Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
EN Publishing
Elements of Magic feat idea
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Verequus" data-source="post: 1960788" data-attributes="member: 9135"><p>Thank you! In this case, the idea was half stolen, because someone does it already with the core rules, and half extrapolated from Practiced Spellcaster and its implications. Under EoMR, there aren't any benefits for a spell with a higher caster level, so having a higher MP limit isn't really benefitting without having more MP. Also I think, that this idea was clouded to the fact, that "class level = factor x caster level" has been a strong dogma around all the years, even if there have been a few "+1 to caster level" around. BTW, what is your opinion on my proposed rules changes on Extra Spell List? And why did delete your original comment, that you meant not only the MP limit, but true caster levels? The rest of my posts refers to this information.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> (To torem13: The last rule means, that an 8th level Mage can cast 10 MP spells.)</p><p> </p><p> Does this mean, you are giving up your idea of "I wish I hadn't multiclassed"? There are more problems with this feat, than I thought yesterday.</p><p> </p><p> 1. It isn't a mechanical clean solution like the combined caster level. This is one the third best reason, why I like the rules, after spell-points and the free spell creation. Having a feat doing the work of the actual multiclassing system is not a good design choice.</p><p> 2. I don't like it, that this feat gives you the equivalent of 8 feats. Your above example with the Fighter 14/Mageknight 6 is wrong and ineffective - the caster level would be only 7 1/2, not 8. Better choices are Fighter 16/Mage 4 for a caster level of 8 or Fighter 12/Mage 8 for a caster level of 12. If you look at it from a point-buy perspective, then someone gains points for free, just because he took a different route than a pure mage - it would be unfair, regardless if he pays a feat or not.</p><p> 3. Is someone at character level 20 effective with a caster level of 12 or 8. I don't know, because I haven't seen someone playing the above mentioned combinations, but regarding offensive capabilities it looks dark. Utility spells mostly, because buffs are dispelled easily. Not good, it seems.</p><p> </p><p> Another problem, which Archus mentioned to me: Metamagic is limited by the MP limit, which results in spells being weaker, because they utilize metamagic. His suggested fix of allowing metamagic going over the limit isn't good, because there is neither an in-game explanation, how MP used for metamagic differs from MP used for spells and nor are the metamagicked spells reduced in their spell DC, compared to other pure magic spells with the the same MP. Ryan, your +1 MP limit for every 4 Mage levels could take care of this problem - at least, it gives the Mage class an edge, which I missed. The other spellcasting classes seem only to be a Mage minus some caster levels in exchange for some abilities.</p><p> </p><p> But still a further problem isn't solved: Silent and stilled spells cost 4 MP and two feats, where the Psionic Mage needs only one feat and a bit of time, which results in more powerful stilled and silent spells. The skill check can be with Skill Mastery made to "Always Take 10" and then the few needed skill points are not much to invest. Skill Mastery is an option for Mages, right? As a solution I suggest to combine Silent Spell and Still Spell into one feat and for every used option the caster pays 1 MP.</p><p> </p><p> Another gripe, I have: Races with an supposed magical aptitude aren't superior compared to humans, when you are only giving them levels in a full caster class. A Mage 20 is nearly the same, if he is elf or not, even though elves should be powerful magic users. Only the Favorite Class is supporting this stance. Your +1 bonus isn't helping, because everyone gets them. I'm thinking of a spell power ability like of the archmage - +1 to MP limit and to caster level checks. Actually, this problem is related to the fact, that with "MP limit = hit dice" characters with ECL are at a disadvantage. In their case, a +4 bonus, but not higher than the ECL, similar to Practiced Spellcaster would be nice, but only for the MP limit, not for caster level checks.</p><p> </p><p> But I don't like two feats with similar effects - better is to use the broader feat. This would result in "Empowered Caster: You gain a +2 bonus to your MP limit and to your caster level checks.". Of course, such a member of such a race still needs MP and spell lists, but that could be provided in the package. The only problem, I see with this feat, is that it includes Spell Penetration - if Empowered Caster stacks, like it should do, then no one would take Spell Penetration. Hmm, maybe splitting the effects: One feat to raise the MP limit and one feat to raise the caster level regarding SR. Then we need only a feat for extra cantrips and everything is covered. