New Feat - Outsider Banemagic - too good?

[farscapesg1]

OK, after looking through the Lords of Madness supplement, I wanted feat similar to Aberration Banemagic, but related to Outsiders. Would a simliar feat focused on Outsiders be too powerful? The original feat added an additional +2d6 to damage to any spells used against Aberrations (and increased save DC's by 2). Aberration covers a large number of creatures, so I am not sure if Outsider would be too much.

The reason that I was thinking about this is for my conjurer who is dedicating himself to summoning spells. Considering how specialized he is at bringing in outsider help, it would only make sense that he could be pretty effective against enemy outsiders.

I want advice on this before bringing it up to my DM.

 

[farscapesg1]

Should this feat idea instead be seperated between different types of outsiders? In other words, one feat for lawful, one for evil, etc.

Outsider (Evil) is the only subtype that comes close to matching the number of creatures in the Aberration subtype. However, as pointed out at the WOTC boards, using the Ranger's favored enemy ability as a basis, it should probably be seperated.

On that note, since I hadn't even thought about the seperating the types, what about stacking issues?. I guess it would be too strong to allow them to stack so that if you have both chaotic and evil then a chaotic evil outsider would suffer 4d6 extra damage. On the other hand it makes sense that since you are adept at attacking both kinds of outsiders, then something that falls under both categories would be even more susceptible

 

[Arkhandus]

It should only be obtainable once anyway. Unless a feat's description specifies otherwise, the feat is only available once. I think if you limit it to one outsider subtype it may be fair. Thing is, outsiders are generally more powerful than aberrations, and more otherworldly, so it doesn't matter so much that there are sorta more kinds of aberration. Outsiders, like aberrations, are not generally creatures that a party is likely to confront often in a typical campaign, thus why such a feat might even by considered fair (as opposed to one that applied to, say, magical beasts, which would be ridiculously over-powered because of how common such critters tend to be).

 

[Nifft]

It would seem to me that a DM who's using Feats out of Lords of Madness would probably also be likely to run an Aberration-heavy game. Thus, the Feat would be expected to see a lot of use.

For my game, I'd allow Outsider (some descriptor) Banemagic, but I'd add some kind of 25 gp material component -- maybe a vial of Holy Water for (Evil)-bane? -- in place of any spell level increase.

-- N

 

[farscapesg1]

Well, the Aberrant Banemagic doesn't affect the level of the spell. Basically it adds 2d6 damage to any spell cast against an aberrant creature. This damage is applied only once except for spells that cause continual damage each round (like Melf's Acid Arrow) in which case it causes the extra 2d6 damage each round. For multiple attack spells (like Magic Missile or Scorching Ray) it only affects one attack.

We are currently playing the Shackled City adventure path from Dungeon, so I don't know if it would even be useful, but I was thinking about it more from a character flavor standpoint. Since my character is a Conjurer that is focusing on summoning creatures (and taking my custom prestige class that has already been OK'd by the DM), it fits the concept. Not only is he good at bringing the creatures into his plane of existance, but through his study and knowledge of the creatures he would be adept at fighting those already on his plane of existance.

 

[the Jester]

Wait- you're saying there are *more* aberrations than outsiders?

Wow, it always seemed the other way to me.

Anyhoo, I'd recommend limiting it to one alignment or elemental subtype.

 

[Nifft]

In my experience, Outsiders (even just Evil Outsiders) are more common than Aberrations.

However, the telling factor here is that Outsiders are harder to damage with spells tha Aberrations. Most Outsiders have both SR and energy resistance (usually several kinds). So, allowing a spell to deal +2d6 untyped damage suddenly makes Acid Arrow and Acid Cloud the unequivocal go-to spells for Outsiders. Oh, and Extended Acid Arrows.

So, I'd require a modestly expensive component.

-- N

 

[farscapesg1]

Wait- you're saying there are *more* aberrations than outsiders?

Wow, it always seemed the other way to me.

Anyhoo, I'd recommend limiting it to one alignment or elemental subtype.

When I say there are more aberrations, I am taking the idea of splitting the feat into different types. In otherwords, there are more abberations then there are Outsider(Lawful) and there are more Abberations then there are Outsider (Earth) for two examples. The only one that comes close is Outsider (Evil) and that one may actually have more after you break down the demons and devils into individual creatures.

Hmm, so the untyped damage is one of the key factors then? What if the feat just added the same type of damage (+2d6 acid for Acid Arrow, +2d6 fire for Fireball, etc.)? +2d6 has a decent chance of overcoming any resistance of 10 or less, allowing the spell to deal normal damage to the creature. Is this still too powerful?