Complete Mage - Is it out yet?

[Particle_Man]

I just realized that a mage sitting on a high-level spell purely to fuel a reserve feat will have a special, dedicated hatred for spell-thieves that steal the very spell the mage was sitting on.

 

[Particle_Man]

Come to think of it, getting negative levels would suck, for similar reasons.

 

[Rystil Arden]

I just realized that a mage sitting on a high-level spell purely to fuel a reserve feat will have a special, dedicated hatred for spell-thieves that steal the very spell the mage was sitting on.

Bwahaha, awesome combo!

Enemies of a nigh-epic PC Wizard who refused to take Spell Mastery once humbled her by sending Spellthief ninjas to steal all her spells prepared and then trapping her inside a minimum-security room with a poor lock, but she couldn't get out

Spellthieves aren't great PCs, but they can be fun enemies.

 

[Felon]

Well, when I initially wrote the feat, it had a 30 foot range, but was usable against only one target and required a ranged touch. When it was changed to a 20-foot line, my guess is that it should have had a saving throw added in, but this was missed.

So while I don't know if it was intended to have a save, it seems to me that it should, and that this would put it in line with the other, similar reserve feats.

How about that invisible needle? 1d4 per spell level, requires a normal attack roll (not touch), and only affects one target. Seems pretty weak compared to the other reserve feats. Is it supposed to actually be an invisible attack? The name suggests as much, but nothing in the description does.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Look again. The "D&D is based on fantasy literature" and the "reserve feats make the game more like a video game" are SEPARATE TOPICS. Someone said the game is not literature, and I said it was based on it, and proved it. End of that discussion.

a) You are the person who brought up both... in the same sentence, with a clear link between the two.

b) No one was arguing with you about D&D being inspired by fantasy literature.

If you want to start another point, saying that the feats don't make the game more or less like the source material, that's another topic of discussion. Period.

No it isn't. That WAS the point of discussion to begin with. Please don't misinterpret people's posts to the point of ignoring their content; it isn't respectful conduct. Thank you.

EDIT: Back to topic for everyone else, with apologies!

 

[Mouseferatu]

How about that invisible needle? 1d4 per spell level, requires a normal attack roll (not touch), and only affects one target. Seems pretty weak compared to the other reserve feats. Is it supposed to actually be an invisible attack? The name suggests as much, but nothing in the description does.

As a force effect, it's considered mechanically more potent than a comperable energy effect.

That said, if you wanted to jazz it up a bit--perhaps by, as you imply, making it truly invisible, and thus requiring a roll to detect where it came from--I don't think that'd break anything. (Though I'd need to try it in play to be sure, of course.)

 

[brehobit]

As a force effect, it's considered mechanically more potent than a comperable energy effect.

That said, if you wanted to jazz it up a bit--perhaps by, as you imply, making it truly invisible, and thus requiring a roll to detect where it came from--I don't think that'd break anything. (Though I'd need to try it in play to be sure, of course.)

That _may_ make the opponent lose their dex mod against it. Not sure how I'd treat an invisible attack...

Mark

 

[BryonD]

How about that invisible needle? 1d4 per spell level, requires a normal attack roll (not touch), and only affects one target. Seems pretty weak compared to the other reserve feats. Is it supposed to actually be an invisible attack? The name suggests as much, but nothing in the description does.

Just an undeveloped thought here....

What about making each missle a flat 1d4+1 with no attack roll required and no save.
Then allow 1 missle per 3 spell levels.
Thus you get a very short range version of magic missle.
For a caster of Level 5-10 you get one missle, CL11-16 can get 2 and 17+ can get 3. All with a significantly cut down range.

Or 1 missle for 1d4+spell level.

Or 1 missle but with better range based on spell level.

 

[Felon]

As a force effect, it's considered mechanically more potent than a comperable energy effect.

That said, if you wanted to jazz it up a bit--perhaps by, as you imply, making it truly invisible, and thus requiring a roll to detect where it came from--I don't think that'd break anything. (Though I'd need to try it in play to be sure, of course.)

Well, the point of it being invisible would be to deny its target its Dex bonus--great for unseen seer or arcane trickster.

Even allowing for its force effect, this is a sub-par ability compared to other reserve feats. The damage is lower than any of the other single-target damage-dealing abilities, and it requires a normal attack roll. One of those things might be worthwhile for a force effect, buth both? Heck, just the fact that it's a single-target effect makes it inferior to many of the reserve feats. Unless there's something else I'm missing, some jazzing up is in order.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Well, the point of it being invisible would be to deny its target its Dex bonus--great for unseen seer or arcane trickster.

Even allowing for its force effect, this is a sub-par ability compared to other reserve feats. The damage is lower than any of the other single-target damage-dealing abilities, and it requires a normal attack roll. One of those things might be worthwhile for a force effect, buth both? Heck, just the fact that it's a single-target effect makes it inferior to many of the reserve feats. Unless there's something else I'm missing, some jazzing up is in order.

I forget--does it allow SR? If not, it ignores energy resistance and SR, with no save and could be about right.