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /> Would make a nice base for point-buy system, too...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Verequus, post: 1960788, member: 9135"] Thank you! In this case, the idea was half stolen, because someone does it already with the core rules, and half extrapolated from Practiced Spellcaster and its implications. Under EoMR, there aren't any benefits for a spell with a higher caster level, so having a higher MP limit isn't really benefitting without having more MP. Also I think, that this idea was clouded to the fact, that "class level = factor x caster level" has been a strong dogma around all the years, even if there have been a few "+1 to caster level" around. BTW, what is your opinion on my proposed rules changes on Extra Spell List? And why did delete your original comment, that you meant not only the MP limit, but true caster levels? The rest of my posts refers to this information. (To torem13: The last rule means, that an 8th level Mage can cast 10 MP spells.) Does this mean, you are giving up your idea of "I wish I hadn't multiclassed"? There are more problems with this feat, than I thought yesterday. 1. It isn't a mechanical clean solution like the combined caster level. This is one the third best reason, why I like the rules, after spell-points and the free spell creation. Having a feat doing the work of the actual multiclassing system is not a good design choice. 2. I don't like it, that this feat gives you the equivalent of 8 feats. Your above example with the Fighter 14/Mageknight 6 is wrong and ineffective - the caster level would be only 7 1/2, not 8. Better choices are Fighter 16/Mage 4 for a caster level of 8 or Fighter 12/Mage 8 for a caster level of 12. If you look at it from a point-buy perspective, then someone gains points for free, just because he took a different route than a pure mage - it would be unfair, regardless if he pays a feat or not. 3. Is someone at character level 20 effective with a caster level of 12 or 8. I don't know, because I haven't seen someone playing the above mentioned combinations, but regarding offensive capabilities it looks dark. Utility spells mostly, because buffs are dispelled easily. Not good, it seems. Another problem, which Archus mentioned to me: Metamagic is limited by the MP limit, which results in spells being weaker, because they utilize metamagic. His suggested fix of allowing metamagic going over the limit isn't good, because there is neither an in-game explanation, how MP used for metamagic differs from MP used for spells and nor are the metamagicked spells reduced in their spell DC, compared to other pure magic spells with the the same MP. Ryan, your +1 MP limit for every 4 Mage levels could take care of this problem - at least, it gives the Mage class an edge, which I missed. The other spellcasting classes seem only to be a Mage minus some caster levels in exchange for some abilities. But still a further problem isn't solved: Silent and stilled spells cost 4 MP and two feats, where the Psionic Mage needs only one feat and a bit of time, which results in more powerful stilled and silent spells. The skill check can be with Skill Mastery made to "Always Take 10" and then the few needed skill points are not much to invest. Skill Mastery is an option for Mages, right? As a solution I suggest to combine Silent Spell and Still Spell into one feat and for every used option the caster pays 1 MP. Another gripe, I have: Races with an supposed magical aptitude aren't superior compared to humans, when you are only giving them levels in a full caster class. A Mage 20 is nearly the same, if he is elf or not, even though elves should be powerful magic users. Only the Favorite Class is supporting this stance. Your +1 bonus isn't helping, because everyone gets them. I'm thinking of a spell power ability like of the archmage - +1 to MP limit and to caster level checks. Actually, this problem is related to the fact, that with "MP limit = hit dice" characters with ECL are at a disadvantage. In their case, a +4 bonus, but not higher than the ECL, similar to Practiced Spellcaster would be nice, but only for the MP limit, not for caster level checks. But I don't like two feats with similar effects - better is to use the broader feat. This would result in "Empowered Caster: You gain a +2 bonus to your MP limit and to your caster level checks.". Of course, such a member of such a race still needs MP and spell lists, but that could be provided in the package. The only problem, I see with this feat, is that it includes Spell Penetration - if Empowered Caster stacks, like it should do, then no one would take Spell Penetration. Hmm, maybe splitting the effects: One feat to raise the MP limit and one feat to raise the caster level regarding SR. Then we need only a feat for extra cantrips and everything is covered. ;) Would make a nice base for point-buy system, too... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
EN Publishing
Elements of Magic feat idea
Top