FEAT: Reactive Attack

[Artoomis]

This feat is to serve the needs of those who think it's too easy for a spell caster to cast spells in melee.

Reactive Attack [General]

Prerequisites: Improved Initiative, Alertness

You can react quickly to interrupt spells cast by opponents.

Benefit: Once per round you can attempt to interrupt a spell being cast just as if you had readied an action. This partial action may be any sort of physical attack allowable as a partial action - melee attack, ranged attack or partial charge. This partial action takes the place of your next regular action, and your initiative order changes to that of just before the spell caster. If under the effects of a Haste spell or similar magic, you may take only your extra partial action on his next turn.

Normal: Without this feat, you must use an attack of opportunity or ready an action each round you wish to attempt to interrupt a spell being cast.


[edited to be closer to Improved Counterspell]

 

[mikebr99]

Hey Artoomis.
What about Combat reflexes as an additional prereq.?

I really don't want to make it too easy...

I was also considering adding light armour only, what do you think?

Mike

 

[Artoomis]

Hey Artoomis.
What about Combat reflexes as an additional prereq.?

I really don't want to make it too easy...

I was also considering adding light armour only, what do you think?

Mike

Hmm - adding in Combat Reflexes would be okay, I think - though I am not sure - is that one in the PHB or in C&T? I'd not include prerequisites that are not in the PHB. I'm not worried about making it too easy - unlike Reactive Counterpsell there is no way to make success automatic here - teh spell caster will alwys get a Concentration Check.

With Reactive Counterspell your success is automatic - if you have the right spell, and with the proper feats, even that gets much easier to do.

As for light armor - that's not a needed restriction and doesn't add much - in heavy armor you'll be too slow to reach the spell caster anyway (though you could still use your bow). This just doesn't have a "light armor" feat feel to me.

You may want to compare this to "Reactive Counterspell." I think it's a fair bit less powerful - especially of "Reactive Counterspell" lets you take your regular actions, which I do not know (I can't find that on-line PDF that was published a while ago that included teh FR feats - it was the FR preview, if you recall).

 

[kreynolds]

With Reactive Counterspell your success is automatic

You still have to make a spellcraft check. How is that automatic success?

 

[kreynolds]

You may want to compare this to "Reactive Counterspell." I think it's a fair bit less powerful - especially of "Reactive Counterspell" lets you take your regular actions, which I do not know (I can't find that on-line PDF that was published a while ago that included teh FR feats - it was the FR preview, if you recall).

Compare to your heart's content ...

REACTIVE COUNTERSPELL [General]
You can react quickly to counterspells cast by opponents.
Prerequisites: Improved Counterspell, Improved Initiative.
Benefit: Once per round, you can counterspell an opponent’s spell even if you have not readied an action to do so. This counterspell action takes the place of your regular action for the round. You can’t use this feat when flat-footed.
Normal: Without this feat, you must ready an action each round you wish to use a counterspell (see the PH, page 152).

Actually, I kinda dig your feat, Artoomis. It's different. I don't know that I'd use it or allow it, but I dig it.

 

[mikebr99]

Hmm - adding in Combat Reflexes would be okay, I think - though I am not sure - is that one in the PHB or in C&T? I'd not include prerequisites that are not in the PHB.

PHB. Page 80.

 

[Artoomis]

I've edited the feat to be closer to Improved Counterspell - with my improved language about what it does to your regular actions.

ed: I also added Alertness as a prerequisite. That makes it, in my opinion, costly enough.

ed(2): kreynolds: I'm not sure I'd use it either - though I like it, it is kind of expensive to take. Also, my group is not big on House Rules.

 

[kreynolds]

Also, my group is not big on House Rules.

Mine isn't either, at least not usually. My solo games being the exception, as I'll let you use damn near any feat, PrC, ability, whatever from just about whatever book you find. My dragonhide rules are the closest thing to a house rule, but the rules for them are designed just like magic items anyway, so they're not much different except for flavor text.

 

[mikebr99]

What about adding some level of skill in spellcraft (maybe 2+ ranks), so the dim-wit of a fighter would at least be able to tell if it is a real spell being cast or the mage is faking it? The guy doens't need to be able to identify the specific spell, just know if the mage is indeed casting.

 

[Artoomis]

What about adding some level of skill in spellcraft (maybe 2+ ranks), so the dim-wit of a fighter would at least be able to tell if it is a real spell being cast or the mage is faking it? The guy doens't need to be able to identify the specific spell, just know if the mage is indeed casting.

Nah. Let the Mage use Bluff to fake it if they want to. A built-in defense to this feat:

Mage uses Bluff to fake casting.

Fighter charges and hurts Mage, but fails to kill him in one blow.

Mage defensively casts (to avoid AoO) some nasty Will Save type of spell ( the fighter Achille's Heel).

Fighter fails save and is taken out of the fight. Mage wins!!