Does spell thematics and prayer bead: karma stack?

[Pielorinho]

I'm not talking the purely descriptive part. I'm talking about tha fact that it's harder to identify one's spells, because not only do they LOOK (very) different, you cast them in a different, unusual way.

That has it's own inherent benefit ... it's harder for you to be counterspelled, because there's an increased chance that the enemy will misidentify which spell you're casting.

True, but I've not once in my three years of playing D&D seen someone use a counterspell. And the number of occasions where spellcraft was actually useful I could count on my fingers. There's no way in heck I'd spend a feat on making my spells harder to recognize; I think WOTC realized this and added in the useful part of the feat.

It's no more powergaming to make your central-to-the-theme spells be ones that benefit from +1 caster level than it is for a weapon-finesse fighter to use a light weapon, or for a spell-focus character to learn spells in their preferred school. If you spend a feat, you may as well get some mileage from it.

Daniel

 

[Pax]

True, but I've not once in my three years of playing D&D seen someone use a counterspell. And the number of occasions where spellcraft was actually useful I could count on my fingers. There's no way in heck I'd spend a feat on making my spells harder to recognize; I think WOTC realized this and added in the useful part of the feat.

Funny, that. My first 3E character -- a vanilla sorceror by the name of Jalen -- got into a counterspell duel with an enemy sorceror; the DM had tweaked an encounter in teh module we were in (Forge of something-or-other, the sequel to Sunless Citadel); I kept countering his spells while the party laid waste to his buddies, and then to him. Not much, but, it kept him from dealing damage to the rest of the party (and the look on the GM's face was absolutely priceless, too).

It's no more powergaming to make your central-to-the-theme spells be ones that benefit from +1 caster level than it is for a weapon-finesse fighter to use a light weapon, or for a spell-focus character to learn spells in their preferred school. If you spend a feat, you may as well get some mileage from it.

Daniel

Methinks you misunderstand slightly: I think it IS powergaming to try and get the maximum benefit from any given aspect of your character (the "max" oart of "min/max").

However, I don't see anything WRONG with powergaming; as long as it's not taken to an excess that damages others' enjoyment of the game, there's nothign wrong with powergaming at all.

However, I put a great deal of value in the concept of "pure unadulterated style" ... something may be suboptimal power-wise, but, may be chock full of style ... in which case, if it can be made simply WORKABLE (let alone efficient or superior) ... I'm probably all over it.

 

[Pielorinho]

Methinks you misunderstand slightly: I think it IS powergaming to try and get the maximum benefit from any given aspect of your character (the "max" oart of "min/max").
...
However, I put a great deal of value in the concept of "pure unadulterated style" ... something may be suboptimal power-wise, but, may be chock full of style ... in which case, if it can be made simply WORKABLE (let alone efficient or superior) ... I'm probably all over it.

I guess where we disagree is over whether this is "maximizing." There's a difference between configuring a character so a feat is useful (choosing weapon focus with a weapon you own) and configuring a character with the maximum benefit from a feat (taking wf: spiked chain, monkey grip, and improved trip). I'm calling for doing the former, not the latter. Taking spell thematics with spells that don't benefit from them is like taking weapon finesse when your strength is higher than your dexterity: it adds flair to your character sheet but nowhere else, and wastes a feat.

And the thing with spell thematics is that you get the pure unadulterated style with all of your spells, inasmuch as the window-dressing changes apply to everything you cast. The only difference with the central-theme spells is that you cast them more effectively; and if you choose central-theme spells that don't benefit perceptibly from +1 caster level, then you actually lose a chance for style instead of gaining it, since you no longer have spells that people will recognize you as being especially good at.

Daniel

 

[Pax]

And the thing with spell thematics is that you get the pure unadulterated style with all of your spells, inasmuch as the window-dressing changes apply to everything you cast. The only difference with the central-theme spells is that you cast them more effectively; and if you choose central-theme spells that don't benefit perceptibly from +1 caster level, then you actually lose a chance for style instead of gaining it, since you no longer have spells that people will recognize you as being especially good at.

Daniel

I think where we disagree is in what constitutes "materially benefits" in regards to the spells. Take Flame Arrow; you will "materially benefit" from that only in getting new missiles one level sooner than anyoen else; for the rest of the time, you won't be much better than anyone else -- except in penetrating SR, and every other level, your range.

I can think of very few spells that would not get at least TWO (if not more) benefits among: duration, damage, range, dispel resistance, SR penetration, area of effect/number of targets. True Strike would be one of these.

For example, with Melf's Acid Arrow ... you get a touch of range, some SR penetration, and (at every odd-numbered caster level) an extra round of duration. Is it the best spell to pick for your theme? Possibly not. Is it wrong to pick other than the BEST possible spell at each level?

Absolutely not.

For example -- Buff spells gain duration (a less significant issue in the upcoming 3.5, to be sure), and are ever so slightly harder to dispel. Their absolute effects aren't increased, however.

Improved Invisibility gains nothing except a slight increase to duration, and slightly improved dispel resistance -- yet, it might be what fits best for the character in question.

Or it might not be.

Yes, you should try and gain SOME benefit from any feat. However, in the case of Spell Thematics, you don't have to try and wring every possible drop of advantage out of EVERY spell-level choice, in order to benefit from the feat.

 

[Pielorinho]

Yes, you should try and gain SOME benefit from any feat. However, in the case of Spell Thematics, you don't have to try and wring every possible drop of advantage out of EVERY spell-level choice, in order to benefit from the feat.

I agree and hope I haven't suggested otherwise.

Daniel