Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Verequus" data-source="post: 1871206" data-attributes="member: 9135">Sorry for the delay - RL issues.Taking RangerWickett's post into account, you are still behind that, what you've written above? I'm a bit confused in that regard. My original comment was correct to the RAW, so I don't see, what should change my opinion anyways. Could you enlighten me, what I seem to overlook?A 20th level Mage wouldn't cast Dispel Magic 15/Gen 5, he would add any enhancement with a cost of 5 MP, effectively casting a spell worth an equivalent of 25 MP for only 20 MP. Even if you limit the use, that the bonus MP are counted to the overall MP limit (kinda "you pay still the full amount, but get a small part of it back"), a player could demand a feat, which allow the same for a Evoke spell list. Evoke Fire 18/Gen 2 for 14 MP - something everyone wants to have and thus it is TOO GOOD! And lastly, compare it to Spell List Familiarity - your feat scales, SLF doesn't. Yes, I think SLF is underpowered, but only because it can be applied to only one specific spell list, not an entire action type. The actual benefit seems fine.Basically, with this feat you are trampling on to other paths - Quicken Spell and Move Time. Did you look up, how many MP the quickening of an signature spell costs? 7 MP. Everytime, you can use the feat, you are saving 7 MP. What are you paying? A move-action. With Move Time, you can gain the effect of Haste for 4 MP, then for a duration of 10 minutes you need 1 extra MP. 5 MP once for every battle, saving zig-times 7 MP at practically no cost and some player could argument, that under Haste he could surely use a quickened spell. Even if you decline it for this Haste variant, wait until the players are high enough for the über-3.0 variant...Disclaimer: If something in the above paragraph is rules-wise wrong, then because I couldn't look the rules up at the time of writing. But I still stand with my arguments - no possible error can invalidate them entirely.I forgot, that Arcane Mastery(?), the last of the three feats regarding "making spellbooks like scrolls" is too weak as written (comparing all three feats, I think of Arcane Mastery as a waste, but I would take the other two within a heart-beat). An additional bonus like you propose for every Specialist feat (whatever the effect would be), if someone has both the Specialist feat and the Arcane Mastery feat, would make this feat chain far more interesting.No.If you don't allow the stacking of the various Action and Effect Masteries, then a powergamer will look, where he has to invest the least to get the most out of his buck, which equals a generic +4 bonus to Dispel Magic. There are 11 Action Masteries and 22 + 15 + 5 = 42 Effect Masteries - which route would you take? My advice is, to allow the stacking and halving the gained boni. This wouldn't devalue Effect Masteries, which are already slightly weaker (there is nothing like Charm/Compel Experts for Effects).I don't like this. For example, someone attacks you with an Evoke [Element] 1 with all elements combined, except [Fire], for an overall MP amount of 22 (1 MP is for general). Now substitute the last MP for Evoke Fire and then you gain the full bonus? Nah... Half the bonus like the penalty for Dispel Magic, if you know some of the spell lists used.I have to admit, that I don't know if this kind a feat is overpowered or not, even if you wouldn't need to pay the 2 MP. Playtesting calls.How could you tell that from my subtly formulation? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f631.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":eek:" title="Eek!    :eek:"  data-smilie="9"data-shortname=":eek:" /> Show me the next incarnation, before I put it to rest. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Like you posted above, I think, it should be a general ability directly tied in the rules.</blockquote>

Verification