Complete Mage - Is it out yet?

[Cthulhudrew]

I honestly can't imagine someone playing an arcane spellcaster and NOT taking this feat.

I was thinking the same thing, actually. In fact, my first thought*, was "why even bother ever using the lightning bolt? Just hang one in reserve and zap people, you'll do as much damage, even if you don't have quite the same range.

*Thought based, naturally, solely on what I see here, and not having read the book for myself yet.

 

[BryonD]

3d6 at 20 ft is significantly less than 7d6 (minimum) at 120 ft.

I do agree that any character who takes this feat is GOING to hold a bolt in reserve. But isn't that the point? It doesn't show that a feat is broken to say that a player will do with it what it is designed to do.

There is a lot of total damage upside, but there is also a lot of opportunity cost downside.
The up is better than the down, sure.
But, to my admittedly so far untested judgement, the up isn't so much better than the down that the feat is not beyond the high end of feats.

I still agree with Felon that a wand of lightning bolt is pretty easy to get and provides a lot more punch than this does. Heck, a wand of scorching ray or acid arrow would provide more punch.

 

[Felon]

I was thinking the same thing, actually. In fact, my first thought*, was "why even bother ever using the lightning bolt? Just hang one in reserve and zap people, you'll do as much damage, even if you don't have quite the same range.

Note the bolt only does 1d6 per spell level, not 1d6 per caster level. Thus, holding a lightning bolt in reserve only yields 3d6 damage.

I still agree with Felon that a wand of lightning bolt is pretty easy to get and provides a lot more punch than this does. Heck, a wand of scorching ray or acid arrow would provide more punch.

Exactly. These feats are neat, but I'm not sure why wands get overlooked when it comes to addressing the limitations on vancian slots.

Then again, it's always easy to fall into the trap of thinking damage output as the sole index for the concepts of "power" and "balance".

 

[Ciaran]

Exactly. These feats are neat, but I'm not sure why wands get overlooked when it comes to addressing the limitations on vancian slots.

A lot of people play low-wealth or "low-magic" campaigns where it's difficult or impossible to craft items. Others play in fast-paced adventuring games where their PCs don't have the time or opportunity to craft or purchase magical items.

 

[Nightchilde-2]

Oh, I can. Wands and (later) staves can easily make that 3d6 look pretty piddling. It's the exact same deal with a warlock's eldritch blast...except the stormbolt doesn't have essences to enhance its effectiveness...and it's not an unspecified energy type...and a spell of the wizard's highest level has to be reserved for it to remain equivalent damage...

Wands and staves run out of charges. Replacing them costs either gp or XP & requires time.

Wands and staves can be disarmed. Then they can be used against you.

Wands and staves can be sundered.

Wands and staves have a static caster level that won't increase for penetrating spell resistance.

Wands and staves have to be carried around.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Oh, I can. Wands and (later) staves can easily make that 3d6 look pretty piddling. It's the exact same deal with a warlock's eldritch blast...except the stormbolt doesn't have essences to enhance its effectiveness...and it's not an unspecified energy type...and a spell of the wizard's highest level has to be reserved for it to remain equivalent damage...

It's a psychology thing. The idea that a wand's rescource is limited (even if it is more charges than people can usually use in a month) makes people more reluctant to use it.

The irony is that a wand is more effective at a lower cost than a feat....you don't get that many feats as you level up, but you get loads of GP and wands (and scrolls) are cheap as heck. But those feats will probably be more popular because they are permenant modifications rather than disposable equipment.

 

[coyote6]

It's a psychology thing. The idea that a wand's rescource is limited (even if it is more charges than people can usually use in a month) makes people more reluctant to use it.

The irony is that a wand is more effective at a lower cost than a feat....you don't get that many feats as you level up, but you get loads of GP and wands (and scrolls) are cheap as heck. But those feats will probably be more popular because they are permenant modifications rather than disposable equipment.

Are wands really that cheap? They cost spell level*caster level*15 gp per charge; that's 225 gp per 5d6 fireball. An EL6 encounter is supposed to be worth 2000 gp, on average; after you split it four ways, the wizard who uses one wand of fireballs charge has spent almost half the money he earned. And the save DC on that fireball is all of 14; IME, that means many foes will be taking half damage.

That's where wands really suck: saving throw DCs; the most powerful wand you'll ever own has a save DC of 16, while your typical spellcaster's 4th level spells will have an 18+ DC (4 for level, 15+1 [level increase] ability, +2 stat boosting item). That's 15% more foes who will succeed, and each shot will cost you at least 420 gp.

Penetrating spell resistance has similar problems; and it gets worse as the spellcaster's level gets higher.

Me, I find the Reserve feats idea intriguing, and I wish to subscribe to the newsletter look forward to picking up the book.

 

[BryonD]

Wands and staves run out of charges. Replacing them costs either gp or XP & requires time.

50 charges lasts a VERY long time.

Wands and staves can be disarmed. Then they can be used against you.

Wands and staves can be sundered.

Neither of these have ever happened in one of my games. Weapons yes, wands and staves no. Overlooked tactic? maybe. Doesn't matter though because bottom line is the same, no issues here.

Wands and staves have a static caster level that won't increase for penetrating spell resistance.

Staves dont.
And a wand of LB does better damage than this power and has much better range.

Wands and staves have to be carried around.

shrug

 

[WarlockLord]

I really, really like the reserve feats. Mystic Backlash looks interesting. Also, I notice storm bolt allows no save nor touch attack. This should be good. Plus, it's virtually unlimited.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Are wands really that cheap? They cost spell level*caster level*15 gp per charge; that's 225 gp per 5d6 fireball. An EL6 encounter is supposed to be worth 2000 gp, on average; after you split it four ways, the wizard who uses one wand of fireballs charge has spent almost half the money he earned. And the save DC on that fireball is all of 14; IME, that means many foes will be taking half damage.

A wand will last more than 1 encounter, though. With 50 charges, a wand can last every turn a wizard has for a good 10 encounters. That's 20,000 GP until he has to buy another one, and by that point he can probably afford a 7d6 fireball or two.

I'll more or less agree with the "low saving throws" thing, but that's what makes it worthwhile to cast fireball even when you have a wand of fireball.