Mage Slayer - Not For Mages Anymo'? [2005 thread]

[HeapThaumaturgist]

So I was going through Complete Arcane, contemplating building a Warlock for myself (to try, should my current character up and gack it) and was looking at the feats.

I remembered Mage Slayer from Minis Handbook, so I hadn't looked at it again, but when I was going through I noticed that now it drops your Caster Level by 4. They added two new Anti-Caster feats and each of them drops your Caster Level by ANOTHER 4 levels.

Now, this sort of confused me. The feat was always sort of flavored for melee non-casters, but I'd been thinking about the possibility of taking Battle Caster and the melee-blast-invocation, sort of create a melee warlock ... something like Mage Slayer would be a cool flavor approach for that type of character ... now, entirely unworth it.

Which is most likely the point. I just don't get WHY. I could build a much more effective mage-slayer by playing a pure-class grapple monk, I can't really see where any other melee-caster-build would be even REMOTELY viable for anti-magic work anyway (Fighter/Casters are already suffering horribly from low caster-level, something like Mage Slayer would just be suicide for them).

Was there some keystone mage slaying build that arose out of Minis Handbook I never heard about? Was there a spate of rogue sorcerors out there mincing up wizards? Was the idea of a warlock spending 2-3 feats and an invocation on being a melee anti-caster that frightening? I mean, the fact that a melee-lock will never get iterative blast attacks sort of nerfs them after a while anyway.

--fje

 

[Evilhalfling]

Well Mage slayer is overpowered anyway, esp compared to the Epic Spellcasting Harrier.
anything that reduces the chance of taking it is just fine. I would be more likely to ban it outright. and pierce magical protections? Ie Carumbah!

 

[boolean]

I think the really worrying build was melee clerics taking the feat.

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

Y'know, I hadn't honestly thought of that ...

And I'm playing a pretty strong melee cleric right now ... Gah. Brokeness, gone before I even realized it was there.

--fje

 

[FEADIN]

To counter that you can take Practiced spellcaster, +4 level for casting not above your hd; -4+4= 0.....

 

[Particle_Man]

I thought the latest ruling on Warlocks was that their "Caster Level" did not get affected either by Practiced Spellcaster or the Mage Slayer feats, so that you actually could go "Meelee Warlock vs. Mages" if you wanted.

 

[frankthedm]

Those feats are lethal in the talons of dragon. It could shread through buffs increadably fast with just 2 feats IIRC.

 

[Hypersmurf]

To counter that you can take Practiced spellcaster, +4 level for casting not above your hd; -4+4= 0.....

I had a Cleric cohort with Mageslayer and Practiced Spellcaster.

I don't think he ever actually used the Mageslayer feat.

Frank, why are you resurrecting 2-year-old threads?

-Hyp.

 

[Slaved]

If your dm deems caster level and manifester level to not be effected by things that say the wrong one then you could go with a psionic class.

There are a few versions of a psionic warlock floating around or you could simply go wilder, or less simply a modified wilder to get the flavor and abilities closer to where you want them.

I do not like mage slayer myself though. I would prefer it to give a penalty to concentration checks in some way, maybe kindof like that wrestling feat does for grapples but modified of course.

 

[frankthedm]

Frank, why are you resurrecting 2-year-old threads?-Hyp.

1. Because due to big book sales I've read some of the material involving these and developed opinions on these subjects.

Also I've missed many of these threads, several of which where left unresolved and deserving of input.

Mageslayer is not to bad for a dragon willing to give up those spells, Pierce magical protections is a Horrifiying Power Attack set up. Ignoring every AC buff for the standard action attack and ripping all those buff off on hitting is worth the caster levels being ground to dust.