"Practice Spellcaster" Feat - Huh ?

[Vegepygmy]

I am a voice of dissent on this one. It is illogical, 4 levels worth of spellcasting competence? Where the frag from? What's next? A feat that adds 4 to your BAB?!

BAB for fighter-types is not comparable to caster level (not spells per day, but caster level) for spellcasters.

Now, a feat that provided a +4 bonus (not BAB) to your first (and only your first) melee attack roll in a given round, with a prerequisite that your BAB must be at least 4 lower than your HD...that might be comparable to Practiced Spellcaster. (You could still argue that it's an overpowered feat, of course, but it's not nearly as much so.)

 

[Hypersmurf]

This feat sounds like it might let you do that, but it really just makes sure the PCs get spread over the map by monstrous spellcasters.

Except that monstrous spellcasters tend to be even more of a waste of levels than multiclass spellcasters.

The Hill Giant Wizard may only increase his CR by 1 for every 2 wizard levels, but that's because those wizard levels don't really make him much scarier. Practiced Spellcaster doesn't change that.

-Hyp.

 

[airwalkrr]

Didn't you once put it as ...

Practiced Spellcaster [General]
Prerequisites: You must suck.
Benefit: You suck less.

Ok, well whoever came up with that gets major props points from me. Hooray! Made me laugh.

 

[airwalkrr]

Practiced spellcaster is also one of those feats smart players ask the DM NOT to allow. The fact the feat is worded using hit die rather than character level is a hint the PCs won't be the ones benefiting from it the most.

OP, Ask the players if they fully comprehend what this feat does, not just for them, but across the board. If they don't seem to care, remember most monster pick up spellcasting classes at 2 level for 1 cr until that class level equals thier orginal Hit dice.

Well I don't think it is as bad as you say, but it this is an admitted disadvantage of the feat, and also a reason I am trying to patch up the multiclassing rules here so that these kinds of feats aren't necessary. I once build an elder redcap sorcerer with Evard's black tentacles. Oh, the pain!

 

[airwalkrr]

Except that monstrous spellcasters tend to be even more of a waste of levels than multiclass spellcasters.

The Hill Giant Wizard may only increase his CR by 1 for every 2 wizard levels, but that's because those wizard levels don't really make him much scarier. Practiced Spellcaster doesn't change that.

-Hyp.

I beg to differ, my friend. Consider, if you will, the 14th level frost giant wizard. CR 16 creature with 7th level spells, caster level 18, BAB of +17 and 294 hp? Did I mention he has a +9 natural armor bonus, immunity to cold and the saving throws of a god? Holy Hell, man! The non-associated levels stuff is prone to abuse at so many levels it isn't even funnie.

 

[kjenks]

I once build an elder redcap sorcerer with Evard's black tentacles. Oh, the pain!

You already know my opinion of that aberration.

I beg to differ, my friend. Consider, if you will, the 14th level frost giant wizard. CR 16 creature with 7th level spells, caster level 18, BAB of +17 and 294 hp? Did I mention he has a +9 natural armor bonus, immunity to cold and the saving throws of a god? Holy Hell, man! The non-associated levels stuff is prone to abuse at so many levels it isn't even funnie.

Sounds like CR 21 to me. The MM example of a "Frost Giant Jarl, 8th-Level Blackguard" boosts the CR of a normal frost giant from CR 9 to CR 17. Adding wizard levels to a standard frost giant should boost the CR in the same manner.

Abusing the non-associated class level rule is almost as bad as abusing "Craft Contingent Item" or giving a monster an artifact in increasing the power of the monster without reflecting that power increase correctly in the monster's CR.

I expect better judgment from you.

 

[airwalkrr]

Yes, Ken. I've been coming around to the opinion that the unassociated class levels stuff needs serious re-thinking. Maybe not quite CR 21, but definitely not CR 16.

 

[Melkor]

Thanks for the responses/opinions folks.

 

[Infiniti2000]

I beg to differ, my friend. Consider, if you will, the 14th level frost giant wizard. CR 16 creature with 7th level spells, caster level 18, BAB of +17 and 294 hp? Did I mention he has a +9 natural armor bonus, immunity to cold and the saving throws of a god? Holy Hell, man! The non-associated levels stuff is prone to abuse at so many levels it isn't even funnie.

The problem is HD vs. CR. This is why I houserule the planar ally/binding series of spells to also be limited on CR. A 14th level wizard is CR 14. A frost giant is CR9 but HD 14. There's a descrepancy. Perhaps an easy solution is to use non-associativity up to CR or HD, not just HD. So, a frost giant Wiz 14 would be CR 9 (base) + 4.5 (9 NA wiz levels) + 5 (5 A wiz levels) = CR 18.5. Then, consider the creature as a whole to choose between CR 18 or 19.

 

[Evilhalfling]

Didn't you once put it as ...

Practiced Spellcaster [General]
Prerequisites: You must suck.
Benefit: You suck less.

okay, milk out nose - whoever said it

Edit - I also consider it a must for most dragons with any spells that would benifit from it.
At hight lvls it also helps alot vs SR a few less caster levels can efficitvly end your ability to hurt creatures with magic directly