Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5740062" data-attributes="member: 6668292">Well, 3.X might be a bad edition to use as an example. What, mechanically, represents this?Are their verbal and somatic components? No? Good spells, since their really aren't (m)any like that. I mean, if the character has his tongue numbed, or his hands were full (say, sword and board, bow, or a greatsword) he can still fight, I assume. But, okay, that takes care of that problem, conceptually, though it's stretching it already.Does Detect Magic pick it up? Well, if the spells are all reactive instantaneous actions (for opportunity attacks) with no verbal or somatic components, I guess that Detect Magic would never pick it up. I mean, even Quicken Spell (spell level +4) is limited to once per round as a free action. So, that problem is taken care of, but now it's basically unbelievable when compared to the internal consistency of the world (comparing it to other spells and feats).Does he ever run out of spells? Well, if the spells function like a Reserve Feat, then maybe he could do it indefinitely. I mean, he doesn't need to actually have the feat, and more importantly, he doesn't need to actually have a spell in reserve, but I guess that makes it work. You've now squarely pushed into overpoweringly new territory from a mechanical standpoint, unless you're dismissing internal consistency based on the mechanics of the game.Does it stop functioning in an antimagic field? I mean, if he walks into one, I assume he'll keep his base attack, so the spells seem to work there, too. So, spells that ignore antimagic fields and the like. Again, not much else in the world(s) works this way (artifacts, I guess?), so it's very powerful in the fiction.Does he still need to prepare from a spell book? Well, wizards can get the Spell Mastery feat, which lets them prepare spells without the book. I guess while you don't have the feat, you could fluff it as being the case, though your character also doesn't need to prepare for one hour per day, and can't learn any new spells, and is probably much less intelligent than the average wizard (if you want to use point buy and he's keeping his Str and Con high).You basically have a "wizard" who casts unlimited spells (with no power to draw upon, even if he wanted to switch it up, like all Wizards can), they can't be detected because they're all instantaneous, they have no verbal or somatic components, they can be cast on anyone's turn at any time as he needs them, they are immune to being suppressed to an antimagic field, and they don't need to be in a spell book, and he doesn't need to prepare for an hour per day, nor can he learn or prepare other spells.From an internal consistency standpoint, that's a problem. When people look at the game to give them information about the world (like the Kobold's Shifty power), then things that buck hard against that consistency are more likely to be singled out. Your wizard example is a perfect representation of that. I would never allow that to fly in a 3.X game back in the day, for the reasons stated above.Sure, it's doable, and yes, you can make exceptions, but in my campaign, that means it now has a place in the world. Arbitrarily deciding where those limitations begin and end for balance is something I'd rather avoid, as doing so in this case is going to stretch my groups suspension of disbelief dramatically. (And no, not all decisions a GM makes is arbitrary.)There's nothing wrong with doing it if the group is cool with it and you have fun. But, I think there's definitely valid objections to be raised. As always, though, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification