it had been that bad, (b) it's not the only PrC that does this, there's at least one other in the BoVD, one or two in the BoED, and at least one other in the CD, (c) it's no worse than the Blighter, which does the same but in addition it gets to add his previous druid spellcasting levels to his blighter caster level. I'm of the mind that if recieving 9 spell levels per 10 class were that big of a problem, they wouldn't keep making such PrCs. I'd be interested in hearing from someone who has had extensive dealing with these classes in gameplay.

The Radiant Servant of Pelor is balanced high, but probably not totally overpowered. Being better at healing AND turning makes this class more powerful than the standard cleric, but you might actually be fine with that, since the benefits of the class apply as much to the party as a whole than to the PC himself.

The only drawback to taking levels in this PrC over more levels in cleric, are the requirements. Other than those, why would any cleric not take levels in this PrC over cleric levels?

The spells that confer fast healing instead of curing are arguably a bit more powerful, but perhaps not so.

Unless, you have the Augmented Healing feat.

 

[Kalendraf]

As I looked thru the book a few of the spells looked pretty potent. It's not in front of me, so the names escape me.

I saw a 1st level cleric spell that does 1d6 damage per 2 levels (max 5d6) or 1d6 per level vs. undead that seemed really strong. Sure it allows a save, I think it had shorter range, and it can't be divided between targets, but this is like giving the cleric a 1st level spell in the damage range of magic missile. Most clerics in the games I DM barely bother with 1st level spells besides maybe a Protection from Evil or Shield of Faith. They just write some misc stuff down and then end up pitching most of them for cure lights as needed. Now there will be a real, live damage spell for them at 1st level. It's good to give them an offensive option, but this particular one seems almost too effective. Given that it's so good against undead, it seems like it should have some additional drawback beyond just the will save for half damage. At least with magic missile, there are spells to divert it (shield) or items (brooch of shielding).

 

[Kalendraf]

I re-checked and the spell I was thinking of is actually 2nd level. Not such a big deal. Compared to similar spells of this level - sound burst hits an area while spiritual weapon can outdamage it given enough rounds. So I don't think the spell is unbalancing.

 

[Olive]

Among PrCs, the ur-priest is notoriously problematic because you can combine it with classes that offer +1 spellcasting level progression, and it gives 9 levels of spells out over 10 levels. A bit broken, perhaps.

But would it be a problem if you couldn't combine it with other PrC spellcasting advances? I've just ruled that no 9 spell levels over 10 class levels can be improved witha PrC +1 spellcastng /lvl prc.

 

[ruleslawyer]

I thought that too at first, but it must not be too problematic, if at all, because (a) the Ur-Priest was orignally in the BoVD, it's not likely it would have made its way into the CD if it had been that bad,

Not such a great argument; WotC is perfectly capable of neglecting to clean up problematic rules or even making new ones with edition changes (note 3.5 astral projection, shapechange, Mord's disjunction, etc.)

(b) it's not the only PrC that does this, there's at least one other in the BoVD, one or two in the BoED, and at least one other in the CD,

There aren't any others in BoVD; the one in BoED, the Apostle of Peace, is similarly problematic but requires a massive feat investment and is an exalted, ascetic, nonviolent class, so abuse is somewhat restricted on an RP level; and the Divine Crusader in CD gets access to one domain of cleric spells, which is hardly going to break the bank.

(c) it's no worse than the Blighter, which does the same but in addition it gets to add his previous druid spellcasting levels to his blighter caster level.

Well, the blighter actually truly suxx0r; it doesn't get to add druid spellcasting levels, it adds caster level, which is a different thing entirely. The blighter actually gains 9th level spells over FIFTEEN class levels, since you need to acquire (and then give up) five druid levels in order to get into the class.

I'm of the mind that if recieving 9 spell levels per 10 class were that big of a problem, they wouldn't keep making such PrCs. I'd be interested in hearing from someone who has had extensive dealing with these classes in gameplay.

Not the same, but check out the ur-priest threads on the WotC Character Optimization boards if you have a moment.

The only drawback to taking levels in [RSoP] over more levels in cleric, are the requirements. Other than those, why would any cleric not take levels in this PrC over cleric levels?

Yup, not so good. However, some powergamers, notably those who don't want to play a healer/undead turner, and would rather play a melee combat cleric, cleric archer, divine trickster-type, or similar concept won't go with RSoP. The class is certainly a powerup over the vanilla cleric, but at least the powerups serve the party as a whole rather than the individual PC; it's not an attention hog or grandstander class.

Olive: That's the solution I'd advocate; I think it's the design whole that they just sorta failed to patch up.