DMM Persistent Spell - Do You Allow It?

[Nail]

And without extra turning attempts, you will be very limited in exactly how many spells you can DMM anyway.

But, like any "problem" rule, you can always build your PC in such a way as to avoid the supposed limitations. It's pretty pointless, IMO, to claim that "most won't get much out of it". We aren't talking about a generic PC here.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

Unfortunately, ToB:Bo9S is an awful lot of fun. It's fun enough that I decided it was worth allowing...and then having to slog through it to find any problems that might come up. So far, so good.

That's cool! By that, I mean that I hope you didn't think I was placing a judgment upon people who allow it in game. I have actually heard that so long as you don't mind the power-up that the book is actually a lot of fun and makes fighters a blast to play. I'll agree with you on that much!

Personally, I didn't want to have to deal with the implications of the power-up (or more precisely: which power-ups are good and maneagable and which ones are bad and unmaneagable). Good luck slogging, though!

 

[Infiniti2000]

In general, though, I agree wholeheartedly with the "head 'em off at the pass" before broken stuff needs to be retroactively fixed. As a player, I'd rather have a DM say "Nope" than "Sure, build your character around it and maybe we'll nerf it later." I have much respect for the former, little respect for the latter.

That's a really good way to put it. Well said. A lot of gamers spend a lot of time to build characters. Having done that and THEN get the main shtick nerfed/banned later would suck.

 

[Mistwell]

At 6th not that much, but at 7th you get quasi-permanent Divine Power... that's where it starts to become really powerful.

Bye
Thanee

You think a constant-on, party-wide regeneration isn't "that" powerful?!? (Lesser Mass Vigor)

 

[Mistwell]

Assuming the OP is using the errata version of DMM, then yeah I allow it in all circumstances. It only works on Divine spells anyway, and it is feat intensive. A dispel magic will ruin the day of a Divine Metamagic-er. You have to be quite high level anyway to get any "real" use out of it. And without extra turning attempts, you will be very limited in exactly how many spells you can DMM anyway.

The errata did nothing to correct the major flaw with this feat. It did not address the level cap issue. You don't have to be high level to get any real use out of it. It's incredibly powerful at just 6-7th level.

 

[Rokes]

What does Radiant Servant of Pelor have to do with this build?

 

[mr_outsidevoice]

I allow it

It requires 2 feats to even get it officially, and odds are Extra Turning will be picked up. The earliest level to get any use of it is 12th level, more than likely 15th.

If a Player wants to expend 7 turns, which is allot, let him. It is his resources.

 

[Slaved]

I'd say probably a persistant "Mass Vigor, Lesser", so that your party has fast healing - constant. And the FAQ even uses this example I believe.

As a character if this was the effect I was going for I would rather just spend a single feat on Sacred Healing [divine].

With 7 turn attempts I could give fast healing 3 for 7 times my charisma bonus plus 1 to all living creatures within a 60' burst.

It might not be as good in the middle of a battle but it would probably wind up healing more damage for less cost.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Limitations of the Tactic

- Feats: Using DMM Persistent requires that you invest at least 3 feats (probably 4 - extra turning) into the trick. Feats are a precious resource for most clerics, so this cost is not inconsequential.

- Ability Scores: This requires a CHA-focus. Clerics are a fairly high MAD class so this is a sacrifice, assuming standard point-buy for ability scores.

- Dispel Magic: A simple Dispel Magic can wipe the buff away, making all those feats and turn attempts and equipment worthless.

- Uses Turn Undead Attempts: While turning undead is usually pointless, sometimes it is handy. Some days a cleric might prefer to have turn attempts left than to have Divine Power running.

You basically nailed all the reasons I think DMM is fine and consider the reaction to it a bit of a knee-jerk. I've honesty never even seen it used, it's so very costly and easy to lose. This brings me to the next point (and the reason I chose "other") - Persistent Spell is what's broken! I have NEVER seen a more outrageousy unbalanced* monstrosity of a feat! It doesn't matter if the spell lasts round/level (or even 1 round total, not sure off the top of my head) or hour per level, it's all the same as far as the feat's concerned. Is the massive stupidity inherent in such a starting premise merely lost on everyone else?! So yes, I ban this combo, but from the other side.

* In this case unbalanced = extremely situational in power level. And, having looked over Frostburn recently, this isn't technically true anymore. Oh well.

Finally, I'd like to say our current party has a gestalted Healer/Paladin with 18 turn attempts a day, and a massive charisma. Looking for feats to give her a better "punch" in combat, we looked at DMM. And realized what an absolute waste it was, both in feats, and turn attempts, which ARE useful (she has a feat that lets her burn one to heal at range). Feeling disheartened, we discovered in the same book Divine Spell Power. Now that there's a broken feat! It's come in handy so often for boosting damage and pushing through SR already. Even more fun: She just got access to Holy Word (She uses cleric spell list, and favored soul spells known/per day progression). Plus 4 caster levels REALLY can make a difference there!

 

[Pickaxe]

You think a constant-on, party-wide regeneration isn't "that" powerful?!? (Lesser Mass Vigor)

Of course, that's not a core spell. We're already talking about combining two separate non-core feats; adding more non-core spells obviously increases the power of this combo, so it would make sense to not allow non-core spells.

I'm actually trying this combo out for the first time in a Savage Tide campaign; we typically play core-only, but in this campaign we decided to allow more options, at least if it means more fun. To me, the real litmus test of a potentially broken combo is whether it diminishes the fun of one or more players. My character is building towards having one Persistent Spell at 6th and two at 8th; the likely candidates are Fly (Travel domain), Find Traps, and (of course) Divine Power. We have no rogue, and flying is not a "role" that another character would cover, so my character shouldn't be stealing the spotlight from anyone else with regards to the first two spells, and at the same time we'll have some very useful abilities in a very challenging campaign.

Divine Power is where the real test will come; will the cleric shine in melee and make the TWF ranger and half-orc monk look bad? Maybe, but I think it's more likely that the cleric will simply be effective in melee to the extent that our four-character party won't go into a downward spiral as soon as the tank goes down.

Anyway, we'll see.

--Axe