Meta-game reason to NOT get spellcasting prodigy?

arcady said:
Assuming it's allowed in the game, and spellfire is not.

Is there any metagaming reason for a Wizard or Sorcerer to -not- get this feat?

No roleplay or concept or story reasons here, just from a pure min-max metagamer's viewpoint, why would you ever consider passing this feat up for some other option?

"Because it's a boring and overused option."

This is metagaming (thinking outside the parameters of the in-game reality) just as much as is "I want a big boost to spellcasting". If you really wanted to ask "is there any _powergaming_ reason ... to not get this feat", you should have done so.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

hong said:
If you really wanted to ask "is there any _powergaming_ reason ... to not get this feat", you should have done so.
I did, you're just suffering from idiocy.

Try being relevant next time.
 
Last edited:


Maybe you want to work on a certain feat chain to get into a PrC. I'm not a big fan of arcane spellcasters, but I believe there are some PrC's that require a lot of feats to get into it.
 

re

Nope. It's the best feat you can get for a caster at first level. If your DM doesn't limit it for story reasons, then you should get it.

It was better than the old Spell focus and is a better feat than any other first level feat for a caster. Given the name of the feat Spellcasting Prodigy, it should be limited to a few select characters by the DM to keep it as rare as a prodigy should be.

I for one am glad they include certain special feats like Spellfire Wielder and Spellcasting Prodigy because it shows that sometimes story is more important than balance and it is up to the DM to prevent abusive player's from min/maxing according to their own judgement.
 

I played a lot of low level games and can't remember a wizard who didn't take it if he was allowed to. That extra spell at level 1 rocks.

Sorcerers usually didn't care, they went for the hit and damage spells instead.

I usually allow this feat only for guys with an appropriate background and some inherent flaws.
 
Last edited:

arcady said:
Spellcasting Prodigy gives a +2 to your -STAT- for the purposes of finding the DC and bonus spells only.

So it's really just a +1 to spell DCs, and a bonus spell -if- it makes your stat hit one of the break points for bonus spells. Which it always will at some spell level if at least 12, but may not all spell levels.

Basically, +2 to stat is always worth at least 1 extra slot (if the stat is <20), but if it makes it for example from 18 to 20 it's 2 extra slots (1st level + 5th level). I think this bonus thing alone is worth more than the T&B feat "Extra Slot".

edit: that said, if you already had at least 12 in the spellcasting stat, you won't get the benefit of bonus slot until you are able to cast the appropriately higher level spells
 
Last edited:

Darklone said:
I played a lot of low level games and can't remember a wizard who didn't take it if he was allowed to. That extra spell at level 1 rocks.

It is only relevant if your wizard has an 18 intelligence. Anything less, and he doesn't get the extra spell at 1st level.

I've never had a wizard or cleric take this spell; cosmopolitan and spell focus were more popular than this feat, especially when spell focus led to Greater Spell Focus.
 


Henry said:
It is only relevant if your wizard has an 18 intelligence. Anything less, and he doesn't get the extra spell at 1st level.

I've never had a wizard or cleric take this spell; cosmopolitan and spell focus were more popular than this feat, especially when spell focus led to Greater Spell Focus.
Henry, especially the wizards who went for Spell Focus and GSF took the feat at all costs since they wanted to max out their DCs. And honestly, I can't remember the last wizard in my groups who didn't have INT 18 at level 1, no matter how bad all the other stats were.

As for mind over body... They rather dropped their strength and dex into silly low ranges and boosted Con like hell.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top